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.
HOUSTON, July 11, 2006 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- UTSI International Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Diverse Networks, Inc. and The Jackson Rivers Company, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: JKRI) announced today that it has been awarded three (3) separate contracts from Shell Pipeline Company LP (SPLC) to provide application porting services for specialized software related to support of SPLC's Pipeline Operations Control Center located in Houston, Texas.
Two of these contracts involve conversion and/or migration of portions of SPLC's Operational and SCADA Interface System (OPSIS) from a Sybase PowerBuilder environment to Microsoft's VB.Net based applications. The third contract concerns conversion of a specialized software application, used to support critical aspects of maintaining the SCADA system, from a legacy platform to a PC-Windows operating environment.
"We are very excited about this work as it allows us to leverage our prior experience and knowledge of these legacy applications, as well as, apply our expertise with Microsoft.net technologies. This work involves several of UTSI's core competencies in the areas of software maintenance, support, and development, and we are pleased to have the opportunity to assist SPLC with these activities," states Daniel Nagala, President of UTSI International Corporation.
Mr. Robert Bliss, SPLC's Control Center Development Supervisor stated "We have a very long standing relationship with UTSI, and we are very pleased to have them perform this work for us. These projects, along with several other parallel efforts, are key components in SPLC's ongoing program to continuously improve and enhance the tools and technologies used within our pipeline control center and by our corresponding support personnel."
More information on the company can be found at www.jacksonrivers.com and at www.utsi.com. Shell Pipeline Company LP can be found at www.splc.com.
Read powerbattles posts to learn about M2M Technology and SCADA. If you can't grasp it then, don't think about it!
It is purely High Risk/High Reward.
So even though the economy is not doing well. And Jackson River has not decided it was planning on going to the next level you say buy??????????????
I don't know enough about the company. I don't know what type of wireless they are doing? And I don't know what is SCADA.
I do know there price has gone down...................
So even though the economy is not doing well. And Jackson River has not decided it was planning on going to the next level you say buy??????????????
I don't know enough about the company. I don't know what type of wireless they are doing? And I don't know what is SCADA.
I do know there price has gone down...................
we are just about ready to move... load up!
Most companies at this stage aspire to OTCBB listing. JKRI has it! 10KSB and 10QSB are current. Next 10Q (qtr endg 6/30) due 8/15. Hopefully will include UTSI Financials, etc.
Is this stock planning on moving to another board????
Will it fill out a Q10??????
UTSI International to Provide Software Maintenance and Support Services to New York City Transit Authority
Thursday June 15, 9:00 am ET
HOUSTON, June 15 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- UTSI International Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Jackson Rivers Company, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: JKRI - News) announced today that it has entered into a two-year agreement with the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) an agency of the Metropolitan Transit Authority, State of New York, to continue providing maintenance and support services for Series VII SCADA software.
ADVERTISEMENT
"UTSI began supporting NYCTA's Series VII SCADA software in 2003 and we are pleased that the client has decided to allow us to continue that support," states Daniel Nagala, President of UTSI International Corporation. "We take pride in the fact that we are able to attract and maintain our extensive customer base through our technical expertise and dedication to superior customer service."
Mr. Sal Valenti, Superintendent-SCADA Power Control Center, at New York City Transit Authority stated that "We are very pleased to have UTSI continue to provide this support for NYCTA. The SCADA system is used to monitor and control the power distribution system for one of the most extensive public transportation systems in the world. One of our goals is to also have this system remain one of the most reliable transportation systems in the world and the technical expertise and support that UTSI provides plays an important part in achieving that goal."
More information on the company can be found at www.jacksonrivers.com and at www.utsi.com. Information on New York City Transit Authority can be found at http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/.
Investors are cautioned that certain statements contained in this document as well as some statements in periodic press releases and some oral statements of JKRI and UTSI officials are "Forward-Looking Statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the "Act"). Forward-looking statements include statements which are predictive in nature, which depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, which include words such as "believes," "anticipates," "intends," "plans," "expects," and similar expressions. In addition, any statements concerning future financial performance (including future revenues, earnings or growth rates), ongoing business strategies or prospects, and possible future JKRI and UTSI actions, which may be provided by management, are also forward-looking statements as defined by the Act. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to materially differ from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements and to vary significantly from reporting period to reporting period. Although management believes that the assumptions made and expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, there is no assurance that the underlying assumptions will, in fact, prove to be correct or that actual future results will not be different from the expectations expressed in this report. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and JKRI has no specific intention to update these statements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: The Jackson Rivers Company, Inc.
Overall I think the octbb market is not very good, the situation might affected our pps on top of that due to our low volume that give MM the opportunity to dragging us down.
IMO the company is conducting the business as usually they manages to land more contracts that are very good signed.
I see JKRI doing very well extremely in great shape than ever.
I hoped very soon we will hear some more developments, UTSI financial, and more contracts to be announcement. I’ll continue to remain optimistic in JKRI future pps, and hopefully very soon we will have our day’s eom
What is the problem here? Stock price going down and no one posting.
KMP is one of the largest publicly traded pipeline limited partnerships in America and owns or operates more than 27,000 miles of pipelines and approximately 145 terminals. Its pipelines transport more than 2 million barrels/day of gasoline and other petroleum products and up to 9 billion cubic feet/day of natural gas; and, its terminals handle over 80 million tons of coal and other bulk materials annually and have a liquids storage capacity of about 70 million barrels for petroleum products and chemicals. KMP is also the leading provider of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery projects in the United States.
The general partner of KMP is owned by Kinder Morgan, Inc. (NYSE: KMI), one of the largest energy transportation, storage and distribution companies in North America. Combined, the two companies have an enterprise value of more than $35 billion.
Todays news was good,most likely not a super high revenue project but still. Building connections with a company like Kinder Morgan Energy Partners is a nice step in the right direction.
UTSI International to Provide Software Application Porting Services for Kinder Morgan Energy Partners
Thursday June 8, 6:00 am ET
HOUSTON, June 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- UTSI International Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Diverse Networks, Inc. and The Jackson Rivers Company, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: JKRI - News) announced today that it has entered into an agreement with Kinder Morgan Energy Partners to provide application porting services for specialized software related to its Plantation Pipeline Operations Control Center. The subject software is used to support critical aspects of maintaining the SCADA system in support of the ongoing operations of the center.
ADVERTISEMENT
"This work involves porting a mature software utility operating within a software environment that is no longer supported to a new technology platform," states Daniel Nagala, President of UTSI International Corporation. "The scope of our work is to move the application from its current legacy operating environment and enable it to function in a PC environment under the Windows XP operating system. One important goal of this work is to maintain all of the functionality and look and feel of the application in the new environment in a manner transparent to application users."
Mr. Rex Miller, Manager of the Information Technology Team at KMP's Plantation Pipeline stated that "We are very pleased to have UTSI perform this work for Kinder Morgan Energy Partners. Porting this application will complete our goal of eliminating dependency on the HP Alpha hardware platform in favor of HP's Itanium technology. By operating on the newer technology we can significantly increase the product life and long term reliability of our control and monitoring system."
More information on the company can be found at www.jacksonrivers.com and at www.utsi.com. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners can be found at www.kindermorgan.com .
Investors are cautioned that certain statements contained in this document as well as some statements in periodic press releases and some oral statements of JKRI and UTSI officials are "Forward-Looking Statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the "Act"). Forward-looking statements include statements which are predictive in nature, which depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, which include words such as "believes," "anticipates," "intends," "plans," "expects," and similar expressions. In addition, any statements concerning future financial performance (including future revenues, earnings or growth rates), ongoing business strategies or prospects, and possible future JKRI and UTSI actions, which may be provided by management, are also forward-looking statements as defined by the Act. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to materially differ from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements and to vary significantly from reporting period to reporting period. Although management believes that the assumptions made and expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, there is no assurance that the underlying assumptions will, in fact, prove to be correct or that actual future results will not be different from the expectations expressed in this report. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and JKRI has no specific intention to update these statements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: The Jackson Rivers Company, Inc.
Very interesting Dan's presentation was Very impressive Mr.Daniel Nagala give presentation at the
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD
PIPELINE SAFETY HEARING
Leak Detection and Response
Conference Center and Board Room
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, D.C.
The next panel is the Independent Systems Design Panel. On this panel is Mr. Daniel Nagala from UTSI International Corporation, and Mr. Al Senftleber from Senftleber and Associates.
Panelists, I would like to remind you that you have 15 minutes to give your presentation. The yellow light in front of you will go on when you have two minutes remaining. The red light indicates that your time is up.
Mr. Chairman, staff is ready to hear from the panelists.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Well, I'd like to welcome both of you gentlemen, and, Dan, if you would please proceed. You took the Number 1 seat there. So, --unless there is a different order the two of you all have agreed to. That's fine.
MR. NAGALA: We're okay. Is this working? Yes.
Panel: Independent System Design
MR. NAGALA: First of all, I'd like to thank Chairman Hall and the other Members and staff of the Board for allowing me to address you in this forum today.
My comments are directed to the overall state of the industry from a SCADA automation perspective and include comments pertaining to vendor capabilities, operating company expectations, and common practices for system maintenance and on-going support.
The comments I'm about to make have been compiled from my own observations and experience within the pipeline automation industry and are not targeted toward any particular automation supplier, pipeline operator, or service organization.
I will begin by offering a short summary of the evolution of SCADA systems over the past 25 years, followed by a discussion of the current state of the industry from my perspective, and, finally, I will offer some suggestions for how we might improve our approach to the design, implementation and support of such systems.
While some of my comments may appear to be critical of the industry in some aspects, they are notintended to be so and are only presented here to form a basis for the suggestions I will present at the conclusion.
In order to fully appreciate where we are today and how we got here, I would like to take everyone several years back in time. During the 10-year period between 1975 and 1985, many of the foundations for pipeline SCADA systems, as we know them today, were formed.
However, during these years, the approach to implementation of such systems was substantially different than that of today's common practice.
In the latter half of the 1970s, the typical approach to a pipeline SCADA project was to build a custom system to a rigid set of requirements, generally produced as a joint effort between the operating companies, engineering and operations departments, and in many cases, it was common to have selected a software or system supplier prior to the specification effort, making the process a combination of addressing specific operational and performance requirements in parallel with detailed software design.
The outcome of such efforts generally resulted in very detailed written descriptions of the software and hardware systems to be provided, includingdefinition of all principal data structures and software modules, sometimes to the point of detailed program flow diagrams.
While the merits of such a process can be debated, the end result was a solution specifically engineered to achieve a given set of requirements for a given target operation.
These projects, while time consuming and expensive, were generally completed successfully and provided expectation levels of functionality and performance.
In the late 1970s, the emphasis was typically on performance, reliability and operational stability, and the technology choices required to achieve the desired characteristics were typically left up to the operating companies, engineering personnel, and the system supplier.
While most companies in the SCADA business prior to 1980 had their preferred technology platforms, because of the custom nature of their business, it was typical to find most of them very receptive to the use of alternate technologies wherever it was deemed to be technically appropriate.
As the early 1980s arrived, system suppliers and operating companies began to grow weary of the costand continued maintenance and support complications associated with custom systems and began to look for solutions based on more product-oriented approaches.
Between 1982 and 1985, several companies initiated R&D projects specifically related to the design and development of SCADA products that could be configured and applied to solve multiple sets of requirements without the necessity of substantial custom development on every project.
These products were typically designed and developed for a particular hardware and operating system platform. However, most of those systems still remaining in the market today have also been forwarded to other platforms.
The era of SCADA products had arrived and was in full force after about 1985 with several vendors actively competing for turnkey projects with a standard product offering.
Moving into the 1990 time frame and coinciding with wide acceptance of personal computers and local area networks within operating companies, we began to see a notable shift in the expectations for SCADA within the business enterprise. The result being apparent to new architectures, many of which incorporated tools common to traditional businessapplications but never previously used within a SCADA environment.
Notably, the incorporation of relational database management systems or at least some level of connectivity to such systems into SCADA architectures was almost universal among principal suppliers in the market by 1993.
The driving force behind these evolving architectures was to provide better and more timely ways of moving information pertaining to the physical operations of the pipeline to management and to related departments.
Pipeline SCADA systems were no longer simply operational tools implemented and supported completely by a dedicated engineering group but an integral part of the daily business operations of the enterprise.
While all of the SCADA architecture and requirements changes were taking place in the early '90s, operating companies were also undergoing radical changes from the organizations of the '70s and '80s.
Almost every company experienced a significant loss of expertise related to their SCADA systems as a result of corporate down-sizing, reorganizations, mergers and acquisitions and so on, leaving the company with more complicated systems thanever before but with less internal expertise to keep those systems operating at peak performance.
Wide acceptance of and an almost exponentially-expanding dependence on internet-related technologies since about 1997 have further served to change the appearance and expectations of SCADA systems in the eyes of many industry professionals and promise to add yet another dimension of complication to these systems while the availability of sufficient SCADA support personnel and their relative depth still remains behind that which was common several years earlier.
This brings us to where we are today. Generally speaking, most of the systems that are in use today work pretty well, and while there are always exceptions to any given set of observations, it is apparent that these systems have substantially more demands being placed upon them than ever before, but for the most part, they have kept pace with the challenge.
Still, most of these systems continue to rely largely upon the legacy of the early 1980s R&D for their base functionality, having had little enhancement to the core functionality or its underlying software architecture since its initial implementation.
It is apparent that vendor companies have had and continue to have a difficult time meeting customer expectations while attempting to remain profitable and competitive.
In the typical project today, vendors, operators and consultants all tend to place much less emphasis upon the traditional performance, reliability and core functionality components of a system, and tend to focus more on the business and enterprise integration of such systems.
In fact, many industry professionals perceive the traditional core functionality of the early years as a commodity in today's market and take for granted that it will always be there. But this view may be incorrect and may be producing an unintentional shift of focus away from these items, so as to address other more pressing project requirements.
SCADA systems are significantly more complicated than ever before. Most of this can be attributed to the fact that the underlying system architectures rely on substantially more third party hardware and software components than their predecessors of the '70s and '80s.
This has also changed the image of the typical SCADA supplier to encompass a significantamount of complex system integration tasks for both hardware and software components.
Because of this, the skill sets found within vendor companies have also changed from that of pure programming and system engineering disciplines to include specialties in network architectures and protocols, multiple operating systems, relational database administration and management, graphic display standards and related tools, just to name a few.
The task of seamlessly putting all of these components together into a single continuously-operating environment, configuring them to satisfy a given set of customer requirements, and conducting complete and thorough system functionality testing, all under a budget set forth by a tight competitive bidding process, is nearly an impossible task.
Combine this with the fact that the pipeline SCADA market is very small in comparison to other automation markets, and therefore cannot offer sufficient financial resources to fund the necessary R&D required to keep pace with emerging industry expectations and advances in relevant technologies.
The results of all of this are systems that require functionality that is not always consistent with the core competencies of suppliers, complexsoftware development or system enhancement tasks being performed under the scope of specific projects, systems that go to the field before they are ready, and systems that generally require a significant amount of on-site debug and testing prior to being approved for on-line operation. Sometimes the on-site work alone can continue for up to a year or even more.
All of these things contribute to the potential for having overburdened and unreliable systems under certain conditions of operation.
A related example of this might be an instance where a given system is required to send critical information on a periodic or exception basis to some other system or another department or to even another company.
We have seen many implementations where the preferred architecture has moved away from the former dedicated communication path or protected network transport method in favor of techniques, such as the Internet's FTP, SMTP or other related means.
While these techniques can work reasonably well most of the time, they were never designed to operate in an environment where guaranteed performance and availability was required, and when a problem occurs, many times, it will require human interventionto correct.
Usually while such a problem is present, certain system functionality is completely unavailable to individuals and/or related applications. This is an example of an implementation to address an evolving functional requirement without a complete engineering analysis to determine the appropriate solution for the desired outcome with the requisite level of reliability.
Today, it is common to find the SCADA system falling under control of corporate information technology departments. While some of these organizations have simply absorbed the previously-existing engineering departments responsible for the companies' SCADA systems, others have inherited such responsibility because the former department or its key personnel no longer exist within the company or are unavailable for some other reason.
It is this latter case that is of concern to me. In my consulting practice, I have come across groups responsible for such systems who have little or no experience in dealing with critical real-time systems, not to mention the absence of a firm understanding of fully-redundant, no-single-point-of-failure architectures, and the importance of isolatednetworks for such systems.
This is not to say that such people are not receptive to these ideas, but the underlying concepts and their critical importance to SCADA are not part of the background typically afforded to the traditional IT professional.
Although most any SCADA system can be very reliable when configured and maintained properly, that same SCADA system can be very fragile and unreliable if operated in an environment contrary to that envisioned by the original system designers.
For this reason, it is of critical importance that such system be specified, implemented, managed and maintained by personnel who possess the appropriate skill sets and background system knowledge.
I've seen many of my colleagues from the real-time modeling and simulation disciplines here today, and it's apparent that these are areas very well represented. Therefore, I will withhold any specific comments pertaining to leak detection systems and their application, except for one particular item that relates directly to the SCADA system.
Most software-based leak detection systems operate in conjunction with the SCADA system and are completely dependent upon information from thesesystems in order to perform their primary function.
However, in many cases, among those specifying performance, there's a naive lack of under-standing of the relationship between the data acquisition and processing portion of the SCADA system and the leak detection algorithm.
Many times, we see leak detection performance requirements that exceed the limits of the SCADA system and its corresponding instrumentation. In some cases, such performance requirements are being heavily influenced by various regulatory and permitting agencies.
The point that I'm trying to make here is that no matter how much work is put into producing a highly-sensitive leak detection algorithm, the quality of that algorithm can only be as good as the data that it's given to work with. The SCADA system must be considered in any such sensitivity mandate.
Overall, I don't believe that any of the difficulties present in the SCADA arena today cannot be overcome by exercising prudent system engineering, conducting thorough system testing and implementing well-defined, on-going maintenance and training programs.
As I hope I have indicated, our majordifficulties are stemming from being too aggressive in some areas at the expense of others, namely core system functionality, run-time performance, robustness and reliability, while struggling to keep pace with rapidly-increasing demands on these systems.
All of this is taking place with a workforce that has a much different set of objectives to satisfy and very different expertise than their predecessors of the 1970s and '80s.
Please keep in mind that I'm certainly not suggesting that we fall back to the '70s and stay there, but I do believe that there are some lessons that were learned during that period that have either been lost or forgotten, and we need to recover those as we move forward into the next generation.
Therefore, as I near conclusion of my comments, I would like to offer some suggestions for change for your consideration.
There are already regulations mandating operator training and qualification, and I believe that this training and qualification should extend to the SCADA engineering, support and maintenance activities.
In particular, Subparts N and G of 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195, respectively, pertain to operator and technician training. While these regulations donot -- are not directly related to SCADA and/or leak detection systems, implications are that such training programs must include specific knowledge and interpretation skills related to these systems, along with proven capabilities to adhere to company-specified recognition and response protocols.
Full-scale training simulation, covering SCADA, leak detection and related telecommunication system operation, should be a required component for all new control center projects.
All personnel with system maintenance or operator access to the system should be required to be trained accordingly on such systems and should be subject to periodic follow-up testing.
Support personnel might also be subject to other detailed off-line training specifically related to the SCADA system and the maintenance thereof. This type of program would go a long way toward resolving the experience and technical depth issues related to personnel turnover I noted earlier and would most certainly result in better-running and more reliable control centers.
New agency regulations, although some might be helpful, can only go so far. For example, mandates that attempt to define acceptable levels of CPU idletime, RAM availability, disk and network utilization, would soon become outdated, and in order to be broad enough would most likely be so vague that the range of interpretation could end up being almost like having no targets whatsoever.
Instead of mandating such items, operating companies might be required to certify that a new SCADA system or the result of a substantial upgrade are compliant with a predefined and deterministic set of criteria, and OPS is already working on a control center audit checklist that identifies various aspects of the SCADA system and its operating characteristics.
One approach might be to extend this to the site testing and commissioning phase for any given project. Rather than involving -- having regulators involved in such processes, however, the responsibility should be placed on the operating company to have a qualified SCADA system engineer witness and approve the system's operation on its own merits before it is put into on-line operation.
The term "qualified" in this sense is in reference to the operator training and qualification rule I mentioned earlier.
Particular emphasis for such testing should be placed on the performance reliability, security andcore functionality of the SCADA system, and records pertaining to such testing should remain on file for reference and comparison use during subsequent follow-up audits.
The SCADA market worldwide is very small and as such does not have sufficient revenue-generating potential to fund substantial amounts of vendor-sponsored R&D. Still, it is apparent that we need to be able to take advantage of new technologies, and perhaps more industry-sponsored or even federally-funded R&D programs could be established.
Such programs might be tasked to evaluate and recommend how a certain technology could be applied in a typical SCADA environment while still maintaining the performance reliability and security aspects of the SCADA system.
Thank you.
Future Recording Requirements and Capabilities
in the Oil and Gas Industry.
http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/symp_rec/proceedings/May_5/SessionIV/Pres_Nagala/sld001.htm
M2M...This is the industry JKRI is in...
Machine-to-machine (M2M) communications, interconnecting physical assets with each other and with people, is predicted to exceed $250 billion by 2010, according to the recent “M2M In Action: Strategy Summit & Networking Event” in Chicago.
The merged with UTSI which provides leak detection and hydraulic modeling consulting services, and is considered to be one of the leading independent sources of such expertise. The company's current customers include Shell Pipeline, Koch Industries, Panhandle Energy, New York City Transit Authority, Baltimore Gas & Electric, gasNatural, SDG (Spain) and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company, Ltd. (Russia). Dan Nagala and his team have proven to be among the leading experts in SCADA systems and engineering solutions for the oil and gas pipeline industry, and have worked with some of the top companies in the world.
Now add the soon to be addition Camvera Networks, Inc., an established provider of wireless data services to over a dozen municipalities and utility markets in the Southern United States.
powerbattles, almost 3 mos., since .016.
How long have you been holding JKRI!
Read the term of the merges eom
God, i can't wait to get out of this stock.
Nothing but down since i bought.
Where do you get those estimates?
I have seen or been told those before but don't recall where.
Do you anticipate a r/s or a workout of pps by significant business development of 3 divisions?
TIA
Imo they already have a game plan that is why they are predicting the rise of their shareprice.
.21 by 12-1-06
.59 by 12-1-07
1.00 by 5-5-08
Yes I agree unlike other pos out there Diverse and UTSI are rock solid company,I believed our investment will be well reward. I expected more news regarding to UTSI financial and Nigerian contracts and don't forget the pending acquisition Camvera Networks are still in proceeding.
Hey guys, still here, the recent preformance insn't stellar but that is what we can expect at this point, afterall this company is still getting rolling. I think soon enough our investment will pay off. Remember we bought into some pretty sweet companies with Diverse and Utsi. They both have several years of experience. Wait for the Nigerian Contract, if it comes it will all be worth it.
buy before they file $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
yorick strap on your seat belt we are gonna run after everyone gets their fill!
i picked some up today just based on all the big block buys.
new uptrend is looking good to. lots of support.
http://www.americanbulls.com/StockPage.asp?CompanyTicker=JKRI&MarketTicker=OTC&TYP=S
2.6mm(million) in buys vs. under 800K in sells!
this is sooooooooooooo ready to run!
almost double the volume of yesterday already plenty of buys few sells this goes higher next week it wanted to run then that 800K in sells about 4 tades stopped the rally but nice buys here @ .009 healthy to me up 5% yesterday it was .008x.0085 now we are higher than that 0086x.009 so I think it is looking good to start a turn around here and slowly move to .015 in the next few days. I am dding here and continue to buy I want 2.5 million shares before the rally and the 5 to 8 million share days!
8K just out:
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 OR 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported) May 12, 2006
------------
The Jackson Rivers Company
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Florida 333-70932 65-1102865
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(State or other jurisdiction (Commission (IRS Employer
of incorporation) File Number) Identification No.)
550 Greens Parkway, Suite 230, Houston, Texas 77067
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (619) 342-7449
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to
simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the
following provisions (see General Instruction A.2.below):
[_] Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17
CFR 230.425)
[_] Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR
240.14a-12)
[_] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the
Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))
[_] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the
Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))
1
Section 1 - Registrant's Business and Operations
Item 1.01 Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
Not applicable.
Item 1.02 Termination of a Material Definitive Agreement.
Not applicable.
Item 1.03 Bankruptcy or Receivership.
Not applicable.
Section 2 - Financial Information
Item 2.01 Completion of Acquisition or Disposition of Assets.
Not applicable.
Item 2.02 Results of Operations and Financial Condition.
Not applicable.
Item 2.03 Creation of a Direct Financial Obligation or an Obligation
under an Off-Balance Sheet Arrangement of a Registrant.
Not applicable.
Item 2.04 Triggering Events That Accelerate or Increase a Direct
Financial Obligation or an Obligation Under an Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangement.
Not applicable.
Item 2.05 Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities.
Not applicable.
Item 2.06 Material Impairments.
Not applicable.
Section 3 - Securities and Trading Markets
Item 3.01 Notice of Delisting or Failure to Satisfy a Continued Listing
Rule or Standard: Transfer of Listing.
Not applicable.
Item 3.02 Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities.
Not applicable.
Item 3.03 Material Modification to Rights of Security Holders.
Not applicable
2
Section 4 - Matters Related to Accountants and Financial Statements
Item 4.01 Changes in Registrant's Certifying Accountant.
Not applicable.
Item 4.02 Non-Reliance on Previously Issued Financial Statements or a
Related Audit Report or Completed Interim Review.
Not applicable.
Section 5 - Corporate Governance and Management
Item 5.01 Changes in Control of Registrant.
Not applicable.
Item 5.02 Departure of Directors or Principal Officers; Election of
Directors; Appointment of Principal Officers.
On May 12, 2006, our Board of Directors appointed Daniel W. Nagala as a
Director of The Jackson Rivers Company. Our bylaws confer upon the Board of
Directors the power to determine the exact number of authorized directors and by
unanimous written consent dated as of May 12, 2006, our Board of Directors
increased the number of authorized directors to (3). Concurrent with the
increase in the size of the Board, our Board of Directors, elected Daniel W.
Nagala as an additional Director.
Daniel W. Nagala has been a director of The Jackson Rivers Company since
May 12, 2006. Mr. Nagala also serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of
UTSI International Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Jackson Rivers
Company as of May 5, 2006. Mr. Nagala founded UTSI, a company specializing in
engineering and information solutions for the oil and gas pipeline industry in
1985 and has served as President and Chief Executive Officer since that time.
Mr. Nagala holds an engineering-based Bachelor of Science degree in Computer
Science (1976) from Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona.
Item 5.03 Amendments to Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws: Change in
Fiscal Year.
Not applicable.
Item 5.04 Temporary Suspension of Trading Under Registrant's Employee
Benefit Plans.
Not applicable.
Item 5.05 Amendments to the Registrant's Code of Ethics, or Waiver of a
Provision of the Code of Ethics.
Not applicable.
Section 6 - [Reserved]
Not applicable.
3
Section 7 - Regulation FD
Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure.
Not applicable.
Section 8 - Other Events
Item 8.01 Other Events.
Not applicable.
Section 9 - Financial Statements and Exhibits
Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.
(a) Financial Statements of Businesses Acquired.
Not applicable.
(b) Pro Forma Financial Information.
Not applicable.
(c) Exhibits.
Not applicable
4
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
THE JACKSON RIVERS COMPANY
(Registrant)
Date: May 18, 2006 By: /s/ Jeffrey W. Flannery
----------------------------------
Jeffrey W. Flannery, Chief
Executive Officer, Chief Financial
Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
I HAVE HAD NO NEWS ON ANY OF MY OTC'S SINCE WEDNESDAY!?
guys wake up it is TGIF DAY! WE NEED SOME POSI+IVI+Y
ok $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
REPOST FROM TIM GREAT HEADS UP GREAT INSIGHT...
REPOST-investors read^^^jeff-jkri>>Hi Tim --
Clearly some shareholders do not understand how this debenture is structured. No shares have been issued nor will they be issued until the SB2 registration statement is filed and the SEC deems it effective. That process could take anywhere from 3 to ? months. So no shares will hit the float during this time. We essentially receive the entire $2 million without issuing the funder a single share.
Once the SB2 goes effective, the only shares that are sent to the funder are those requested for conversion. Each month the funder is only allowed to request an amount of shares equal to the highest daily volume or $60,000 worth, whichever is larger. So the dilution will not be anything close to what is being rumored. Conversion price is also set based on share price at conversion not on today's price.
The funder has warrants which are only exercisable at $0.07. And there are no shares registered for those warrants. That means the funder needs to see the price rise to $0.07 to exercise those warrants and we get paid $3.5 million in return.
When I have more time, I will try to add more detail. But I hope that helps.
EXACTLY TIM JUST WHAT I HAD I CLOSED MY WINDOW BEFORE I GOT ALL TEN TRADES!
way OFF TOPIC!
I made almost 35K dollars off HTDS this week...still looks good here to get to .05 check it out! still holding a million shares
Recent Trades - Last 10
Time Ex Price Change Volume
15:58:35 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 10,000
15:53:42 Q 0.0081 +0.001 35,000
15:53:42 Q 0.0081 +0.001 5,000
15:52:06 Q 0.0081 +0.001 12,049
15:52:01 Q 0.0081 +0.001 24,100
15:51:21 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 12,500
15:44:51 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 50,000
15:38:32 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 60,000
15:34:59 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 40,000
15:34:59 Q 0.0084 +0.0013 20,000
EVERYTHING LOOKING GOOD FOR A RALLY NEXT WEEK JUST IN TIME FOR FILING MAYBE NEWS!?
FROM YAHOO KEY STATS...
Income Statement
Revenue (ttm): 2.19M
Revenue Per Share (ttm): 0.669
go to yahoo key stats it shows .66 cents a share for earnings
closed hold chart looking AWESOME!
http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=jkri&p=D&yr=0&mn=6&dy=0&id=p83954996129
I HAVE L2 AND STREAMER LAST SEVEN TRADES AS FOLLOWS...
10k 15:58 .0085 3:58EST
35k 15:53 .0081 3:53EST
5k 15:53 .0081
12k 15:52 .0081 3:52 EST
21.1 15:52 .0081
12.5k 15:51 .0085
50k 15:44 .0085 3:44 EST
Recent Trades - Last 10
Time Ex Price Change Volume
15:44:51 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 50,000
15:38:32 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 60,000
15:34:59 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 40,000
15:34:59 Q 0.0084 +0.0013 20,000
15:27:36 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 240,000
15:27:33 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 10,000
13:55:55 Q 0.0075 +0.0004 3,000
13:41:13 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 100,000
13:40:13 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 210,000
13:37:00 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 11,763
THAT 40k TRADE @ .0081 WAS WHEN IT WAS .008X.0085 MAYBE A BUY?
Recent Trades - Last 10
Time Ex Price Change Volume
15:44:51 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 50,000
15:38:32 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 60,000
15:34:59 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 40,000
15:34:59 Q 0.0084 +0.0013 20,000
15:27:36 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 240,000
15:27:33 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 10,000
13:55:55 Q 0.0075 +0.0004 3,000
13:41:13 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 100,000
13:40:13 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 210,000
13:37:00 Q 0.0085 +0.0014 11,763
Followers
|
14
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
576
|
Created
|
03/23/04
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |