InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 3
Posts 142
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/30/2011

Re: None

Sunday, 08/31/2014 12:30:53 PM

Sunday, August 31, 2014 12:30:53 PM

Post# of 160012
Milesblue You Are Correct

Milesblue you are correct. As of Friday, the end of business, the stock price closed at .0002 after a 1 for 100 reverse split earlier in the year.

Here is what we don't know from reading the filed documents with the SEC which were not only attested to as accurate by the Chairman and CEO of the Company but also were reviewed (on an interim basis) and audited on an annual basis by the distinguished accounting firm of DKM.

1. Footnote 5 - refers to the Amendment #1 of the Form 10K where the property amount was restated as the table did not foot and could not be reconciled to the balance sheet. (close enough for horseshoes).

2. In the third quarter Form 10Q, is states that the shares issued on 4/29/13 and 5/1/13 were valued at .0001. These shares which were issued to Mr. Samblis aggregated 850,000,000 shares, however Note 11 to the financials indicate that the purported employment contract in 2005 called for the issuance of 350,000,000 shares. Which number is correct? Why were more shares issued than the amount per the contract?

3. If, the employment contract was dated in 2005, when were the shares supposed to be issued? If they were supposed to be issued in 2005, would not the number of shares (whether it be the 350,000,000 per the purported contract or the 850,000,000 issued for the hell of it), have to be adjusted for the reverse splits in 2007 (10 for 1 reverse) and in 2010 (30 for 1 reverse)? The only way to know is to see the contract. Typically, a contract for the issuance of shares albeit earnouts, splits, reverse splits etc. track the capital changes of the Company. Did this not happen here?

4. As long as the accountant/auditors were checking their report for clerical accuracy, how come the Statement of Changes in Stockholders Equity indicates that the issuance of shares for employment services totaled 2,970,000 but the detail ads up to $2,920,000 (85+2,919,915). Where is the other $50,000?

I am glad I am not a CPA because all of these numbers and internal references are a bit confusing to me. Can someone shed some light on them?

Well, tomorrow is Labor Day and I predict the stock will remain unchanged for the day.

Always remember do your own due diligence as Meadow2009 does not recommend buying or selling any security.

Cheerio