Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Hey Nitwit, we coming off the greys with a custodian here?
I've seen a few grumblings about someone wanting to get this off the greys. Anybody able to buy this right now? Looks like a great candidate for a custodian play with the length of time she has been dead.
No emotion ClayTrader
Anyways, my question is this: what "different" feelings do you have?
About 3 years ago the SEC delisted AERP
jmo
when aerp delisted? revoked?
Peacock swindled a bundle here.
jmo
It's been 7 years since shareholders were Pea'Cocked on this scam job!
AERP, some sorry investors got a lot of friends and family to invest in this Peacock scam. It sure became a sorry mess.
Course it was all the Naked shorters fault. lolol
NOT
jmo
whatever happened to petro??? he was the biggest pumper here.
he was suppose to be traveling around the country in his van
Going public when they are bankrupt, not a good idea.
jmo
AERP ... a lot of fake NSS fairy tales here.
lolol
jmo
AERP is Dead as dead can be.
jmo
This is terrible and made it that the numbers were huge
Hunsaker and Peacock LIED about sales.
jmo
At one point they made this company had huge sales. JMO
AERP .. one of many Peacock scams.
jmo
AERP ... About as Dead as Dead can be.
jmo
How's EarnieDD? Looks like AERP doesn't have any chance of coming back from Purgatory...
Bad business plan from Day One.
jmo
Peacock is hiding from the SEC.
jmo
When it was trading for pennies, they made it sound so big, until the numbers came out
It's funny how stocks that are claimed to be manipulated by evil mm's always end up at or near zero. Next time you read that a stock is being driven to .0001 by anyone, believe the message, and filter out all the posts about dca'ing shares and how *legit* the company is. Play the pump and dump and forget the noise from those who insinuate they know more about the company than you do.
--------------
So this one is dead
AERP has long been dead.
jmo
AERP lost on all counts.
Looks like Hunsaker got away without any more liability though.
jmo
June 12, 2012
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
BB. The License Agreement and Sponsorship Agreement are valid, binding and
enforceable contracts.
CC. The court may enter a default if: (1) a party fails to plead or otherwise defend
against a complaint; and (2) the clerk has entered that party's default. Rule
1.500(a), Fla. R. Civ. P. Each defendant was properly served and has failed to file
an answer or otherwise appear in this action. The Clerk properly entered the
default of each defendant under Rule 1.500(a), Fla. R. Civ. P. Entry of default
judgment is therefore appropriate under Rule 1.500(b), Fla. R. Civ. P.
DD. Upon entry of default the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint are taken as
true. Wenbov Limited Partnership v. Rockledge Bar-B-Q, Inc., 619 So. 2d 414,
416 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).
EE. The defendants are in breach of the License Agreement and the Sponsorship
Agreement for each party's failure to pay the sums due thereunder.
FF. A default admits every cause of action that is sufficiently well-pled to properly
invoke the jurisdiction of the court and to give due process notice to the party
against whom relief is sought. Bowman v. Kingsland Development, Inc., 432 So.
2d 660, 662 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). A default also admits the plaintiffs entitlement to
liquidated damages due under the pleaded cause of action. Id.; see also Rich v.
Spivey, 922 So. 2d 326, 327 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (a default admits all well-pleaded
allegations of a complaint, which may include plaintiff's entitlement to liquidated
damages).
6
GG. Damages are liquidated when the proper amount can be determined with
exactness from the cause of action as pleaded, i.e., from a pleaded agreement
between the parties, by an arithmetical calculation or by application of definite rules
of law. Bowman, 432 So. 2d at 662.
HH. Where the defendant does not contest the amount prayed for in the complaint and
the claim is for a sum certain or a sum that can be made certain by computation,
the judgment generally will be entered for that amount without any further hearing.
Rich, 922 So. 2d at 328.
Therefore, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that:
1. NASCAR's breach of contract action for money damages against defendant TTR
HP, INC. d/b/a AERO EXHAUST, also d/b/a AERO PERFORMANCE EXHAUST,
arising out of breach of the License Agreement (Second Amended Complaint,
Count I) is GRANTED.
2. NASCAR's breach of contract action for money damages against defendant TTR
HP, INC. d/b/a AERO EXHAUST, also d/b/a AERO PERFORMANCE EXHAUST,
arising out of breach of the Sponsorship Agreement (Second Amended
Complaint, Count II) is GRANTED.
3. NASCAR's breach of contract action for money damages against defendant FLOCO,
LLC, as successor to TTR HP, INC. (Second Amended Complaint, Count
III), is GRANTED.
4. NASCAR's breach of contract action for money damages against defendant AERO
PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC. d/b/a AERO EXHAUST, INC., as successor
to TTR HP, INC. (Second Amended Complaint, Count IV), is GRANTED.
7
5. NASCAR is the prevailing party in this action.
Inst rument# 2012-102522 # 8
Book: 6722
Page: 367
Diane H. Mateasek
Volusia Canty, Clerk of Court
6. NASCAR shall recover principal damages in the amount of One Million One
Hundred Fourteen Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($1,114,750.00),
7. NASCAR shall recover pre-judgment interest at the rate of 1.50% per month,
having accrued from January 15, 2008, August 1, 2008, and from November 1,
2008, in the sum of Eight Hundred Seventy Two Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty
Three 77/100 Dollars ($872,853.77).
8. In total, NASCAR shall recover from TTR HP, INC. d/b/a AERO EXHAUST, also
d/b/a AERO PERFORMANCE EXHAUST; and AERO PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC. d/b/a AERO EXHAUST, INC.; and FLO-CO, LLC, joint and
severally, the sum of One Million Nine Hundred Eighty Seven Thousand Six
Hundred Three 77/100 Dollars ($1,987,603.77), for all of which let execution
issue.
DONE AND ORDERED in Daytona Beach, Volusia County, Florida this f.R. day of
June 2012.
Copies furnished to:
William R. Wohlsifer, Esq.
William R. Wohlsifer, PA
1100 East Park Ave, Ste B
Tallahassee, FL 32301
AERO Performance Products, Inc.
14553 S790 W., Ste B
Bluffdale, UT 84065
ard S. Graham, Circuit Judge
TTR HP, Inc.
2078 Prospector Ave, Ste 2
Park City, UT 84060
FLO-CO, LLC
2078 Prospector Ave, Ste 2
Park City, UT 84060
Evil NSS killed it? lolzzz
NOPE ... no trading ever again in AERP.
jmo
You nailed that one.
lolol
jmo
9/27/11 - the scam scenario: Steven R. Peacock ... 'nuf said... EOM
Rufus Paul Harris needs a cellmate, lol.
Peacock just got named by the SEC for his hinky lawsuit settlements.
He did a number of these on AERP as well.
jmo
SEC Charges Penny Stock Financiers and Two Public Companies With Illegal Unregistered Stock Distributions
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2012/lr22381.htm
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 22381 / May 30, 2012
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Mark A. Lefkowitz, Compass Capital Group, Inc., Mark A. Lopez, Unico, Inc., Steven R. Peacock, Shane H. Traveller, and Advanced Cell Technology, Inc., United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Civil Action No. 8:12-CV-1210T35MAP
SEC Charges Penny Stock Financiers and Two Public Companies With Illegal Unregistered Stock Distributions
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil injunctive action today in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida against Mark A. Lefkowitz, Compass Capital Group, Inc., Mark A. Lopez, Unico, Inc., Steven R. Peacock, Shane H. Traveller, and Advanced Cell Technology, Inc., alleging that they violated the federal securities laws in connection with the unregistered distribution of billions of shares of penny stocks through the repeated misuse of the exemption from registration contained in Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933.
Section 3(a)(10) provides an exemption from registration that permits a company to issue common stock to public investors “in exchange for one or more bona fide outstanding securities, claims or property interests” without having to file a registration statement “where the terms and conditions of such issuance and exchange are approved after a hearing upon the fairness of such terms and conditions” by any court or any governmental authority “expressly authorized by law to grant such approval.” The Complaint alleges that the Section 3(a)(10) exemption was not available for any of the stock offerings at issue because the terms and conditions of the exchanges – including the fact that the issuers were raising capital through such exchanges – were not fully disclosed to the court.
According to the Commission’s Complaint, in or about early 2006, Lefkowitz, a penny stock financier, devised a strategy for penny stock issuers to pay off past due debts while, at the same time, improperly raising additional capital in reliance upon Section 3(a)(10). According to the Complaint, Lefkowitz executed his illegal strategy with Lopez, the chief executive officer of Unico, a penny stock issuer based in California, and William Caldwell IV, the chief executive officer of Advanced Cell Technology, a penny stock issuer based in Massachusetts. The Complaint further alleges that Peacock and Traveller, two penny stock financiers who learned of the illegal strategy from Lefkowitz, executed the strategy with Unico and other penny stock issuers.
The Complaint alleges that from September 9, 2006 through January 29, 2009, in order to satisfy the fairness hearing requirement of Section 3(a)(10), more than fifty pre-settled lawsuits were filed in a Florida state court purportedly to settle past due debts owed by Unico, Advanced Cell, or other penny stock issuers (collectively, the “Penny Stock Issuers”) to Compass Capital Group and several offshore financing entities affiliated with Lefkowitz, and Sequoia International, Inc., an entity affiliated with Peacock and Traveller (collectively, the “Financiers”). The Complaint further alleges that in each case, one of the Penny Stock Issuers entered into a written settlement agreement with one or more of the Financiers whereby the Penny Stock Issuer agreed to issue unrestricted common stock to the Financiers at a substantial discount to the prevailing market price, purportedly to retire the past due debt. The settlement shares allegedly were worth multiple times more than the debt that was to be extinguished and the Financiers agreed to remit monies to the Penny Stock Issuer following the sale of the settlement shares to the public on the open market. According to the Complaint, none of the settlement agreements submitted to the court for approval, disclosed, nor did the parties ever apprise the presiding judges of, the existence of the side agreements, that the market value of the shares to be issued greatly exceeded the debts that were to be extinguished, or that significant sums of monies would be remitted to the Penny Stock Issuers as a result of the Section 3(a)(10) settlements.
According to the Complaint, at the conclusion of each of the hearings, the Florida state court granted a Section 3(a)(10) exemption from registration and, thereafter, unrestricted shares were issued to the Financiers, who quickly sold the shares on the open market to public investors unaware of the dilutive effects of the new stock issuances. Also according to the Complaint, the Financiers subsequently remitted millions of dollars to the Penny Stock Issuers, either directly or through an intermediary, as financing, making it an improper capital raising transaction for the Penny Stock Issuers.
The Complaint alleges that Unico extinguished approximately $4.0 million in past due debts but separately raised more than $9.2 million as a result of monies later remitted to it by the Financiers. Advanced Cell allegedly extinguished $1.1 million in debts while separately raising more than $3.5 million through monies later remitted by or on behalf of the Financiers. The Other Penny Stock Issuers allegedly collectively extinguished approximately $1 million in debts while separately raising more than $1.2 million. The Complaint also alleges that Lefkowitz and his affiliated entities profited by at least $1.7 million from these transactions and that Peacock and Traveller profited by at least $455,000.
The Complaint alleges that Unico filed false and misleading disclosures with the Commission concerning the monies it received from the Financiers and that Unico and Advanced Cell failed to timely disclose the settlement agreements and issuance of over 9 billion and 260 million unregistered shares of their respective common stocks in connection with the Section 3(a)(10) settlements. In addition, the complaint further alleges that Peacock, aided and abetted by Traveller, failed to report his beneficial ownership of more than five percent of the outstanding shares of Unico common stock in December 2006.
The Complaint charges all of the defendants with violations of the securities offering registration provisions, Unico and Advanced Cell with periodic reporting violations, Lopez for aiding and abetting Unico’s periodic reporting violations, Peacock with beneficial ownership reporting violations, and Traveller for aiding and abetting Peacock’s ownership reporting violations. The Commission seeks permanent injunctions, disgorgement of illegal profits with prejudgment interest, and civil penalties as to Unico, Advanced Cell, Peacock, and Traveller; a permanent injunction and a civil penalty as to Lopez; disgorgement of illegal profits with prejudgment interest and civil penalties as to Lefkowitz and Compass Capital; and an order barring Lefkowitz, Compass Capital, Lopez, Peacock, and Traveller from participating in any future offerings of penny stock.
Lefkowitz, Compass Capital, and Traveller previously have been enjoined from violating various provisions of the federal securities laws, including the antifraud provisions, in connection with unrelated conduct that also involved the misuse of an exemption from registration of securities offerings. See Litigation Release No. 21319 (Dec. 2, 2009):
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2009/lr21319.htm
and Litigation Release No. 20695 (Aug. 28, 2008).
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2008/lr20695.htm
SEC Complaint in this matter:
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2012/comp22381.pdf
NO LONGER owned by AERP.
Owned by Richards in his private company.
jmo
Bankrupt is the company.
Revoked by Nevada Sec. of State.
Assets went to Richards.
Lawsuit from NASCAR leaves nothing left.
jmo
does anyone know if areo still exists? i thought they would be long gone.
is the ceo still in jail?
who owns areo these days?
any hope for the future here? lol thought i'd throw that in for the heck of it.
Time for a channel check to see how product comes to market.
Anybody seen a distribution footprint lately?
product still on the market
revive it
can stock holders do anything?
Sorry treeman1 I have no answers for you. I just drop by ever so often to see is there is any change. What I see doesn't look good. I have had this stock for years and lost my money.
Anything is possible in pennyland. Lets hope for a "Lazarus" experience here.
GLTA
Richards got the product. AERP has been delisted.
GAME OVER.
jmo
Followers
|
300
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
162847
|
Created
|
03/16/05
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Stock is currently in Limbo with NO operations and NO assets.
Office is CLOSED.
Aero Performance Products, Inc., publicly trades under the symbol AERP.
Aero Performance Products, Inc. has had its Status REVOKED by the Secretary of State for Nevada for failure to file its Annual Returns.
http://nvsos.gov/sosentitysearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=mfpaSiSsbXkawktSH%252fop%252fw%253d%253d&nt7=0
NASCAR is suing Aero and some principals of the Company for outstanding accounts payable and failing to honor payments required under a marketing agreement.
A/S= 5 billion
O/S= UNKNOWN - Transfer Agent is GAGGED
Outstanding at May 1, 2009 3,437,045,822 shares
AERP AERO Performance Products SEC filings:
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&filenum=000-50127&owner=exclude&am....
News/PR's Headlines
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=AERP.OB
/>
Note: If you would like to have something posted in the I-box please send the Mod a courteous PM explaining why it should be posted
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |