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.
And here's an example of how to provide the potential investor the tools he/she needs to do proper DD IMO. No commentary or opinions. Simply the facts laid out in simple format that will allow the reader to draw their own conclusions.
WDPT DD Links:
Business Summary
WidePoint Corporation, formerly known as ZMAX Corporation, focuses on implementing middle-market companies' Information Technology (IT) e-strategies. The Company helps its clients analyze, design, implement and support e-business solutions that improve the value of their e-business initiatives. In order to capitalize on the Internet revolution, the Company evolved from a Year 2000 strategic solutions provider to an IT based e-business solutions provider. The Company presently focuses on planning, implementing and supporting component-based, custom application development and integration services. These services include the up-front Internet consulting services designed to increase revenue, develop digital brand strategy, generate additional market share, reduce costs and/or establish competitive advantage.
Expanded Business Description
http://yahoo.marketguide.com/MGI/busidesc.asp?target=/stocks/companyinformation/busidesc&Ticker=...
Significant Developments
http://yahoo.marketguide.com/MGI/signdevt.asp?target=/stocks/companyinformation/signdevt&Ticker=...
General Information and Share Information
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/w/WDPT.ob.html
Basic Company Profile
http://www.knobias.com/individual/research/basicprofile.htm?ticker=WDPT&coid=1533891695
BigCharts Interactive Chart
http://www.bigcharts.com/intchart/frames/frames.asp?symb=WDPT&time=8&freq=1
SEC Filings
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/quotes_sec.asp?symbol=WDPT&selected=WDPT
Recent Press Releases
http://biz.yahoo.com/n/w/WDPT.ob.html
Company Webpage
http://www.widepoint.com
Executive Biographies
http://yahoo.marketguide.com/MGI/biograph.asprt=offrdirs&target=/stocks/companyinformation/offic...
Insider Trade Data
http://biz.yahoo.com/t/w/WDPT.html
Catalysts
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/research/wizards/srwcatalysts.asp?Symbol=WDPT
Historical Quotes
http://host.wallstreetcity.com/wsc2/Historical_Quotes.html?Button=NEW+REQUEST&template=hisquote....
OTCBB Level 2 Quotes
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/mp_quotes.asp?Sort=4&Quotes=WDPT
Active Market Makers
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/tradeact_mml.asp?searchby=i&searchfor=WDPT&x=20&y=6
Market Maker Activity
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/tradeact_mv.asp?SearchBy=i&Issue=WDPT&SortBy=v&month=10-1-2000&...
BarCharts Signals
http://quotes.barchart.com/texpert.asp?sym=WDPT
Stockscores.com Rating
http://www.stockscores.com/index.asp
OTCBB Most Active List
http://quotes.freerealtime.com/dl/frt/stats?exch=D&stat=0
Technical Analysis Education
http://www.stockcharts.com/education/index.html
http://www.e-analytics.com/techdir.htm
http://www.chartpatterns.com
http://www.clearstation.com/education/cover.shtml
http://www.litwick.com
http://www.investormall.com/compleat/averages.htm
Charting Webpages
http://www.bigcharts.com
http://www.prophetcharts.com
http://www.stockcharts.com
SEC Complaint Link
http://www.sec.gov/enforce/comctr.htm
Disclaimer: This page is a compilation of links to websites containing stock information.
While this information is believed to be accurate, no guarantees can be made.
Disclaimer
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=135097
The following is an example of how not to present a DD report on a company. ADAPT makes no commentary on the validity of what information is provided below nor on the veracity of the reporter. It is presented only as an example in the hopes that others may learn from it's authors mistakes. ADAPT commentary is in italics.
~*~*~UNPAID DD ON NPCT~*~*~
This is completely irrelevant. Whether the DD is paid or not, if it is correct it's correct. If it is wrong, it's wrong.
Some information about the public company Nanopierce and its CEO Paul Metzinger. (Some of the links go my website mary.cc. I have no cookies, virii, password grabbers... or anything in my site that is harmful, guaranteed)
A report like this should not deliver only "some" information. It can be focused only on a specific type of information and it is perfectly correct to do so. The portion in parenthesis comes across as an excuse for not providing third party confirmation.
1. The CEO was sued for fraud by the SEC three times. (see below for lawsuit dockets). He "consented to issuance of permanent injunction and entry of judgment against Metzinger." Look at all the charges against him http://www.mary.cc/npct/7.htm
Here is the judgment. He showed the SEC that he was penniless then agreed to rat out his companies and associates in exchange for the injunction and judgment. If he breaks the settlement agreement, he consents to be tried as a criminal in criminal court. Here are the documents.
http://www.mary.cc/npct/NP1.JPG
http://www.mary.cc/npct/NP2.JPG
http://www.mary.cc/npct/NP3.JPG
http://www.mary.cc/npct/NP4.JPG
Major red flags here. All corroborating "evidence" is available only at the reporters website and mostly consists of "pictures" of purportedly SEC documents taken by the reporter. Likewise the "evidence" indicates some charges and the referenced lawsuits, but the commentary is slanted towards the inflammatory that the individual is guilty of something. If the inflammatory commentary were removed and third party verification of the "evidence" presented this would be an outstanding bit of information in reference to company management.
Note: ADAPT did a most cursory search concerning the individual above. In addition to some verification of the above information we also found references to the individual prevailing in several appeals. That information should also be included in a report of this nature.
2. The CEO was also sued for racketeering and was involved in a lawsuit over missing stock certificates.
No supporting evidence whatsoever presented in the report. This reporter appears to expect the reader to take everything at face value. a clear sign that the reader should be very careful in judging the accuracy of this information.
3.The CEO's last company went bankrupt, i.e. Intercell. Other companies he was involved in went bankrupt also such as Faspaq. He also went bankrupt personally in 1989.
Again no supporting third party confirmation. Additionally, while worthwhile to know, this reporter is reminded of the standard disclaimer used by mutual fund salesmen. "Past results are not necessarily an indication of future performance"
4. NPCT was started as a mining company then became a distributor of skylights symbol SUNY which is a shell Metzinger's wife owned and now they sell hitech? The assets of npct i.e. patents and patent applications were bought with printed shares from a division of Intercell. Intercell considered their value ZERO. CEO Paul Metzinger is also the CEO of Intercell. symbol IICP.OB http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=IICP.OB&d=t
At last a third party link. Though not to the company that is the subject of the report(?). More unverified "facts". this is beginning to look more like an opinion column than a DD report.
5. No direct revenue, no profits. They had a tiny tiny bit of income for consulting about something which had nothing to do with the company.
This informationis too easily verified not to have been accomanied by the appropriate link. At this point the astute investor is likely to leave the document and proceed directly to the company filings to review thing for himself. The reporter has failed the reader by not providing the information promised in the header.
6. They have hired many, many stock promoters. One of them posted on the message boards that toxic funding is good and the funder was a good company when that was not the case. The company is currently suing the funder for stock manipulation and securities fraud. The funder Southridge Financial, Kernaghan are infamous as corporate loan sharks who short stocks. More information on them here http://www.mary.cc/tk
Again more easily verifiable information lacking verification. Though if taken at face value it appears that company may be trying to recoup losses as the result of misplaced trust in the past. The comments concerning the funder are irrelevant in this context.
7. They have an Open House every year which is basically just a stock promotion meeting. Here is a photo from it. They promote it heavily in Asia, Germany and the US yet they only had 35 people and I see at least five stock promoters in the audience. If this were a revolutionary product, how come more people weren't there? Why'd they even take a photo of such a small audience? http://www.nanopierce.com/daten/company/openhoeuse_event/oh_images/
Audience/Thumbnails/TN_the_audience1.jpg
Presented without the commentary this would be a good piece of DD. The questions asked are an obvious attempt to direct an action by the reader. a definite no-no in a proper DD report.
8. Most of the DD on this company is paid promotion such as wallstreetreporter.com , investortoinvestor.com (Kathy Knight, Kent Klook), Investor Relations Worldwide Corporation asianinvestoronline.com (owned by a Colorado company) , WillyWizard.com (Hal Engel) , marketreporter.com , ceocast.com, nanotechinvesting.com is company site, stockreporter.de, Charles Van Musscher of Gruenwald, Germany, The Geneva Group, Inc. of Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida and probably others. Check out their disclaimers on their sites. They have been paid to promote NPCT. Check out annual SEC reports and search/find for Investor Relations and you will see their names and compensation. Here are just a few from the SEC documents which you can recognize from the message boards especially Hal Engle, Kathy Knight and Chad Beemer who do not post anonymously.
7/1/98 . Common Stock 186,500 Investor Relations Putter Consulting
7/1/98 Common Stock 24,500 Investor Relations Kathy Knight- McConnell
7/1/98 Common Stock 6,250 Investor Relations Hans Kast
7/1/98 Common Stock 6,250 Investor Relations Roger L. Smothers
6/3/99 Common Stock 100,000 Investor Relations Harold Engel, Jr.
6/30/99 Common Stock 144,000 Investor Relations Stock Enterprises
6/30/99 Common Stock 250,000 Consulting Services Bert Roosen
6/30/99 Common Stock 30,000 Investors Relations Chad Beemer
6/30/99 Common Stock 10,000 Interest on Rose & Richard Gram
Again, presented without the commentary that attempts to steer the reader to a desired conclusion this would be an excellent bit of DD.
9. Paul Metzinger is also CEO of Intercell. They did a 1:20 reverse stock split and their stock was at .14 That means it is really worth less than a cent. He changed the stock symbol also. He wasn't even in any type of business. His words again "I am currently assessing with the Board of Directors various business opportunities, which could well form the basis for the future business activity of the Company. There are several opportunities which we find of particular interest and which are in markets of substantial size upon which to build a real operating company. We have no specific restrictions imposed upon our search. I invite any shareholder who may be aware of a technology or a business opportunity, which they think may be of interest to the Company, to please contact me."
After a short respite we return to no verification.
10. Intercell also had problems with the SEC with their reports. They had to restate them. This straight from the CEO. "Our previously announced plan to restructure, recapitialize and refinance Intercell Corporation was, unfortunately, delayed because of a frustratingly long effort to accommodate the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission on certain technical accounting issues relating to the audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1999."
This is the first portion of this document to be presented in the proper format. Now if the reporter had only included a third party verification link of the quote it would be perfect.
11. The CEO begs shareholders not to verify contracts with other companies. This is very troubling and suspect.
http://www.nanopierce.com/daten/investor/press_archive/shletter14_09_01.html
"We are currently engaged in extremely sensitive discussions with many major global players in the microelectronics industry. These discussions and future business relationships can and will be jeopardized if shareholders make direct contacts with any of these companies in what may be a well intentioned effort to find out what is going on.
Recently executives of one company, at the highest levels, contacted us expressing extreme and troubling concern about calls received from inquisitive shareholders. These executives felt "compromised” being faced with answering questions about what they deemed to be inside material information, which obviously they could not disclose or even affirm or deny. These contacts must stop otherwise we may lose the opportunity to ever again deal with these companies. It destroys our reputation to be a trustworthy partner." Then shareholders check out contracts as per SEC recommendation. Boeing said "Nanopierce who?" and Infineon clearly stated they are not doing business with Nanopierce. Others said no comment or did not respond at all.
Also, if you say you are in a related company and ask for a sample to try out, test, they say NO. What does that tell you?
Paul then states 10/2001 through his promoter Kathy that he will no longer be providing information to shareholders because of message board posters trying to verify his information. I personally believe he received a cease and desist letter from Boeing as Boeing told me they were going to find out what was up with Nanopierce.
This time we get a good link but the commentary is deliberately inflammatory. Recommendation that an investor make a false representaion to obtain a sample is extremely disturbing. As is the follow up that because the company doesn't hand out samples based on a phone call proving something is amiss.
12. NPCT stock promoter Stockreporter sued by the SEC for fraud in his promotions. Here is the npct stock promotion. Here is the SEC lawsuit against the Stockreporter. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr16680.htm
This information should have been included in item #8 above. Properly constructed though.
13. Here Metzinger claims there are huge oil reserves for a company when there weren't. http://www.mary.cc/npct/1.htm
Again the link is not third party verifiable.
14. Here are some investors burned by Paul posting on Silicon Investors about him and his scams. http://www.mary.cc/npct/3.htm and yet another burned Intercell Investor, same scam over and over again. http://www.mary.cc/npct/4.htm
see item #13
15. A recent unbiased article about NPCT. http://www.mary.cc/npct/5.htm This is the only honest article ever written about the company I believe. He did some good DD.
see #13
16. Metzinger rips off his business partners as well.
Paul shouldn't have a law license.
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=NPCT&read=59053
Paul doesn't keep promises to his partners.
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=NPCT&read=59052
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=NPCT&read=59050
Louis wins his appeal
http://www.courts.state.co.us/ctappeals/caseann/12-6-01.htm
Article about Paul and Louis
http://www.mary.cc/npct/6.htm
A poor mix of other opinions and bad verification. Given that so much of this document is unverifiable only the most desperate investor would bother researching these allegations.
The remainder of the document references court dockets. This is appropriate for a due diligence report. However considering the overall length of the preceding and it's questionable presentation the reporter has all but insured that no one will review the attached documents.
In Conclusion: Had the report provided verifiable confirmation at respected impartial third party locations and dispensed with the attempts to guide a reader to a specific conclusion this would be a valuable document. As it stands it is almost worthless, save for it's ability to teach others how not to proceed in making a report and alerting one what to expect from the reporter in question in the future.
Here are lawsuit dockets
105 METZINGER, PAUL codc 1:1989cv00227 02/08/1989 850 02/23/1989
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE vs. PAUL METZINGER
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Denver)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 91-CV-65
Kanchanapoom, et al v. Zufelt, et al
Filed: 01/14/91
Assigned to: Judge Sherman G. Finesilver
Jury demand: Both
Demand: $5,000,000
Nature of Suit: 850
Lead Docket: None
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
Dkt # in USDC C Dist CA : is CV89-7321-RMT (Ex)
Cause: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
PAUL METZINGER Paul H. Metzinger
defendant [COR LD NTC]
Paul H. Metzinger, P.C.
600 - 17th Street
#2309-S
Denver, CO 80202
U.S.A.
303-592-1010
PAUL METZINGER, P.C. Paul H. Metzinger
defendant (See above)
[COR LD NTC]
2/5/91 9 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant Richard Metzinger,
defendant Robert H. Burgener, defendant E.M.I. Inc.,
defendant Crown, Ltd., defendant King, Ltd., defendant Sid,
Ltd. by Timothy James O'Connor, Mary Frances O'Connor (yk)
[Entry date 02/06/91]
It is ordered that the
second cause of action is dismissd as to Paul H. Metzinger
and Paul H. Metzinger, P.C. and First Trust Corp. It is
ordered tht the 8th and 12th causes of action are
dismissed.
U.S. District Court
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Denver)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 96-CV-1300
Maxam Gold Corp v. Timberline Conslts, et al
Filed: 06/03/96
Assigned to: Judge Clarence A. Brimmer
Jury demand: Defendant
Demand: $1,667,000
Nature of Suit: 190
Lead Docket: None
Jurisdiction: Diversity
Dkt# in other court: None
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract
MAXAM GOLD CORPORATION Michael H. Berger
fka [COR LD NTC]
Maxam International Waldbaum, Corn, Koff, Berger &
Corporation Cohen, P.C.
plaintiff 303 East 17th Avenue
#940
Denver, CO 80203
U.S.A.
303-861-1166
Raymond Harris
[COR LD NTC]
(To be updated)
Cary Ira Schachter
[COR LD NTC]
Conant, Whittenburg, French &
Schachter, PC
600 North Pearl Street
#2300
Dallas, TX 75201
USA
214-999-5100
FTS 999-5747
v.
TIMBERLINE CONSULTANTS, INC. John Henry Schlie
defendant [COR LD NTC]
John H. Schlie, Atty at Law
1120 Lincoln Street
#1600
Denver, CO 80203
USA
303-832-6890
RON KNITTLE John Henry Schlie
defendant (See above)
[COR LD NTC]
PAUL METZINGER John Henry Schlie
defendant [term 10/09/96]
[term 12/23/96] (See above)
He was sued over stock certificates.
U.S. District Court
District of Utah (Central)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 88-CV-897
SEC v. Faspaq, Inc., et al
Filed: 09/30/88
Assigned to: Judge Bruce S. Jenkins
Jury demand: Defendant
Demand: $0,000
Nature of Suit: 850
Lead Docket: None
Jurisdiction: US Plaintiff
Dkt# in other court: None
Cause: 15:77 Securities Fraud
PAUL H. METZINGER
defendant
[term 01/30/89]
The SEC won the case against the main defendant. Paul had case against him dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. SEC was supposed to refile against him in CO which is the proper jurisdiction but didn't.
Check out NPCT thread on http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/subject.gsp?subjectid=19793 especially the old posts. Look at all the promoters on the IHUB one also http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=98
Look at all the promoters here on Raging Bull. http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=NPCT
I have no shares. I have not been paid to post. I am not short. I just hate seeing people being fleeced by stock promoters. This company seems very suspect to me because of management's history and the fact they have no real income. If their patents were so hot, why wouldn't someone buy them or license them for millions? Why couldn't they have gotten a loan against the patents instead of the toxic funding? Why would they have sooo many stock promoters? When you see stock promoters saying this is a $60 stock when they're at .66 cents, you just KNOW something is funny here. As per Asensio's book "Sold Short" this company has almost ALL the signs of a stock scam, i.e. little or no revenue, a hot hot field, management with a bad past, restated earnings, change in auditors, lots of stock promoters, a hard to define product, lots of fluffy press releases, a past involving a mining company...
Sources of information
All legal information about lawsuits came from here. It's a pay site so you need an account, only 7 cents a page. Well worth it to do your DD on your investments.
http://pacer.uspci.uscourts.gov/
All SEC information came from their SEC filings. I use this source
http://www.amex.com/quote.dll?mode=stock&symbol=npct
The Bird of Prey
Thank you, but no. Afraid I'm too much of an anarchist. A federal judge once called me a menace to society?! Wouldn't want to sully your agenda here.
Actually I have a sponsorship open...you interested?
David Weed
aka the Bird of Prey
www.warp-drive.com
Very fine response. Guess we'll be taking a commercial break here for a few words from our sponsors?!
Given the number of persons claiming to have been discriminated against by various alleged means here at IHUB, We should be taxing the limitations of our investigative staff in no tiime at all.
Unless, of course they have no underlying basis. In which case this may turn out to be a most desolate landscape.
As for refreshments...BYO!
David Weed
aka the Bird of Prey
www.warp-drive.com
Have you vested your Commission with subpoena powers?
I'm breathlessly awaiting the curtain's rise. Don't want to squander my bookmark here... I have a front-row seat. How about refreshments??
Ok here is an example of an ADAPT. CNHH is a classic example of an ADAPT because it had a promoter/IR posting as a private investor. Now he did not post who he actually was nor that stock was coming into the market.
In Fed court the deals over the past two years were rescinded by the fed judge. Now I do not see where the SEC has made charges but this scenario wanted the SEC to intervene to stop the fed case so they could go forward with what they were planning. Of course this scenario screamed the people after them were the evil.
The key here is the promoter/IR posting as a private investor and stock coming into the market. That is a Classic Pump (deception without disclosure of who they actually were not neccessarily the informaiton) while stock was being moved into the market.
But this is an example of what ADAPT is looking for to expose.
:=) Gary Swancey
I am presently seeking an additional director to help in determining the validity of a request for an investigation. If you believe you can spot an deception a mile away and would like to help stop Deceptive practices please PM me.
David Weed
aka the Bird of Prey
www.warp-drive.com
Bird you are now the Chair
:=) Gary Swancey
That would be for the MM thread run by Francios. Reread the opening post ... we are looking for a more specific deception and decpetion tactics.
:=) Gary Swancey
It certainly is of interest. And in keeping with the spirit of what is intended on this board. Good work, IMHO.
I don't know why people are so fearful of what to post. If you make an honest effort to fit in a good moderator won't kick you out because your learning. It beats the heck out of hearing HEY GOOFBALL from 250 users that all want to play moderator!
David Weed
aka the Bird of Prey
www.warp-drive.com
Here is an article that might be of interest???
http://www.streetsideinvestor.com/getexec.php3?982881168&tott
It's about head fakes, I don't know if this is the right thread though for it.
Marty,
You are on the right track here. The purpose here is to expose situations where deceptive practices are being used to manipulate a stock (or thread or BBS). Gary and I have assembled a team that includes several Internet Security Protocol Specialists (I hate the term hacker) and a few other specialized experts to ferret out exactly *who* some of these *magical groups* really are. The idea has been to expose these groups for the manipulators they are. A good post here would include a request for the ADAPT team to investigate a particular group fo posters or a specific stock thread. As you might imagine, we are quite engaged at the moment.
David Weed
aka the Bird of Prey
www.warp-drive.com
G.B. I am not sure I understand what you want here. I will make a post and you tell me if I am on the right track or I am confused about the purpose of the thread or not, okay?
When a person posts on a thread and is proving a point, it seems that there magically appears a group of people that start in on the poster with personal attacks. (These are manefested in various ways, name calling, sarcasm, reposts of old posts that have nothing to do with the present but just there for inflammatory effect, insinuations couched as questions, you know the old "so how many free shares did you get? stuff" etc etc) The poster responds, they respond, things get out of hand, and the poster that was proving the point gets suspended. The result? The person that was being effective in making reasoned posts is no longer there, and the ones that want maximize the negatives have one less person to maximize the positives. This can occur for example when a poster is misleading others about say a law suit. They could be going on and on about how the company is going to pay 'millions', better sell, etc etc etc. the other poster is saying wait a minute, nothing has been decided yet, and besides they already won a similar lawsuit.
In this example either one may turn out to be right, or even a combination of the two. The negative side may turn out to be right after all, and the company MAY end up paying millions. On the other hand the positive poster may also turn out to be right, and nothing ever comes of it. Or the firm loses the suit but doesn't have to pay very much. The decietful part comes in when the one side uses the tactics I described above to gain an advantage.
Followers
|
4
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
173
|
Created
|
02/13/01
|
Type
|
Premium
|
Moderator Bird of Prey | |||
Assistants |
Beginning at the top left: Ancient Dragon Scholar, Attack of the Winged Regent, & Dragon Battle
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |