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.
So is this chat board now as dead as Fortem?
Broker sent me a notice that I will not be able to trade this POS soon due to new SEC regulations….ie they need to file proper documents. Why is this so hard for Mgmt?!
I tend to agree with you Randy. But it's been 9 years for me now. I heard from a guy, who heard from a guy that things may be getting better here. But I think that was a month and a half ago and are now sub $0.40. I'm not leaving but this is crazy... Patiently waiting... I seemingly now have some Pot stock too and in the same spot.
I’m still in fundamental agreement with what I wrote in my previous post (sticky post #2487). I had thought by now we would have been given some indication of how things are going. Although I understand that they don’t want to be making changes and thus become a moving target in the eyes of the Alberta Stock Exchange CTO removal.
As for additional reasons to be optimistic about Fortem Resources, here are a couple more points:
8. The price of crude oil has recently been rebounding to the $60 range, with some projecting that we could see $80 or even $100 per barrel.
That being the case, privately held oil and gas properties will be increasing valuable and sought.
9. As I have looked over the fillings, the essence of the accounting disagreement is how the acquired properties be valued and carried on the books of the company.
1) At the value represented by both the issued stock and the cash portion.
OR
2) At the value of just the cash portion paid for the properties (and thus not the value of the tens of millions of shares issued to acquire the properties).
It seems almost ridiculous to me to think that anyone world sell with their properties for less than a value that would fairly represent the properties value. The underlying value of the shares have to be taken into account when valuing the purchase price, as well as the book value those properties continue to have as asset value on the books of the company.
With other investors I’m looking forward to the company putting this behind them. Will it be weeks or months? Who knows. Time will tell.
Well that was helpful…NOT!
You are drinking the KOOL-AID.
Keep hearing they are supposed to get relisted on Toronto exchange…..what’s the hold up? Anyone know anything?
Silence not only from the company, but also zero volume days increasing.
One of those cases where silence is not golden.
Ugh....that would be awful!!
Just got this from e-Trade. "Starting September 28, 2021, you will no longer be able to buy or sell “Pink No Information” OTC securities through E*TRADE. Other restrictions related to the purchase of these securities may apply sooner. Please keep in mind that the upcoming changes will negatively affect the value of any “Pink No Information” OTC securities you hold now or in the future." Let's hope FTMR is able to get things going again.
Who knows for sure. My guess is the building bids are probably a good sign. It's not that long ago we were trading in the teens and twenties.
Also, the CTA was placed by the Alberta Stock Exchange, so I believe they are the only ones who can lift it. I would think nothing will happen on the Toronto Venture Exchange until after the Alberta Stock Exchange CTO is lifted.
Still No relisting on Toronto exchange.....why not?!? Seriously, it shouldn’t take this long, let alone not share any updates!!! This is so annoying. The book value is worthless if the stock doesn’t get relisted and shares start trading in a meaningful way. What an example of gross incompetence by management!
A substantive response that has merit. Thank you.
I think it is also worthwhile information and thought for anyone who may be doing DD to consider in that process.
I've been an investor and a shareholder in FTMR for quite a while. Am I an apologist for the company, not really, but I have only shared and posted what I believe to be true. Here's my message to you back in 2017:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=134145327&txt2find=currency
"Hey Citrati... welcome to the board.
"I know some of the folks involved with FTMR and while HENC was also a huge loser for me, I don't think it was a "scam" as there really was never the opportunity for management or insiders to make big money. In retrospect, sure they should have made better calls... but it would have been a whole other deal if we had actually hit oil on either of the two holes.
"Regarding the FTMR... I think huge value and potential have been acquired in the acquisitions and purchase agreements. The outstanding shares have increased... but they've been spent (as a currency) on real assets with significant upside.
"Is there a risk? Sure... but your entry level at $2.50 is not much more than those that have had their assets brought into FTMR. What reason would these individuals (and Marc Bruner was one of those whose assets were brought into FTMR) have for consolidating their properties in a pubic company like Fortem? I think the logical explanation is twofold: 1. to access public capital and 2. to multiply their value by developing them into profitable, producing properties.
"And so to an extent, I believe FTMR is a natural resource "roll-up" that will spin-off subsidiaries and perhaps one day be bought out by big oil. How else will those that own significant positions in the company find liquidity? Are their hoops to get through? Some challenges and hindrances? Sure.
"Put it on your watch list for a while... as they reach milestones and execute their business plan you'll know. When you hear about multiple million-dollar financings, it will still be a good time to buy... but you will have left some pretty big money on the table. The risk-reward ratio is crazy at these levels... it'll still be good at that later point... but not as good as now.
"My thoughts.
"FWIW, I've tried to estimate FTMR's book value based on acquisitions in the IBox. It's not a true book value as we don't really know the value of the properties acquired.
"A number of the unknowns will be disclosed at some point."
Citrati... this is my understanding of the accounting issue.
The bulk of each acquired property was exchanged for stock (an equity interest in FTMR) and a lesser cash amount.
From my perspective (I'm not an accountant), however one chooses to assign value to the acquired properties, both aspects of the purchase should be accounted for.
Initially, the acquired properties were valued at the price of the stock when the transactions were completed and a cash component.
Secondarily, their values were later restated to reflect only the cash component part of their purchase. I don't believe the company liked this lesser valuation but went along with it, as their intention was to demonstrate their value by developing them and proving their value.
Thirdly, when the new accounting firm came on board, they believed the company's financials should reflect both the shares issued and the cash component... and this is where the company is today.
By this stock and cash valuation, I believe the company currently has a book value of a dollar and twenty-some cents per share.
Granted you seem a company apologist. Otherwise you would not label my comments and opinion as fraudulent.
My point, which was very clear, was that the company likely bears some responsibility for the fiasco. Still after all this time the blame is based solely on the accounting firm for valuation improprieties. IMO it is likely not that onesided. I doubt the company will ever be transparent enough to admit or detail anything on their part that might have lead to inaccurate property valuations.
Who in the company accepted and passed off on those valuations before they were submitted? Are you saying the company never reviewed those valuations yet used them in PR's?
You are clearly evading the questions I raised in my previous comments. I stand by them as legitimate questions.
Citrati, While I suppose there's a bit of speculating on both of our behalves...
It seems to me that your speculating contradicts the official releases of the company and is probably fraudulant. When the accounting issues were first disclosed the company reported the events that were taking place.
In my previous post I linked the fully audited financials which contains this statement (if you care to read it):
On September 21, 2018, we dismissed Dale Matheson Carr-Hilton LaBonte LLP (“DMCL”) as our company’s independent registered public accounting firm. The dismissal of DMCL was approved by our company’s board of directors.
DMCL’s report on our company’s financial statements for the fiscal years ended February 28, 2018 and 2017 did not contain an adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion, or qualification or modification as to uncertainty, audit scope, or accounting principles, though it did contain an explanatory paragraph in which DMCL stated that certain factors raised substantial doubt about our company’s ability to continue as a going concern. However, DMCL’s report on our company’s financial statements for the fiscal years ended February 28, 2018 and 2017 referred to a report on DMCL’s audit, conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), of our company’s internal control over financial reporting as of February 28, 2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and this report on DMCL’s audit of our internal control over financial reporting, a copy of which was attached to DMCL’s report on our financial statements, expressed an adverse opinion on our company’s internal control over financial reporting because of management did not design and maintain effective controls over four material weaknesses, all of which were listed in the report and all of which are listed below.
During our company’s fiscal years ended February 28, 2018 and 2017 and in the subsequent interim period through the date of dismissal, there were no disagreements, resolved or not, with DMCL on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or audit scope and procedures, which disagreement, if not resolved to the satisfaction of DMCL, would have caused DMCL to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreement in connection with a report on our financial statements.
During our company’s fiscal years ended February 28, 2018 and 2017 and in the subsequent interim period through the date of dismissal, there were no reportable events as described in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K.
In DMCL’s report on its audit of our internal control over financial reporting as of February 28, 2018, DMCL identified the following four material weaknesses:
* In-house accounting personnel not having knowledge of complex US GAAP that caused misinterpretation and misapplication of Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 805, Business Combinations regarding the fair value of assets acquired on initial recognition. Specifically, our company did not assess whether the measurement of the fair value of assets acquired in business combinations during the year was more reliably measurable based on the fair value of the consideration given or fair of assets acquired which resulted in the re-statement of the interim financial statements for each of the first and second quarterly reporting periods.
* Not maintaining its tax compliance requirements for which our company determined that the appropriate tax accounting under ASC 740, Income Taxes was not performed impacting the deferred tax asset accounts and related financial statement disclosures.
* Review and approval of supplier and vendor invoices and the related oversight and accuracy of recording the associated charges in our company’s books.
* Lack of adequate oversight related to the development and performance of internal controls. Due to the limited number of personnel in our company, there are inherent limitations to segregation of duties amongst personnel to perform adequate oversight.
We do not disagree with DMCL on any of these matters.
DMCL’s report on its audit of our internal control over financial reporting as of February 28, 2018, expressly states that this report did not affect DMCL’s report on our company’s financial statements for the fiscal years ended February 28, 2018 and 2017
The 10K also reports the findings of the new accounting company Davidson and Company for their then-current and previous filings (see pages 36,37, and 38):
To the Shareholders and Directors of Fortem Resources Inc.
Opinion on the Consolidated Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Fortem Resources Inc. (the “Company”), as of February 28, 2019 and 2018, and the related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows, and stockholders’ equity for the years ended February 28, 2019 and 2018, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Fortem Resources Inc. as of February 28, 2019 and 2018, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years ended February 28, 2019 and 2018 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of February 28, 2019, based on the criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated October 15, 2019 expressed an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting because of material weaknesses.
Going Concern
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has not achieved profitable operations, has incurred losses in developing its business, and further losses are anticipated, all which raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 1. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
Restatement of 2018 Consolidated Financial Statements
As discussed in Note 1 and Note 22 to the consolidated financial statements, the 2018 consolidated financial statements have been restated to correct various misstatements.
Basis for Opinion
These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud.
Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatements of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2018.
“DAVIDSON &COMPANY LLP”
Vancouver, Canada Chartered Professional Accountants
October 15, 2019
Did the original accounting firm not get paid and so wouldn't sign off until receiving payment?
Were they given valuations from FTMR management that they found invalid and so wouldn't sign off?
The reasons for all of this is still hidden from us shareholders. If the company (FTMR) is transparent they would bring the facts to the attention of the shareholders as to timelines, where accountability truly belongs as to the origin of the inaccurate property valuations etc.
If the accounting firm had been doing the work for ten years FTMR management is at the least guilty of negligence for not being up to speed on property valuation totals and methods.
Who was the liaison officer at FTMR who should have in communication with the accounting firm and accepted valuations on behalf of FTMR.
This garbage illuminates incompetence to a high degree in FTMR and possibly the accounting firm.
So far this scenario fits the mold of 'stinkie pinkie' stock manipulation not substantive companies.
All IMO only.
Thanks Renee.
As I read the order, it sounds like this matter has now been dealt with and concluded.
The matter deals principally with not filing their quarterly and annual reports on time. This is not a cease trade order, it has to do with the requirement of filing the annual and quarterly reports.
This whole matter revolves around the accounting fiasco Fortem went through was pretty crazy. They had an auditing and accounting firm (Dale Matheson Carr-Hilton LaBonte LLP, Chartered Financial Accountants) that audited and filed their financials for several years. When they decided to switch to a larger reputable auditor (Davidson & Company LLP)... the previous auditing firm is required to sign off on their previous work. Fortem's old firm wouldn't. This despite numerous requests and efforts made by the company as well as their new accounting/auditing firm. The old firm wouldn't and didn't sign off.
This whole matter is disclosed and discussed in the 10/18/2019 10-K.
https://www.otcmarkets.com/filing/html?id=13692565&guid=C7snUeiLHw36c3h
It's one of the craziest things I've ever seen. Matheson wouldn't sign off on their own work and that really is what leads to Fortem's inability to make their filings in a timely manner.
As a result, in an effort to meet the filing requirements Fortem paid the new auditing firm to go back over and review their previous quarterly reports and re-audit their annual report. All this took place and the required reports were refiled. The records can be seen here:
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/FTMR/disclosure
From my perspective, the company seems to have gone above and beyond the call of duty in trying to resolve this matter. They not only made filings with the US Security and Exchange Commission, but they had also been meeting the comparable Canadian requirements as well as those of the Toronto Venture Exchange.
FTMR SEC Cease and Desist Order:
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2021/34-91715.pdf
It's probably just me... but when I see FTMR trade down like it did today, I think to myself... Dang. I should have been bidding for them.
I don't know that the points in my sticky note are irrefutable... but I think they provide a pretty legitimate argument for FTMR's future.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :)
How about his... if any of you are going to hit the bid... let me know ahead of time and I'll find some cash to be the high bid.
Randy
No worries.
Down on 3,000 shares and back up to positive green on 200 shares.
Nothing fishy about that. Only a .2299 swing on a huge differential from .27 to .4999.
That’s good to hear.....hope it happens soon!
Nothing specific, but I heard that there is discussion and dialogue taking place between the company and the Alberta Stock Exchange.
Whether that translates to days, weeks, or months before we hear about the progress... no one knows.
Anyone out there...? Very discouraged nothing happening STILL with FTMR. Thought relisting would have occurred by now?!
My two .50 limit orders the last few days were taken.
That's my game and I'm sticking to it.
At the moment I'm waiting to see if the 40 cent offer comes.
Correction “relisting”!!
Picked up a few thousand shares lately. Still holding out for a delisting and getting back to $2-$3 in the near term.
yet with all these properties...nothing got done except the one with inside info on buyers/announcements comming 'next week' flips on the buyers....
Maybe they are going to drop the "FRAUD" from Fraudem.
Does somebody no something or drinking the Kool Aid?
Nobody said a thing about not being able to trade it. That was not the discussion point.
The major charting services no longer carry it, so one cannot use favored charting graphs.
The issues are many.
Secondly, one day of volume means little when 4 out of 6 days is ZERO volume. That is not rosy.
Thirdly, it is obvious it is being artificially supported and has been for over a year and has excessively wide price spreads.
Fourth, the company has been silent for over a year.
Just a few of the negative issues.
Not sure what you guys are taking about. The stock traded more volume than usual and closed at 53 cents.
I could trade it at both TDAmetitrade and Fidelity.
At one point we traded over 62 cents and had 20K bids at 49 cents and higher.
I came looking to the board to see if anyone heard anything... Like whether the CTO had been lifted.
I'm still hopeful.
It looks like they were dropped on 3/18 by nearly every service I’m looking on....?!
So has Yahoo, TDAmeritrade, etc...
What happened to the ticker symbol? Did it change? It’s no longer listed on any of my accounts.
That's a real vote of confidence. Stockcharts has stopped charting FTMR due to lack of interest.
While I agree with you, I had to laugh at the "time will tell." I remember when this was Strongbow. Think I'm 9 years into it now...
It would be really nice if the CTO would get lifted soon.
I've not spoken with management in a while, but I think they are as frustrated (or more so) than anyone else... hence the board and officer resignations.
On the bright side with Biden Administration canceling oil and gas leases on public lands, I would think privately owned and existing oil and gas properties will become more valuable.
Not to mention that oil was recently flirting with $70 per barrel... investing in oil and gas will probably be becoming more in fashion.
I could be wrong, but right now I think buying up these low-priced shares was a good move.
FTMR has always had a pretty tight share structure. If the CTO gets lifted and the company can move forward with its business plan, I think we will see a substantial appreciation in share price.
And then factor in... the big bids that are still hanging around are probably indicative that there is somewhat of a short position. If I bid for shares at 35 and to 45 cents... the bids also creep up.
Guess time will tell!
LOL, the FRAUDIES ain't gone. How could they be, when the spread is 100%?
Only manipulators would be trading something with a spread of .255-.55 that hasn't had an update in over a year.
Suckiest sucking sucksters that ever suckt a stock.
Darn right it smells. Stinking decomposing swamp it is.
Yeah, this is the one they manipulated to 3.95 and were touting $10 easy and way higher coming.
Course that is all just IMO only.
Where have all the "FRAUDIES"gone?
It's .55 on the offer.
Don't you smell it?
The Cease Trade Order should be coming off soon now. This will help volume.
While I understand yearend sell off and the volume, there seems to be some buying occurring now. Granted not a lot still, but seems more than before. H3ll, we've waited long enough - could something be stirring?
Followers
|
15
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
2645
|
Created
|
03/05/12
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |