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.
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.
Thanks nicehit,
However, I included that Paul is the chairman of 141 and as a result of the language in the PR, it may include 141 since it talks about all of it's software ops and 141 is a subsidiary of Spooz. Unless you know for sure 141 was excluded from the re-organization.
nicehit, Paul, the chairman of 141 has this to say regarding some of your questions. I would assume 141 is involved in this reorganization.
Spooz Technologies, Inc. Named Central Research and Distribution Center for Spooz, Inc. in North America
- 7/17/2008
Chicago, IL – (BUSINESSWIRE) — July 17, 2008 – Spooz, Inc. (OTCPK: SPZI) is pleased to announce that the Company is in the process of moving all of its software-related North American operations into its wholly-owned subsidiary, Spooz Technologies, Inc. The purpose of this transaction is to market SpoozToolz™, its suite of revolutionary trading and transaction software, to the fast growth financial marketplace.
Spooz, Inc. provides an affordable suite of software solutions designed to simplify financial trading for professionals and non-professionals. Its products provide a versatile configuration of trading screens, analysis screens and automated trading systems for the financial marketplace. The Company’s flagship products enable any trader to quickly and efficiently bridge the gap between concept and execution.
Spooz Technologies, Inc. is a trading solutions company focused on next generation traders. The subsidiary will focus its marketing efforts throughout North America with the ultimate goal to unite the global trading world under a universal standard for market analysis, decision support, systems development, position management and electronic trade execution.
“This is a pivotal time for our Company as we approach the worldwide market for our financial trading solutions, and by making Spooz Technologies Inc. the central depository, research and distribution center for all our SpoozToolz™ technology in North America, we’ll be able to better focus our marketing efforts for the benefit of our Company and our shareholders,” stated Paul D. Strickland Jr., CEO of Spooz Inc................
Again nicehit. All good and valid questions and concerns,
All we can do is look at what Paul has done in the past for his loyal shareholders. A couple of examples would be how he compensated the original shareholders and later the elimination of the anti-dilution clause for insiders, plus while some will argue the merit, Paul has bought back and cancelled shares. Only to have things beyond his control cause the company to dilute again.
Keep in mind too that the financials are only through June 30th. A lot may have transpired since then that is being kept under the radar of the manipulators. Additionally, large brokerages (if any are involved) tend to call the shots with respect to the timing of announcements.
I think too Paul has realized that some "shareholders" have lied to him about their allegiance to the company in order to gain his trust only to double cross the company by spreading erroneous information.
And finally, if I were insecure I would have never invested in the first place.
nicehit All good questions, but all in due time.
I'm reminded of a couple of old sayings. "A watched pot never boils" and "No wine before it's time" Pacing back and forth and asking "are we there yet" every day will not get you anywhere except frustrated. If you are that concerned, call the company.
People must realize that the nature of this beast is not the same as coming out with a new Mr. Coffee machine for example.
Both the product and the market are heavily regulated not to mention the high stakes due to the huge dollars involved. And believe it or not, there are individuals that would do anything to sabotage a company and the technology that threatens their livelihood.
An inventor of advanced technology can not reveal any information until all aspects are protected.
Imperial Whazoo,
It is abundantly clear you have meticulously analyzed all available data to arrive at your conclusions.
Well done and kudos to you.
"Limited" meaning the owners of the company can not be personally sued.
But the company and it's assets can be taken down.
However A LLC does not indemnify the owners from federal prosecution.
Oh. Ok then martingale.
And what did they call OJ in his civil trial? I could be wrong but I thought he was found guilty.
If what you say is true, I suppose he was liable too, but what difference does it make anyway? He is still guilty.
stoxx.
Who bought those shares and locked them up in escrow and why?
What percent of the O/S do the locked up shares represent?
I think those are both good signs. Thanks for pointing them out.
catani.
You overlooked two very important items in your presentation.
1). The escrow shares are locked up until Spring 2010.
2) The use of the word "AND" As quoted..."and for profit."
catani.
How do you get ..."10 billion diluted shares in both scams. Unbelievable!"?
Unless of course you mean what's unbelievable is the fact that something like 50% of the O/S is held in escrow to secure a Debenture and using the same source you highlighted, it says the float is only 850m.
Like you say, unbelievable! I'm glad you pointed that out.
catani. Allow me to help you out here.
1). The IB designation is not necessary because 141 will not be doing any "off site" selling. Nothing wrong with that since customers come to them.
2). Letting customers trade for themselves limits liability to 141. Sounds like a wise move.
3). They will be trading for their own profit. Profit...isn't that the idea?
.......So what is your point?
Wow! DD instead of
BS. Very nice.
Although outdated, it works for me.
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/quickchart.asp?symb=XXIS&sid=0&o_symb=XXIS&x=56&y=16
martingale,
When is the last time you spoke with Groves?
rockmek, " the only ones who speak highly of Spooz and its products are those that post on this board."
How do you know this? Do you personally know the principals of prop houses and major brokerages?
Gbathat,
My point exactly regarding tech support at Omniquant. Their main support is out of India and woefully inadequate. I have heard they are struggling financially as a result.
Spooz is head and shoulders above Omiquant. And just because Spooz is mum does not mean they are floundering. Just the opposite, they are trying to stay under the radar for specific reasons. With the technology they have Spooz does not have to get up on a soap box and pound their chest about anything. They have the attention of the powers that be in this industry.
And you are right about certain types playing the game and posting whatever they feel will benefit their own personal trading style. At any moment in time, regardless of the real facts, they post what they think will benefit them personally.
THSeeker, I would say that is reasonable.
Alliecorp, I guess all one has to do is look around a little to see the steps taken in completing 141's base of operation.
Any bets all the pieces come together fairly soon?
Maybe it sat because it is a new penny and hadn't started operations yet?
It was pointed out to me by another poster that along with the name change request, Erroll has a request in for a new cusip number.
With what I have learned about the company and it's objective, I'm willing to take my chances. My confidence is bolstered by their accomplishments such as NFA and CTA approval. And now I see that a third party is holding 1/3 of the shares in escrow to secure a denture for someone. hmmmm.
Perhaps once they open the doors with trade results published on their new web site things will be different? Then the only fight may be getting enough shares?
I dunno, just my guess.
.
oh...I see. I'll pass on the deep DD if you don't mind.
That's like saying every poster who's name starts with an M is 5'2" tall.
mannmann, and you know this because?
Martingale. So you have no particular facts to support you insinuation other then there was a conrtact? That sounds more dubious to me than the fact there was a contract. hmmmm.
Do you know where Omiquant's customer service/tech support office is physically located? And can you tell me anything about the quality of their tech support office?
TIA
martingale, Please elaborate on why you would insinuate Spooz was guilty of anything by your statement below?
..."Be thankful that there is no Omniquant lawsuit at this time.
I had some concerns that Spooz would be named as a defendant but apparently it was settled and agreement nullified."
Why should I be "thankful"? I'm sure being "almost a lawyer" you must have good cause backed up by facts to support your assertion.
TIA
That's right milo3.
It is simply small print/disclaimer etc. because the company (141) does not own the shares. The owner of the shares is at liberty to do as they please with he shares and is not required to inform 141 of the disposition of those shares as long as they hold them to term.
Seems simple enough to me. Why is it so many here try so hard to cast perfunctory information such as these disclaimers in a negative light?
bucksmypup, Read this, It will shed some light on your inability to comprehend the situation. Better yet, call the company and ask one of the employees why under the circumstances they stay and work for Paul. Just don't tell them who you are or they will probably just hang up on you.
Posted earlier today:
....The fact that employees are willing to defer their pay so that the company can get off the starting block says volumes about how strongly the employees feel about the chances of success for their company. Think about it for a minute. How could employees be so supportive of their company as to defer their pay if the company had nothing to show?
To me it is an excellent indicator and a very strong testament of how much the employees believe in their company. They are the ones that really should know am I not right? Would you defer your pay so that your company can continue and get off the ground. I doubt it. It is proof positive and a huge statement of commitment of an emerging company with disruptive products and dedicated employees to boot. Watch out above!
Your believing Groves when he lied about the winning trades shows how little you know about Groves. And yet you defend him? It has been pointed out several times here that Groves is a liar. Why would he steal software and risk jail time if the product didn't work? if you think about that too even for even a minute or two your logic here just does not make sense either. It further proves that everything Groves says is a smoke screen. Admit it, you fell for his story then you come to this board and chastise others for knowing better? Not very sound reasoning I would say.
Yeah, I wouldn't worry about it Black Dog.
Too many uninformed nervous nellies that are unable to make the call are sitting on the side lines. The ones that know have already bought.
hardasset, Always looking at a 1/2 empty glass can be very misleading.
Instead of thinking in terms of dollars with regard to the escrowed shares and the significance of same. Think in terms of percentages.
In other words with regard to the secured Debenture, what percent of the O/S do the escrowed shares represent?
Just for the sake of the example using rough lumbar here, It looks to me like around 30% of the O/S is held in escrow to secure the debenture. I would say that is quite a significant percentage wouldn't you? And do you even know why there is a secured debenture in the first place? and in the second place, have you ever seen a pinkie with a secured debenture much less a CTA and NFA pinkie?
The glass suddenly looks a lot more then 1/2 full to me.
jcrom56
The fact that employees are willing to defer their pay so that the company can get off the starting block says volumes about how strongly the employees feel about the chances of success for their company. Think about it for a minute. How could employees be so supportive of their company as to defer their pay if the company had nothing to show?
To me it is an excellent indicator and a very strong testament of how much the employees believe in their company. They are the ones that really should know am I not right? Would you defer your pay so that your company can continue and get off the ground. I doubt it. It is proof positive and a huge statement of commitment of an emerging company with disruptive products and dedicated employees to boot. Watch out above!
Your believing Groves when he lied about the winning trades shows how little you know about Groves. And yet you defend him? It has been pointed out several times here that Groves is a liar. Why would he steal software and risk jail time if the product didn't work? if you think about that too even for even a minute or two your logic here just does not make sense either. It further proves that everything Groves says is a smoke screen. Admit it, you fell for his story then you come to this board and chastise others for knowing better? Not very sound reasoning I would say.
clobal, is that all you have to hang your hat on?
What difference does it make if Pink Sheets was a couple business hours after the 29th? 141 posted the fins as they said they would. I simply don't see any merit in your post and yet you keep reposting the same non-event over and over like it is some kind of crime. What is your point? How do you know it wasn't pink sheets that delayed 141's release?
..."I can't try to second guess any of that"
Convenient, you seem to be able to second guess everything else. How is it that the abundance of shares headed into escrow have no significance to you? Does not fit your scenario?
hardasset,
I know the mechanics of the secured Debenture. Did you overlook that in your zeal?
Thanks hardasset.
As I figured. You do not know.
hardasset, grab my belt loop and see if you can follow:
posted by hardasset. The financier has shares to dump. This will kill all buying interest. R/S inevitable IMO.
Posted by: GeorgiePorgie Date: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 12:39:05 PM
In reply to: hardasset who wrote msg# 7145 Post # of 7153
Which financier and which and how many shares?
504's 0r 506's and how do you know?
Just curious.
Posted by: hardasset Date: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 12:43:41 PM
In reply to: GeorgiePorgie who wrote msg# 7146 Post # of 7153
These are paper filings and must be requested from the SEC. The identity and share amount (and what was paid) is public information. Anyone who has done their DD, or knows how will have already done this.
Talk to me about the specifics of these paper filings is my question. 504's 0r 506's and how do you know? You implied you have done your DD and know about these filings. That's all.
TIA
So hardasset you are saying you don't know?
Which financier and which and how many shares?
504's 0r 506's and how do you know?
Just curious.
They may think they can buy lower if they wait.
Take a survey and see where people have orders in.
Me, I don't think that small especially with the potential I see here.
tadhg, keep in mind flippers and day traders dumping.
Those guys will take losses if things don't pan out fast enough.
JMO
Posted by: GeorgiePorgie Date: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 7:05:12 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 7121
First things first. Starting with the Financial statement is out of the way.
Then starting from the top of the statement, the O/S is not too crazy at 2,059,086,125 with a manageable float of 854,443,940. Next, the report shows *143 shareholders which gives an average of less than 6 million shares each and the float is held. Over a billion shares are held to secure debentures that are locked up until at least 04/2010
IMO, not too shabby.
Now a little good news in terms of trading progress and we will see some action here.
*note, the 143 shareholder count is from 06/30 and may be higher by now.
Never mind the spilled milk.
Watch for fins and a gradual up tick until news then she hustles.
IMO.
..." not sure why we are at these prices."
Could it have anything to do with the MM artificially holding the price down while they accumulate the rest of the shares for escrow?
Just speculation. But if an MM or whoever is accumulating, wouldn't it be a good idea to do the same?
{ok naysayers, that was your cue)