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.
One or two e-mails in a year is NOT a "mass e-mail campaign" as you alledged in your post and that's what I meant in my post. There was no "campaign" to promote Labwire stock. No pump and dump at all. Investors were very upset about how little babybulls did for Labwire.
"email from babybulls just came out."
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=13939152
Posted by: zigbee Date: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 1:04:30 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 10585
LBWR - BabyBulls.com..........
email from babybulls just came out.
----------------------------------------------------------
Revealing Undervalued Micro and Small Cap Companies
Labwire, Inc.Update - October 11, 2006
Stock Symbol:
LBWR
Profile Price:
$0.085
Shares Out:
136 million
Float:
9.8 million
Outlook:
Growth
Labwire, Inc.
Third quarter revenue numbers are out and Labwire, Inc. (LBWR) has once again outperformed expectations. Through the first nine months of 2006, LBWR reported gross revenue of $2,674,767 compared to $1,758,132 during the same period in 2005. This represents an increase of $916,635 or 52%. In addition, the $2.6 million in gross revenue reported for the first nine months of 2006 represents more than 100% of LBWR’s gross revenue reported for all of 2005.
And, not only is revenue up, it is up across the board. According the results reported in the press release, LBWR experienced growth across all of its business segments, including: (i) employee screening services, which increased 29% in the second quarter of 2006 over the same period in 2005; (ii) canine security and surveillance, which increased 314% in the second quarter of 2006 over the same period in 2005; and (iii) management services, which generated $14,967 in the second quarter of 2006 compared to zero revenue during the same period in 2005.
Based on the numbers from the press release summarized above, LBWR’s growth in revenue is absolutely terrific, it is hard to complain about being up 52% year to date. However, as BabyBulls.com looks more closely at the numbers, we believe significant upside potential exists based on the following: (i) 2006 revenue up 52% year to date compared to the same period in 2005; (ii) 2006 revenue has been relatively flat when comparing consecutive quarter results; (iii) on June 15, 2006, LBWR announced a 3-year agreement valued at $1.8 million annually; and (iv) on October 3, 2006 LBWR announced an additional agreement with leading petrochemical company valued at up to $2.25 million annually.
So, what does all this mean?
BabyBulls.com believes it means the following: (i) the $1.8 million annual agreement probably is not reflected in the current numbers; (ii) the 29% growth in employee screening services probably is 100% organic; and (iii) the 314% growth in canine security and surveillance reflects the continued acquisition of recurring security contracts, which could continue to grow even faster as a result of the October 3, 2006 announcement.
BabyBulls.com continues to be excited about LBWR as a result of it recent financial results and because of its anticipated future opportunities. Similarly, BabyBulls.com does not believe that LBWR’s current share price reflects the intrinsic value of Company. Below is an excerpt of today’s press release, a complete copy of which can be found at http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/061011/0171323.html.
Labwire Gross Revenue Up 52 Percent Year to Date
HOUSTON , TX - Oct 11, 2006 -- Labwire, Inc. (Other OTC:LBWR), a leading provider of employee screening solutions and canine security and surveillance services, is pleased to announce year to date and third quarter revenue results.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2006, Labwire's gross revenue was $2,674,767 compared to $1,758,132 during the same period in 2005. This represents an increase of $916,635 or 52%. The Company experienced growth during the first nine months of 2006 across: (i) employee screening services, which increased 29% compared to the same period in 2005; (ii) canine security and surveillance, which increased 314% compared to the same period in 2005; and (iii) management services, which generated $14,967 compared to zero revenue during the same period in 2005.
To view the complete release, click here.
For information on other promising emerging growth micro-cap companies, please visit us at: www.babybulls.com.
Disclaimer: This information is provided by BabyBulls.com to provide readers with information on selected publicly traded companies. The reader should verify all claims and complete his or her own due diligence before investing in any securities of profiled companies. BabyBulls.com has been retained to provide investor relations services for some of the companies mentioned in this profile and receives compensation for those services. Further, BabyBulls.com and its employees and affiliates may own, or may purchase and sell, securities of the companies profiled. BabyBulls.com undertakes no obligation to inform readers about the ownership or trading activities of it or its employees or affiliates in the securities of the profiled companies. BabyBulls.com has the following compensation arrangements with the companies profiled in this email: Labwire one million shares of restricted common stock. Neither BabyBulls.com nor anyone involved in the publication of this email is a registered investment adviser or broker/dealer. BabyBulls.com makes no recommendation that the purchase of securities of companies profiled in this email is suitable or advisable for any person or that an investment in such securities will be profitable. In general, given the nature of the companies profiled and the lack of an active trading market for their securities, investing in such securities is highly speculative and carries a high degree of risk. An investor in such securities should be prepared and able to bear a loss of his or her entire investment. Nothing in this email should be construed as an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities of any profiled company. See the babybulls.com website for full disclaimer information.
To opt-out of future announcements and correspondence from babybulls.com, click here and enter the email address you registered under.
a Production of BabyBulls.com
Posts are IMO. Do your own DD and make your own decisions. Good luck to all!
"Got a nice e-mail blurb from babybulls.com"
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=11567930
Posted by: Robsct Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 3:37:51 PM
In reply to: Creede Bighorns who wrote msg# 1500 Post # of 10585
Got a nice e-mail blurb from babybulls.com. It looks good but they misquoted the float and shares out.
Shares Out:
136.6 million
Float:
9.8 million
Wonder where they got their info from.
are you sure about this?
Posted by: Robsct Date: Saturday, February 07, 2009 12:19:10 AM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 1457 Post # of 1482
I'll pick out one of the many erroneous claims in that post to comment on.
Contrary to your assertions babybulls never did anything for Labwire much less promote the company.
I was on their e-mail list and never saw any e-mails promotong Labwire. There was never any e-mail campaign to promote the stock. Stock holders were very upset that babybulls was getting any shares at all because they did nothing to earn them. The statement about this you posted is completely false!
I'll pick out one of the many erroneous claims in that post to comment on.
Contrary to your assertions babybulls never did anything for Labwire much less promote the company.
I was on their e-mail list and never saw any e-mails promotong Labwire. There was never any e-mail campaign to promote the stock. Stock holders were very upset that babybulls was getting any shares at all because they did nothing to earn them. The statement about this you posted is completely false!
No! Point being I'm out of the pocket the equivalent of .02 per share.
you are kidding right?
Posted by: joev2 Date: Friday, February 06, 2009 11:09:06 PM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 1467 Post # of 1478
Let's say I bought 25k at .08 and sold it at .12. I then repurchased at .06. Counting the gains, how much money have I spent for the last 25k? Ans. $500 or .02 per share. That's the way I do it.
Probably best to let sleeping dogs lie.
Let's say I bought 25k at .08 and sold it at .12. I then repurchased at .06. Counting the gains, how much money have I spent for the last 25k? Ans. $500 or .02 per share. That's the way I do it.
I meant to reply to chef d's post homey dude.
So, to all scam-busters on this board,
I-Hub is 60% full of scammy/scummy stocks, 30% in aint never gonna work stocks and 10% real winners.
If you cant tell the difference between the former and the latter, than you shouldn't be gambling away your $$$$.
We can agree on BOTH points then.
I bought into plenty of scammy companies w/o knowing it.
That's how I stumbled onto I-Hub.
I'm no friend of scams and SRSR is certainly not that.
Good luck to you. I am 1000% sure SRSR will be a MONSTA! This month...maybe but this year fer sure!
joev, frankly I really don't care if someone agrees with me or not...the facts are the facts....
and if the facts lead to a suspension of trading by the SEC, then be it...
either way,
If LBWR gets suspended by the SEC, no big deal
If LBWR does not get suspended by the SEC, no big deal
===============
I was being sarcastic also because you appear to be the type of individual who isn't satisfied unless someone agrees with you 100%.
I have m three posts a day and throw in my two cents worth. lol
fair enough...I cannot tell you when that will change over there.
The MB can't be a onesided pump- fest, Frankly it looks very phony to me adn god knows i've seen to much of that crap on these boards already. thats why my ears go up and the alarm rings. no other reason really"!!!!
joev, look at LBWR's trading range since it started trading in 2005. Then come back and tell us how you can average .02/share on this stock.
Listen, I'm not stuck in this stock. I've traded it numerous times where my average is something like .02 with one account and a bit higher with the other. I can't even honestly say what I'm averaged in with the other account because it's an IRA and I haven't kept track. All I know is I've traded it there also.
I was being sarcastic also because you appear to be the type of individual who isn't satisfied unless someone agrees with you 100%.
I agree on the post deletion...its one reason why I limit my posts and their content. Its been that way FOREVER it seems.
there you go joev, your responses are self-explanatory for anyone to read and understand why you are stuck in this stock.
I don't give advice on stocks
If you are talking about my comment to hold the stock until it is closed down by the SEC, I guess you didn't realize that it was just a sarcastic comment
good luck in your investing
===========
Posted by: joev2 Date: Friday, February 06, 2009 4:39:19 PM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 1457 Post # of 1462
Point one is NOT proven that Dexter is crooked. Thanks for agreeing with me.
Point two was in reference to Morris, not Stocker.
Point three was in reference to a poster's comment about Stocker's performance with Labwire. I can't verify the accuracy or inaccuracy.
Point 4 was a question about Moseley....nothing more, nothing less. If he was charged and found guilty, I learned something. If he wasn't charged or was found innocent, I also learned something. I simply haven't bothered to search him out.
Point 5 about Babybulls: Seems like it's a total crappy outfit and I would wonder why anyone would EVER do business with them for any reason.
Point 6: Someone uses him otherwise he wouldn't be employed. What are you suggesting, that he could never do a good job because of a previous discretion...or that no one should ever give him a chance eventhough he's been totally reinstated? I guess we shouldn't bank at Citigroup either? Well, I don't but my wife does.
Point 7: Thanks for your advice, but I've survived until now. I don't think I need you as being my financial advisor. In fact, I'm leery of anyone who gives advice....starting with the analysts working on Wall Street.
Any board that I participated in and stock I owned when any negative posts are deleted without merit, sends up a red Flag and all those stocks went bust. why, because the promotors were pumping the hell out of it and wanted to continue to dump shares, Now I COULD RATTLE OFF DOZENS OF SCAMS, we all know which ones they are. i AGREE the jury is still out on srsr, but the symptoms are all there.imo glty
Point one is NOT proven that Dexter is crooked. Thanks for agreeing with me.
Point two was in reference to Morris, not Stocker.
Point three was in reference to a poster's comment about Stocker's performance with Labwire. I can't verify the accuracy or inaccuracy.
Point 4 was a question about Moseley....nothing more, nothing less. If he was charged and found guilty, I learned something. If he wasn't charged or was found innocent, I also learned something. I simply haven't bothered to search him out.
Point 5 about Babybulls: Seems like it's a total crappy outfit and I would wonder why anyone would EVER do business with them for any reason.
Point 6: Someone uses him otherwise he wouldn't be employed. What are you suggesting, that he could never do a good job because of a previous discretion...or that no one should ever give him a chance eventhough he's been totally reinstated? I guess we shouldn't bank at Citigroup either? Well, I don't but my wife does.
Point 7: Thanks for your advice, but I've survived until now. I don't think I need you as being my financial advisor. In fact, I'm leery of anyone who gives advice....starting with the analysts working on Wall Street.
SRSR is NOT a scam.
The jury is still out on some other stocks I am holding so I will let you know.
homey, are you here to give us some info on a scam? I'm all ears.
AND YOUR POINT IS"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
responses in bold
Posted by: joev2 Date: Friday, February 06, 2009 6:37:36 AM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 1391 Post # of 1455
All that REALLY proves is that Dexter hasn't been the wisest in choosing his associates. Yes, he could be crooked, but he also could be naive....or simply made bad choices.
Naive is not the word. Since LBWR specializes in investigative services, the fact tha LBWR has contracted all of these slimy people leads one to believe that Dexter is either a bad businessman or crooked himself, not naive. How can a company convince a potential client to do business with them if the company can't carry out its services on itself?
Unless or until he IS convicted of something, one still has to assume his innocence.
Are you talking about someone like David B. Stocker, the LBWR Securities Counsel that has been charged in Three separate SEC fraud lawsuits?...yes, he has not been convicted yet. But former SLJB Petar Vucicecvich has not been convicted yet also - and what do you think of the empty shell company that never had any assets or operating business called SLJB?
Adding to that, he DID say that Stocker did the company well (has it been proven that Stocker didn't?).
Please show us where or post a link where LBWR said that Stocker did a good job for LBWR (hint: this is a set-up question)
Was Moseley himself charged with anything? There are a lot of idiots that post on I-Hub. Am I one just because I also post here? Is it guilt by association for that individual or has he also been charged?
What is it about the write-up on Randy Moseley which shows that he was right in the middle of structuring and accepting the fraudulent structure of the Fronthaul/CSHD deal which blatantly violated any fiduciary duties that he had towards stockholders in what was a multi-hundred million dollar fraud that you don't understand? here:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=34864607
What has babybulls been charged with concerning Labwire?
babybulls was involved in the paid promotion of LBWR stock via the use of false and misleading statemtns about LBWR sent out to thousands if not millions of recipients by mass email blasts. Look up how many people and entities have been charged and convicted for doing such things, My guess is that babybulls will be mentioned in any upcoming SEC litigation release regarding LBWR
Moore IS guilty of previous fraud. Has it been proven he is committing the same with Labwire?
Moore is a convicted felon guilty of two counts of mail and wire fraud. You would have to be kookoo to think that this type of background is OK for a company's auditor and not a big gigantic red flag, particularly considering the restatements of financials filed with the SEC by the Moore firm and the filing of false and misleading statements by LBWR with the SEC
Again, I'm sure Dexter is aware of all that is being said lately. If he's clean, now's the time to show the world...which could be helped by the sec's response to their filings. He can also help his cause by clarifying certain issues which according to Creede will begin with the k-9 stuff.
What you should do is wait until the SEC steps in and closes this baby down. You might want to hold your stock til then
but it is sooooooooo good!
You may, if you want. The "promoters" can fend for themselves. For me, this is NOT my most prioritized holding, so if the effort is too much, you needn't bother.
have joev2, you really don't want me to put the time and energy to give you a point by point response, do you?
I don't think that that promoters of the stock would like to read what I would be posting as the detailed responses to you
===========
Btw, I think the response you're responding to was pretty solid, whereas your response was with a bunch of "even if's"
I've said previously....I'm holding. Your argument is pretty strong, but I don't find it absolute. I still believe I will have the opportunity to trade out even if I see those red flags sticking a bit.
If your track record (according to you) remains 100%, then I've learned a lesson.
"If" and "when" are two different stories. I won't be surprised either way.
Btw, I think the response you're responding to was pretty solid, whereas your response was with a bunch of "even if's"
Charges Levied in Insider Case
UBS Banker, Others Face Counts in Albertson's Deal
FEBRUARY 5, 2009, 9:45 P.M. ET
By CHAD BRAY
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123388733794155377.html#
A UBS AG investment banker, a former co-worker, a family friend and a former classmate have been charged criminally in an insider-trading case that allegedly reaped more than $7 million in illicit profits.
Nicos Achillea Stephanou, a UBS investment banker who has been in custody since his arrest in December, has been charged with conspiracy and two counts of securities fraud. The charges against 34-year-old Mr. Stephanou, of London, were announced publicly Thursday.
On Thursday, Joseph Contorinis, a former portfolio manager for a hedge fund in Jefferies Group Inc.'s asset-management unit and former co-worker of Mr. Stephanou; Michael Koulouroudis, a close family friend of Mr. Stephanou, according to court documents; and George Paparrizos, a former classmate of Stephanou's at the University of California-Berkeley, court documents said, were charged with conspiracy and securities fraud. Each fraud charge carries as long as 20 years in prison if convicted.
Mr. Contorinis, 44, of Fort Myers, Fla.; and Mr. Koulouroudis, 59, of Brooklyn, N.Y.; were arrested Thursday by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in New York. Mr. Paparrizos, 37, of Foster City, Calif., was arrested in California on Thursday.
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan have alleged that Mr. Stephanou worked on the acquisition of Albertson's Inc. in 2006 and had access to nonpublic information through his work about a proposed acquisition of ElkCorp by a private-equity firm in 2006. He allegedly tipped others about the deals before they became public.
Mr. Contorinis allegedly reaped the largest illicit profits from the scheme, netting $7.2 million for a hedge-fund account he controlled. Prosecutors alleged Mr. Contorinis received a tip from a banker about the acquisition of Albertson's before the public announcement of the deal in January 2006. Albertson's was sold in 2006 to a consortium of investors that included Supervalu Inc., CVS Caremark Corp. and an investor group led by Cerberus Capital Management LP.
On Thursday, the Securities and Exchange Commission separately brought civil charges against seven people in the matter, including Messrs. Stephanou, Koulouroudis, Contorinis and Paparrizos. The SEC says the plot resulted in more than $8 million in illegal profits and losses avoided.
The SEC also brought charges against Ramesh Chakrapani, a suspended Blackstone Group executive and former co-worker of Mr. Stephanou's at Credit Suisse First Boston, now part of Credit Suisse Group.
Mr. Chakrapani also faces criminal and civil charges in a separate insider-trading plot involving shares of Albertson's. "Mr. Chakrapani is adamant that he never violated his duties to his employer and we expect him to be fully exonerated," said Michael Sommer, his lawyer. Mr. Sommer noted none of the criminal complaints that became public Thursday allege a connection to his client.
Michael F. Bachner, a lawyer for Mr. Koulouroudis, and Christopher J. Morvillo, a lawyer for Mr. Stephanou, both declined to comment Thursday. A lawyer for Mr. Contorinis didn't return a phone call for comment, while a lawyer for Mr. Paparrizos, in custody in California, wasn't immediately located Thursday.
Tom Tarrant, a Jefferies spokesman, confirmed Mr. Contorinis left Jefferies a year ago and declined further comment. A UBS spokeswoman said the company has and will continue to assist authorities in their inquiry.
In January, when Mr. Chakrapani was arrested, a Blackstone spokesman said the firm was "shocked by this alleged breach of the law and violation of our own compliance policies and ethical standards," and added that the firm was cooperating. He repeated those comments Thursday.
Write to Chad Bray at chad.bray@dowjones.com
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123388733794155377.html#
Trading Suspension 34-59365 Feb. 6, 2009 BIH Corporation
http://sec.gov/litigation/suspensions/2009/34-59365.pdf
See also Order
http://sec.gov/litigation/suspensions/2009/34-59365-o.pdf
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Release No. 59365 / February 6, 2009
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced the temporary suspension, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), of trading of the securities of BIH Corporation ("BIH"), of Fort Myers, Florida at 9:30 a.m. EST on February 6, 2009, and terminating at 11:59 p.m. EST on February 20, 2009.
The Commission temporarily suspended trading in the securities of BIH because of questions that have been raised about the accuracy and adequacy of publicly disseminated information concerning, among other things, the identity of the person or persons in control of the operation and management of the company, and contracts entered into by one of BIH's subsidiaries.
The Commission cautions brokers, dealers, shareholders, and prospective purchasers that they should carefully consider the foregoing information along with all other currently available information and any information subsequently issued by the company.
Further, brokers and dealers should be alert to the fact that, pursuant to Rule 15c2-11 under the Exchange Act, at the termination of the trading suspension, no quotation may be entered unless and until they have strictly complied with all of the provisions of the rule. If any broker or dealer has any questions as to whether or not he has complied with the rule, he should not enter any quotation but immediately contact the staff in the Division of Trading and Markets, Office of Interpretation and Guidance, at (202) 5515777. If any broker or dealer is uncertain as to what is required by Rule 15c2-11, he should refrain from entering quotations relating to BIH's securities until such time as he has familiarized himself with the rule and is certain that all of its provisions have been met. If any broker or dealer enters any quotation that is in violation of the rule, the Commission will consider the need for prompt enforcement action.
If any broker, dealer or other person has any information that may relate to this matter, they should immediately contact Eric R. Busto, Assistant Regional Director, Miami Regional Office of the Securities and Exchange Commission at (305) 982-6362
http://sec.gov/litigation/suspensions/2009/34-59365.pdf
I appreciate that. However, he claimed that my post, correcting a factual error he posted, somehow made me a LBWR proponent.
Do you see anything in my post that indicates as such?
If so, please let me know and I will correct it.
Thanks in advance.
Earnest agreed that he made a mistake in a post and thanked you for it
rrufff, Earnest agreed that he made a mistake in a post and thanked you for it
now leave it at that
Particularly surprising was the appearance of Ira Lee Sorkin -- Mr. Madoff's lawyer -- on the customer list. Whether Mr. Sorkin or his family members lost money through Mr. Madoff is unclear. A person familiar with the matter says Mr. Sorkin's father, Nathan, opened an IRA account with Mr. Madoff at some point in the 1990s.
"I have never been an investor or customer of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities," said Mr. Sorkin, adding: "I'm not going to talk about my family members."
[...]
The document itself is a simple alphabetical list, originally posted on the U.S. federal court electronic records Web site. It's not very easy to use in that format: Oddly, it's alphabetized by people's first names.
But within hours, Josh Linsk, a 26-year-old who runs a publishing company based in Las Vegas, transformed it into a searchable database, www.madoffsearch.com, which he dubbed "The first and only Bernard Madoff Search Engine."
The first and only Bernard Madoff Search Engine, with information on all investors at individual and institutional levels.
http://www.madoffsearch.com/
Current Search: Sorkin
IRA LEE SORKIN
10 VANAD DRIVE
EAST HILLS, NY 11576,
then please show us the proof of this
===========
Posted by: Robsct Date: Friday, February 06, 2009 11:50:50 AM
In reply to: scion who wrote msg# 1424 Post # of 1445
Lack of documented evidence? LOL. LBWR has every indication of a thriving company.
sure no problem:
2007 9 month revenues = $3.530 million
2008 9 month revenues = $3.169 million
therefore LBWR is NOT GROWING
===========
Posted by: Robsct Date: Friday, February 06, 2009 11:21:44 AM
In reply to: scion who wrote msg# 1410 Post # of 1442
Prove that Labwire is not growing!!
Earnest, for someone who posts so often about mistakes, errors and what others may calll "trivia," I don't understand why you are upset and why you would post this,
"Good luck to you on total trivia not relevant to any stock."
You posted a factual statement. You claimed that LBWR did NOT average $1 million in revenue.
Is the fact that your statement of FACT was incorrect "NOT RELEVANT TO" LBWR?
I think it is very relevant.
Would you not require the same accuracy in those to whom you often post?
OH and thank you for thanking me for pointing out one of your errors.
yes, a company can say anything in a Press Release, like the more than 1/2 dozen false and misleading press releases issued by LBWR
===========
Posted by: Robsct Date: Friday, February 06, 2009 11:19:40 AM
In reply to: EarnestDD who wrote msg# 1409 Post # of 1441
PR's are not proof??? LOL A company can say anything in a PR??? Get real!!
According to the latest SEC filings, LBWR is NOT a growing company with growing revenue.
2008 9 month revenues dropped from 2007
=========
Posted by: Robsct Date: Friday, February 06, 2009 11:11:31 AM
In reply to: scion who wrote msg# 1407 Post # of 1439
Does it burn you up that much that Labwire is a growing company with growing revenue? Why do you refuse to admit it?
I made one error and admitted to it.
I thanked you for pointing it out.
Good luck to you on total trivia not relevant to any stock.
lol
There is nothing here that shows that LBWR's revenue has grown
Posted by: Robsct Date: Friday, February 06, 2009 10:59:57 AM
In reply to: scion who wrote msg# 1405 Post # of 1437
In case you missed it, here's the documented proof of Labwire's continued revenue growth.
Labwire Implements Additional Service Units
Friday February 6, 8:00 am ET
BROOKSHIRE, TX--(MARKET WIRE)--Feb 6, 2009 -- Labwire, Inc. (Other OTC:LBWR.PK - News), a leading provider of employee screening solutions and canine security and surveillance services, announced that as of January 29th, 2009 it has added another 140 service units in 20 states (utilizing Labwire's federal transit administration (FTA) compliance platform) to one of it's "alliance" contracts (Labwire release May 15, 2008) for calendar 2009. Each location was setup with the capability of doing 50 drug tests before having to reorder forms. "We are pleased to have completed these setups and have them online and functional in less than 30 days. We look forward to the additional volume that will be generated by these locations," said Dexter Morris, Chief Executive Officer, Labwire Inc.
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/090206/0471946.html
Earnest - it seems you want to get into the limits of TOU. Is this perhaps because you have been now proven wrong in at least 2 posts?
Whether I am a "LBWR proponent" or not is none of your business and is not the subject matter of this board.
I asked what in my post to you led you to believe that I was a "LBWR proponent." You made a claim that another poster was wrong and I appeared to show that it was YOU, who was, in fact wrong.
I asked you a factual claim. I did not imply in any way whatsoever that having over a million dollars in revenue as an average was good or bad. That is not my concern at this point. I merely wanted to correct what appeared to be a factual error in your post.
As I asked you in my prior post,
Proving you wrong simply means I read your post and checked out the information.
Do you agree, or are you wrong again? (Now, I'm losing track of the number of times you appear to be wrong.)
Followers
|
24
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
1593
|
Created
|
01/05/09
|
Type
|
Premium
|
Moderators |
This Forum is to discuss events/ceos/cfos/directors/companies/etc etc that May Be or Have been scammers.
THIS IS AN OPEN DISCUSSION. PLEASE FOLLOW THE TOU rules. THERE WILL BE MINIMAL MODERATOR OVERSEE/DELETIONS
CERTAIN MODS ON CERTAIN STOCK BOARDS REFUSE TO LET THE TRUTH COME OUT, FEEL FREE TO DISCUSS THINGS YOU COULDNT ON YOUR RESPECTIVE STOCK BOARDS
Scam stock Characteristics Could Be:
1. A Company Loaded with CD's to Preferreds.
2. A Company Loaded with CD's to YA and Company.
3. A CEO that leaves BAG HOLDERS of their Common Stock, Knowingly or By a Plan.
4. A CEO who issues False and Misleading Statements in PR's or public statements.
5. A CEO who issues False and Misleading Shareholder Updates.
6. A CEO who Carries over from Shell to Shell, Past CD's.
7. A CEO who Indirectly Pumps, Dilutes then Shorts his Company.
8. Certain MODs.
9. A CEO that threatens to sue message board posters that ask Legitimate Questions.
10. A CEO that fails to identify that it Funds, or does Business with Companies with which the CEO or other Officers/Directors of the Company have Ownership.
11. A CEO that issues False and Misleading Financials Statements publicly, in PR's, in pinksheets.com or in SEC filings.
12. A CEO that goes missing
13. A company that does not return calls or emails
14. A CEO that brings other scam CEOs on board as their COO or director
PLEASE (IF APPLICABLE) INCLUDE LINKS TO ARTICLES/FILINGS/ETC ETC
POTENTIAL SCAMS Identified by Posters
Do Your DD !!:
Word of Warning:
THE SCAMS BOARD HAS BEEN CLOSED FOR A WEEK.
PLEASE DO NOT ATTACK OTHER USERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |