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.
Smallville, true? Final chapter written and storybook closed forever on Spongetech. EOM
I got a $61 restitution check today.
:)
If I can live another 1000 years I may get my money back.
SPNGQ was such an obvious scam and anybuddy who lost munny in SPNGQ has to blame the primary person responsible for their losses.
And that person is the person in the mirror.
Nobuddy was 'investing' in SPNG, they were just handing over their munny to Metter and Moskowitz who were the only ones able to instruct the TA to issue shares and delegend them.
And nobuddy could believe Moskowitz's ridiculous made-up sales numbers and faked invoices from obviously fake companies. Even basic DD on the supposed companies would show them to be fake, using phony addresses and phone numbers.
Before that he was pumping and hyping the stock falsely claiming only about 560 million O/S and that SPNG was in a major buyback mode, when in reality there were about 2.0 billion O/S.
Oh - he's been all over the board on it.
Remember the year he was begging to be allowed to trade the stock - to sell it. Claiming it was all types of a conspiracy that he couldn't - at the same time admitting it was a scam? Never ever thinking that he selling a scam security would be as wrong as anyone else - and more than that...there was no chance anyone would pay HIM for this particular scam security that was bankrupt and declared valueless anyway.
No,,,he's been mentally disturbed by this for sure,,,,and probably before I would guess.
Oh - he's been all over the board on it.
Remember the year he was begging to be allowed to trade the stock - to sell it. Claiming it was all types of a conspiracy that he couldn't - at the same time admitting it was a scam? Never ever thinking that he selling a scam security would be as wrong as anyone else - and more than that...there was no chance anyone would pay HIM for this particular scam security that was bankrupt and declared valueless anyway.
No,,,he's been mentally disturbed by this for sure,,,,and probably before I would guess.
He actually didn't lose his entire investment
During the height of the SPNG pump he was pumping and hyping with false and misleading information and admitted selling stock into the market at big profits while doing this....
Jay...really dude.
You have been in essence 100% WRONG on all things SPNG.
At least all things that would be reasons and ways for you to make money in an investment, or recover it from a bad investment.
You realize the whole thing has obviously disturbed you mentally.....Yes, I am saying you are mentally disturbed and along with conservative investment counseling, need mental counseling too.
You have lost your entire investment - it's over.
There will be no attempts to find someone to give YOU anything.
Ain't going to happen.
Regardless of what you wish to spew as a belief - it CAN'T happen. Too many reasons gne over for better part of a decade to repeat them....but they stat with too many others actually owed (and would need to get paid for the next work) before you. Too many well experienced people involved with the ability and resources to keep, hide and certainly NEVER EVER turn over ill gotten gains. Yes, it sucks.
Get help dealing with it.
Jay...really dude.
You have been in essence 100% WRONG on all things SPNG.
At least all things that would be reasons and ways for you to make money in an investment, or recover it from a bad investment.
You realize the whole thing has obviously disturbed you mentally.....Yes, I am saying you are mentally disturbed and along with conservative investment counseling, need mental counseling too.
You have lost your entire investment - it's over.
There will be no attempts to find someone to give YOU anything.
Ain't going to happen.
Regardless of what you wish to spew as a belief - it CAN'T happen. Too many reasons gne over for better part of a decade to repeat them....but they stat with too many others actually owed (and would need to get paid for the next work) before you. Too many well experienced people involved with the ability and resources to keep, hide and certainly NEVER EVER turn over ill gotten gains. Yes, it sucks.
Get help dealing with it.
This regularly revisited topic makes no difference.
The stock revoked or not, in your account or not, is and always will be worth nothing.
You cannot and have not been able to buy or sell it. The stock brokerage that is listing it in your account will do nothing at all with it other than keep it in your listing.
If you drop that brokerage and file all the paperwork to move all your holdings into a new one....the new one will not accept that security into it.
It was, is and always will be worth nothing and only be a problem to all left in it's wake...including the brokerages that now can't do anything but waste time, energy and space maintaining it in accounts (again even if the owner of the account abandons it, doesn't want it, dies, etc). DISCLOSURE: There is one exception with SOME brokerages: They will buy it from you for a service fee, remove it from your account and put it in one they maintain to hold garbage. So maybe yours will if you want to give them the $50 or so to do so.
Some time or another....when paperwork that means very little if anything but costs a great deal to do is completed the stock will be formally revoked and the listing able to be dropped. Don't hold your breath! I have some that went through well recognized bankruptcies (from Banks in the 1980s, Communications Cos (like WorldComm), etc a decade later that are still there.
But again....it means nothing other than the fact the stock isn't worth the trouble to do anything about - and clearly - never will be.
An oldie butt still true and educational:
shajandr Sunday, 07/10/16 12:42:39 AM
Re: None
Post # of 346410
STEVEN YEHUDA MOSKOWITZ has swindled tens of millions of dollars and squirreled it away in Israeli accounts with his relatives and nominee accounts - and restitution will never be made.
At least one disgruntled shareholder has stated that Moskowitz's swindling has cost him the munny needed for 'potentially life-saving medical treatment'.
Oh well, that's why nobody - NOBODY - should throw munny into pennystocks. Ever.
Jay you bought shares in a worthless pennystock scam company that had no real business other than printing and selling shares to victims.
MOSKOWITZ and METTER ripped you off in a classic pennyscam with fake orders, fake PRs, fake Uncle Norman buying the prop product off the handful of stores it was placed in - to make fake sales numbers.
Call or mail Mindy, Jay. It's your ONLY hope of ever getting a cent back from the utter scam you 'invested' in. The FAKE company, SPNG.
"I think Bomart may have been the right man for the job. There was no real reason for attorney opinion letters, so there was no reason for a real attorney.
And, no, I haven't contacted him, not by that name anyway."
1. 'David Bomart' was the fake name of a fake lawyer made up and used by STEVEN YEHUDA MOSKOWITZ and the reason the false attorney opinion letters were needed was to make the TAs issue new SPNG stock to RME and other front entities and then immediately delegend it under Rule 144 (which is WHY the attorney letters WERE needed and why MOSKOWITZ fabricated the fake Bomart letters and sent him from MOSKOWITZ's personal fax.
2. If you haven't contacted 'Bomart' by that name, the only other name 'Bomart' uses is STEVEN YEHUDA MOSKOWITZ, who (along with wife Mindy and daddy Arnold) are the only persons who have your munny. So it sounds like you finally contacted Moskowitz. Did he send you your munny back yet? Did Mindy?
The SEC alleges that Spongetech CEO Michael Metter and another senior executive, Steven Moskowitz, hyped fictional customers and grossly exaggerated sales figures through dozens of bogus press releases and fraudulent SEC filings to pump up demand for stock in Spongetech, a company that sells soap-filled sponges. After flooding the market with the false information to fraudulently inflate the stock price, Metter, Moskowitz, and Spongetech dumped approximately 2.5 billion shares by illegally selling them to the public through affiliated entities in unregistered transactions. They spent portions of their illicit profits in highly visible sponsorship deals with professional sports teams to further create the aura that Spongetech was a well-known and prosperous business.
The SEC suspended trading in Spongetech stock on Oct. 5, 2009, due to questions about the accuracy of the company's press releases and SEC filings. In today's enforcement action, Spongetech is accused of obstructing the SEC's investigation by producing phony sales documents in an attempt to legitimize the make-believe customers it hyped to the public. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York today announced a parallel criminal action in the matter.
"Spongetech used a menu of manipulative strategies to perpetuate this scheme, including fake sales orders and public statements as well as obstruction of the SEC's investigation," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement. "We will utilize all available means, including referral to criminal authorities, to prosecute those who attempt to thwart our investigations."
Christopher Conte, Associate Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement, added, "Investors were deceived into believing that Spongetech was a successful business, while Spongetech and its senior executives were illegally dumping shares into the market."
Two of Spongetech's former attorneys — Jack Halperin and Joel Pensley — and stock promoter George Speranza are also charged in the SEC's complaint, which was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. RM Enterprises International Inc., an affiliate through which Spongetech dumped shares, is also charged.
According to the SEC's complaint, after several years of relatively little business with a single customer comprising the bulk of Spongetech's limited sales, Metter and Moskowitz began to paint a more promising and misleading picture of Spongetech's business. Beginning in approximately April 2007, Spongetech issued dozens of phony press releases touting increasingly larger, yet fictitious, sales orders and revenue. The press releases fraudulently exaggerated the demand for pre-soaped sponges by referencing millions of dollars in sales orders, business, and revenue from five primary customers that purportedly accounted for 99 percent of Spongetech's business, yet none of those customers actually existed.
The SEC's complaint alleges that Metter, Moskowitz, Spongetech, and RM Enterprises used false and baseless attorney opinion letters by Pensley and Halperin to distribute shares of Spongetech to the public. Metter, Moskowitz, and Spongetech also used false and misleading attorney opinion letters — forged in Pensley's name and in the name of a fictitious lawyer, David Bomart — which were transmitted to Spongetech's transfer agents. The SEC further alleges that Speranza created websites and rented unoccupied office space for the fictional customers in an attempt to legitimize them.
The SEC's complaint alleges that Spongetech violated Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b), 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), 13(b)(2)(B), and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-13, 15d-1, 15d-11, and 15d-13. The complaint alleges that RM Enterprises violated Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5. The SEC alleges Metter and Moskowitz violated Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act, Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 13b2-1, 13b2-2 (Moskowitz only), and 15d-14, and Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and aided and abetted Spongetech's violations of Sections 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), 13(b)(2)(B), and 15(d) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 12b-20, 13a-13, 15d-1, 15d-11, and 15d-13. The SEC further alleges Speranza violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5, and aided and abetted violations of Sections 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5. The Commission also alleges Pensley and Halperin violated Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5.
I think Bomart may have been the right man for the job. There was no real reason for attorney opinion letters, so there was no reason for a real attorney.
And, no, I haven't contacted him, not by that name anyway.
I heard David Bomart had your check....did you talk to him?
So, again no munny for you. Bummer, dude. Call or write Mindy Moskowitz and demand a refund. That's the only way any SPNG shareholders nott already on the restitution list will ever have any chance to see a penny back.
Mindy's address and phone are listed in the iBox.
You can contact Metter too, butt I guarantee he'll just wastecan the letter like Mnuchin and the courts did.
Mindy is the last and best hope, dude.
Since this activity was not long after Mirman's involvement with SpongeTech, and since the SEC is seeking disgorgement, interest, and a penalty equal to the disgorgement in the related case filed yesterday against Tommy Belesis, who knows what the good people at the SEC, such as Margaret D. Spillane, Nancy A. Brown, Elzbieta Wraga, Thomas P. Smith, Jr., and Lara S. Mehraban, will do for SpongeTech shareholders?
The only difference is, IF Mirman is also guilty of this behavior in SpongeTech's market, that occurred a little more than 5 years ago. The SEC could not convert the funds recovered to the US Treasury. The money would have to be returned to SpongeTech shareholders, who were victimized in this case.
In the Liberty Silver case, the stock manipulation occurred "between August and October 2012." This is under five years ago, just barely, but it allows the SEC to convert the money recovered to the US Treasury, if they decide that's what they want to do. (At least, that's my understanding of a recent Supreme Court ruling).
Has Mindy Moskowitz sent the refund check yet, Jay? Might want to send her a reminder letter to rebate you and other SPNGQ shareholders for losses - it's the only chance to gett any munny back, dude. Her address is in the iBox.
So, still no munny for you. Bummer, dude. Keep Czeching the mailbox for Steve Mnuchin's reply letter.
This Avi Mirman?
"U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 23895 / August 2, 2017
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Robert D. B. Genovese, et al., No. 17-cv-05821 (S.D.N.Y. filed Aug. 1, 2017)
SEC Charges Two Individuals in $17 Million Manipulation Scheme
The SEC's complaint, filed on August 1, 2017 in federal district court in New York, alleges that, Robert Genovese, a Canadian citizen, his company, B.G. Capital Group, Ltd. and Abraham "Avi" Mirman, the former head of investment banking at now-defunct New York broker-dealer John Thomas Financial, Inc. (JTF), were involved in a scheme concerning Liberty Silver in which Genovese sought to increase dramatically the company's share price and volume and sell millions of shares into the market. According to the SEC's complaint, between August and October 2012, Genovese schemed with Mirman to sell Liberty Silver shares to JTF's customers in part by agreeing to loan $2 million indirectly to JTF without disclosing the loan to the customers. The complaint alleges that Genovese also touted Liberty Silver in newspaper articles while failing to disclose that he had paid for the articles, that he was dumping millions of shares of Liberty Silver stock, and the financial arrangements between himself and JTF. It further alleged that Genovese engaged in manipulative trading on a particular day, increasing Liberty Silver's share price and creating the false appearance of liquidity and demand for Liberty Silver stock."
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2017/lr23895.htm
Is this the same Avi Mirman who was Chairman of Cresta Capital?
"Cresta Capital Strategies, LLC
Investment Banking focused on long-term success.
Melville, NY
Investment banking firm Cresta Capital is led by an accomplished and proven team of financial professionals. Cresta Capital’s investment team has executed hundreds of transactions, some ranging as high as $150 million. Cresta Capital’s management members, who possess an average of 20 years of experience in the industry, employ their expertise in advising businesses of all sizes in the areas of mergers and acquisitions, capital raising, market assessment, competitive analyses, and business model creation. Cresta Capital’s management team includes Chairman of the Board Avi Mirman, President and Chief Compliance Officer Michael Mirman, and Managing Director Russell Steward, CFA."
http://crestacapital.weebly.com/
SpongeTech sued Cresta Capital, remember?
"In August 2009, the Company (SpongeTech) was introduced to Getfugu by Cresta, who was serving as investment banker for both the Company and Getfugu. At the advice of Cresta, the Company entered into a definitive agreement with Getfugu to invest $4 million into Getfugu’s mobile-based web search and e-commerce technology, and that the Company would be the first company to utilize Getfugu’s innovative mobile search platform. An aggregate of $1.75 million had been advanced to Getfugu, soon after Getfugu rescinded the transaction and to this date has not returned the monies to the Company."
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20091016005930/en/SpongeTech%C2%AE-Delivery-Systems-Announces-Class-Action-Lawsuits
Didn't Trustee Silverman take that case? I don't recall exactly.
But, there was definitely some entertainment value in getting acquainted with Getfugu. It led to tales of international intrigue, dubious claims of being part of the US law enforcement complex, and to the sad demise of a beautiful Enzo Ferrari.
http://carlfreer-scammer.com/category/getfugu/page/2/
Jay, has Mindy Moskowitz sent you a refund yett? You did write her and demand your munny back, right?
Cuz that's the ONLY way you'll ever see a penny of your munny blown in this obvious scam.
Without Mindy coughing up a refund, yer munny is G-O-N-E.
If you haven't already, write or call Mindy and demand the Moskowitz loot stash send you a refund. It's your only chance, dude.
I believe you were involved with my transaction.
Please return my money, especially as I understand SPNG had nothing and there is no "disgorgment" to even hope for....and of course, as a astockholder I only get paid after all other debts, of which there are much more than any possible recovery.
So please pay me back for my bad investing.
Bummer for you again. Your hoped for munny just ain't happening - no matter how many irrelevant cases you post or how many letters you write. I'm shure Steve Mnunchin is going to send a personal reply letter 'soon'. Just as soon as he getts done with that tax thingy. Your letter is next on the pile in his 'to-do' box.
Butt Metter and Moskowitz have plenny of munny for potentially life-saving procedures.
Ripped-off SPNG investors need to write to Mindy Moskowitz, document their losses, and demand that she pay reparations. It's the only hope for any munny back from this obvious SCAM.
Write to Mindy, Jay, and demand she refund your munny! That's your only hope for munny from SPNG or anything related (or, in the cases you post, unrelated) to SPNG.
Thanks, Whip. But as with everything about this case, the roots run deep, and the SEC still refuses to make RICO cases, as they isolate every aspect of this case.
However, the SEC can't help themselves to our money in the Sandias case, so we'll see if they give the disgorgement to us, as they should anyway.
Sandias Azucaradas
A number of Admin Proceedings announced by the SEC today were in regards to Moneyline Brokers and their affiliates, including Sandias.
"1. Sandias, incorporated in Costa Rica and domiciled in San Jose, Costa Rica, is a foreign corporation affiliated with Moneyline Brokers (“Moneyline”), a self-described broker dealer based in Costa Rica. Moneyline conducted some of its business within the United States
and abroad through Sandias and other foreign corporations...
3. The Commission’s complaint alleged that from at least January 2009 until at least September 2010, Moneyline and its affiliated nominee entities, including Sandias (“Moneyline Entities”), unlawfully operated as a broker-dealer on behalf of U.S.-based customers seeking to
conceal their holdings of microcap securities and to manipulate the market for these thinly-traded issuers. The customers, working with the Moneyline Entities, penny stock promoters, and other associates, engaged in numerous “pump and dump” schemes, including by manipulatively trading
the shares of microcap stock to create the illusion of genuine investor demand, orchestrating a promotional campaign to inflate the price of the stock, and then selling their shares into the demand that they generated."
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2017/34-80955.pdf
On January 5th, 2009, Sandias received their first OIS stock certificate from SpongeTech. Not surprisingly, these shares were deposited into an account with Penson Financial, until they were sold two days later.
And the SEC beat goes on, regardless of who sits in the Chair.
Spongetech is garbage
Moskowitz and SpongeTech CEO Michael Metter were arrested by FBI agents... so sad
SPNG went from .006 to .25
Bummer for you. Ain't happening. I'm shure Steve Mnunchin is going to send a personal reply letter 'soon'. Just as soon as he getts done with that tax thingy. Your letter is next on the pile in his 'to-do' box.
Butt Metter and Moskowitz have plenny of munny for potentially life-saving procedures.
Ripped-off SPNG investors need to write to Mindy Moskowitz, document their losses, and demand that she pay reparations. It's the only hope for any munny back from this obvious SCAM.
I agree that this is a very big deal, and I would also like to see Congress examine this issue.
This is exactly why I wrote to Secretary Mnuchin, and asked him to escrow any funds disgorged in the SpongeTech case, for the eventual return to shareholders, from whom that money was stolen, as opposed to being transferred to the Treasury's general fund, as the SEC proposed. As I told the Secretary in that message, this amounts to nothing less than the immoral conversion of funds rightly belonging to shareholders.
Justice Sotomayor "noted that the money received often goes to the government rather than victims of the fraud." The question that the Court slept right through is "WHY isn't disgorged money being returned to the injured investors from whom it was stolen?"
Bummer for you, dude. No munny ever comin' from SPNG fraud to you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rules-to-limit-sec-power-to-recover-profit-from-fraud/2017/06/05/13fc02b8-4a02-11e7-a186-60c031eab644_story.html
The Supreme Court on Monday unanimously limited the federal government’s power to recover the profits made from illegal behavior.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the Securities and Exchange Commission must abide by a five-year statute of limitations in seeking “disgorgement” from those whose fraudulent actions resulted in illegal profits.
It is a favorite tool of the federal government; in recent years, the SEC took in nearly $3 billion in disgorgements, more than double what it received in penalties, according to court filings.
The question for the Supreme Court was whether disgorgements were a form of a penalty, which is subject to the statute of limitations, or a remedy for unjust enrichment that simply restores the offender to the situation he would have been in if he had not acted illegally, as the government claimed.
It appeared not to be a close call to the justices.
“SEC disgorgement bears all the hallmarks of a penalty: It is imposed as a consequence of violating a public law and it is intended to deter, not to compensate,” wrote Sotomayor, who noted that the money received often goes to the government rather than victims of the fraud. “The 5-year statute of limitations therefore applies when the SEC seeks disgorgement.”
It was one of the first cases heard by new Justice Neil M. Gorsuch after he was sworn in in April, and he joined his new colleagues in overturning a decision from his old court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver.
The case was brought by Charles R. Kokesh, a Santa Fe, N.M., businessman who was convicted of misappropriating money from four investment companies he controlled from 1995 through 2009 and using the proceeds for a lavish lifestyle.
A judge in 2015 ordered him to pay a $2.4 million civil penalty. But because the SEC has interpreted disgorgement to have no time restraint, the judge said Kokesh must also pay $35 million, the calculated amount of illegal profits dating back to the initiation of his illegal behavior.
With a five-year limit, Kokesh’s disgorgement would be reduced to about $5 million.
Dixie L. Johnson, a securities enforcement lawyer in Washington, said the ruling “shatters” the SEC’s view of disgorgement.
“Those who previously paid disgorgement purportedly for ill-gotten gains more than five years after the relevant violation will be reviewing their situations against this case to determine whether the disgorgement award should have been allowed,” she said in a statement.
Are these scammers refunding folks via the instruction you provided?
Anyone who has lost their entire 'investment' in SPNG can demand a full refund by providing brokerage account records showing the purchase(s) and price(s) of your purchase(s) of SPNG stock and a recent brokerage account statement proving that those SPNG shares are still in the account.
Submit your demand letter accompanied by the documents noted above to:
Mindy Moskowitz
13624 71st Rd
Flushing, NY 11367
Send your correspondence either via US Mail with certified mail return receipt requested or Express Mail or by FedEx with signature required.
Sorry, butt the corporation is revoked. The ticker is a zombie ticker - there is no underlying corporation, so the shares are simply shares in nothing.
The ticker hasn't been revoked, butt the shares you have are zombie or phantom shares - you own shares in a corporation that no longer exists.
A ticker is nott a corporation. It's a trading ticker. Only the SEC revokes those and it takes many years to decades before they gett around to that, so the tickers of dead companies stick around after the companies are long dead.
Simple legal fact. The Delaware incorporation is no longer. The corporate entity is G-O-N-E. The corporation was liquidated in Chapter 7. It was revoked by the Delaware Secretary of State. It no longer exists.
If you were to somehow find someone to buy those shares from you for value, you'd be subject to them later suing you for fraud, as you sold shares in NOTHING for value, and I've now put readers on notice that the shares have no value, so they can't claim they didn't know when the shares were sold to others. It's straight-up fraud.
Whether or nott the SEC has revoked the ticker yett is immaterial. It's grey market-only crapola with zero underlying value, as they are shares in - literally - nothing.
Again, my brokers (both) say different. My account has Spongetech shares in it, so not revoked.
Provide the SEC document that declares revocation of SPNGE and I'll concede. Don't waste your time providing the SEC's attempt to revoke during the BK. I was in court when the judge refused the SEC's request (2010/11 as I recall).
So whatcha got from SEC, the controlling authority, on revocation?
Spongetech and Spongetech Delivery Systems, the FORMER Delaware corporations are indeed REVOKED. Neither is a legal corporate entity in Delaware (or anywhere else).
All that is left is a zombie ticker that doesn't trade.
All corporate assets were lost in the Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy, and the corporation no longer exists in law.
And all the munny is G-O-N-E, and no number of useless letters or emails to anyone is ever going to change that FACT.
I never said anything about making money. Just pointed out an error in logic. Spongetech stock is not revoked. That's a fact. The rest is speculation until revocation occurs.
Whiplash_Investor, 20 years from now nobody who held their Spongetech shares will get one even penny back from their holdings.
Good luck
As Whip correctly pointed out the first time you made this statement, the stock is not revoked.
Wrong...still got all my shares. Ameritrade and Fidelity both say I can't get them out of my account until revoked, which they haven't been. So guess again.
cowtown jay, SPNGQ stock is revoked; there are no more shareholders because there are no more shares.
Good luck.
The important thing to me is that SpongeTech shareholders receive equal protection under the law. To date, the SEC has convicted insiders with selling $52 million dollars worth of unregistered shares, and they are seeking disgorgement of that amount to be paid to those who self-identified with authorities as victims of the fraud.
That's a complete farce. Insiders will be required to pay less than what I used to pay for child support each month.
Also, the identification of shareholders is not the responsibility of those shareholders. This identification is actually required in bankruptcy proceedings. The requirement was ignored because the judge and the trustee felt that there was no way to make that identification. The trustee stated that he didn't even think that the SEC could determine who the shareholders are. This is absurd.
In addition, MOST of the ill-gotten gain realized by selling unregistered shares, which I estimate to be about $390 million, went into the pockets of outsiders, people who were members of the SpongeTech stock distribution network. There were dozens of these individuals, but only three have been convicted to date. The amount disgorged from these convictions is, for the most part, slotted to be transferred to the general fund of the US Treasury. Effectively, our money is being stolen again, this time by agencies of the US government.
Yes, it's less than a shell. The corporation has been revoked. The stock is nott trading. There is no corporate existence for SPNGQ anymore. The liquidation (Chap 7) bankruptcy is long closed.
Spongetech is G-O-N-E and it isn't even a trading shell anymore and cannot be acquired for a RM or any other purpose, as it literally has ceased to exist.
No thorn, no briar patch, just OVER and G-O-N-E, baby.
But the ticker will never return, right? Thanks!
I think it is MORE than a shell. It could be described as a thorn in the side of government agencies, but I also think it is even MORE than that. It's more like a briar patch these agencies are going to have to work their way through.
The biggest bombs still haven't dropped.
Is this LESS than a shell? Thanks!!!
I have some of these dead shares as well. I tried to removed them from my Scottrade account and they couldn't because the transfer agent shows them as restricted. It'll happen at some point. Was looking to take the loss against other gains. It's the only value I see in these. LOL
TDA...ditto. However this is dead, move on.
Never bought into the illegal short propoganda. Did think alot of news put out was the type of news a "real" entity would put out. At the end of the day I didn't keep in mind this was a penny stock. Sadly I had the opportunity twice to make $200K on a $27k investment, lol let's call it a bet. So I lost the $27k instead. Expensive lesson. Greed that led to stupidity. I call it my investestor tuition.
As an individual investor you need to understand you will NEVER outsmart the market makers. Learn how to follow...
In a search for a contractor to replace my roof I had 5 estimates provided from 5 different companies. STEVEN MOSKOWITZ of Renovex LLC gave me the best price by over a couple thousand dollars. This was too good to pass on, so I hired Renovex to do the job.
Steve immediately demanded 60% of the cost to be paid upfront. I was hesitant so I told him once the material arrives on site I would give him the 60%. He rudely told me "I am not a bank, and I won't lay out that kind of money." We eventually came to an agreement. The following day, 80% of the material arrived and so I paid him in good faith. That was my second mistake. My first mistake was hiring him in the first place. I was initially promised that the entire job would be completed in 3-5 work days. Over the course of 3 weeks I've heard one excuse after the other. It went from bad weather (which never came) to family emergencies, to sick days (6 in a row, with no communication) This company left my roof unprotected which lead to a semi-major leak in multiple areas of my home. I am currently in the process of filing a claim against his insurance, which I'm beginning to think is fraudulent. I have gotten no where. After over three weeks from the start date they were only competent enough to complete 45% of the job. I had finally had enough of the excuses and contacted Steve. I told him I have no other recourse at this point. I need to hire someone else to complete the job. His response was, "Why didn't you tell me that my workers haven't been there in over 5 days? You are just trying to steal my materials and I will see you in court!" As if I'm responsible for managing his labor force. Save yourself the headache, don't use Renovex LLC for ANYTHING! It was a waste of my time and money in the long run. It was the least professional management I've ever dealt with in my entire life. PLEASE DON'T BE TEMPTED BY THE LOW COST, IT IS A FACADE THAT IS WELL WORTH AVOIDING!
Ross G. and 1 other voted for this review
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |