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.
Again...Wrong. No, we were under the impression we could get whatever rights we needed. Water related. We were not under the impression there would be any hold up on the water just that we had to fill out the appropriate forms, pay fees etc. which would take a little time. And, that we were buying undeveloped land in the proper zoning that could get water rights thereby reducing the astronomical monetary expenditure which we did not possess to buy hundreds of acre feet of water at 30k an acre foot. Why is this so hard for you to understand?
That is not what I said. We were not aware of the depth of the issue. And?...I said that had we had millions of dollars to spend at the time we could have bought land that already had all the water rights worked out upon the land, but that doesn't mean that there would not have been other problems. We can still work out these issues it just takes time. And yes we were lead to believe from multiple sources that it was going to be nothing like what it became ie we were not aware of much of what we later found out. But also keep in mind, all the laws for growing in Colorado and any other state are fluid and things are always changing including the politics of any given county even if they approve things at some point. There are water politics regarding who get the water and for what and that can change as well. We did as much due diligence as we could at the time with the time we had, and none of the things we encountered were popping up then. Timing on this land was critical because the land owners were not aware of the movement for cannabis in the county which allowed us to pick up the land cheap. Meaning we could resell it today for a good profit as is. As we peeled back the onion on the water issues, one snake after another came crawling forth. Sometimes that is just the way it is. Sure, hind sight being 20/20 I might have teed up a different deal but this can still be salvaged and we can still make something work in Colorado on our property. Just going to take a little time. This does not make me a liar. But it might make you one.
No of course not! It is for listening to you and Ben...
Wrong...And I know I put out data regarding this. Because everyone got mad that we could not do an S1 immediately registering the shares as I had intended to do. I had to eat my word which I explained and was not happy about having to do. It became my mistake which I took ownership of. It was not a lie nor intended to ever be one. I'm sure you remember me posting on ihub about this. As Finckus seems to understand. But why do you continue to bring it up as though I haven't talked on this issue ad infinitum? It should also be pointed out at this time that it wasn't perfectly clear how all this dividend stuff was going to go down as even the brokers and clearing houses were not sure what was going to happen. It was not familiar ground at the time for FWDG and we were trying to explain what we believed was going to happen in the process. There was a bit of learning process in play for the distribution of the dividend shares of which we understand a lot more today about. For example, if FWDG ever does another dividend to its shareholders they will know to suggest everyone buy 3 days prior to the record date just to make sure there are no settlement issues with the brokers that have to be dealt with. It caused a lot of confusion. Stop demonizing the company and specifically me for having to make a change in plans due to necessary company survival. Or just keep it up:)
That is public record.
lol
Ok I won't.
Finckus,
I understand why people are upset. But, the facts are the facts. When confronted with a brick wall you can either go over or under I suppose, but you can't generally go through it. To be technical as you are suggesting we be, I don't recall a press release stating that shares would be released with no burden to the shareholder as you say, I don't specifically remember that language...And FWDG issued restricted shares. You say, but I did not know they were going to be. Well neither did I. Still, they happen to be. And when I found out why it was this way it made sense to me which I tried to explain to the shareholders. But this angers some. Ok. I acknowledge that some are angry, and in most cases about most things this is always true, but the company had no liquidity and trigger happy shareholders were, as you no doubt must know, wanting to dump their shares. But it is their right you say...This would have been counter intuitive for the success of the new company. In order to give the new company a fighting chance to do what it needs to do to create a viable business where shareholders can actually make money it was necessary. But, I get it, some of you don't care about that, you just want the value of the dividend shares today. But it is part of my job, however, to care. Now I'm doing what I can to get this first S1 approved so we can do one that will free up the shares. But, it is still more important for the company to thrive and gain ground fiscally than it is to free up the restricted shares in any case. It just is. If we can get the stock to truly be worth something then the people who got "stuck" with the shares may one day be glad they could not sell them early. And this is what we are trying to do. I hear the criticism now hear the rationale. And, finally, if people really really really need them freed up they have rule 144 to rely upon. And people are doing it. Kind Regards,
Cameron
I'm glad you are glad, but no I will not be a liason for FWDG. What I did say was that I would pass along general discontent about the dividend shares of FUTL. If they are going such a problem then one solution would be to avoid them in the future and perhaps for FWDG completely. This seems to be the position of many. If you don't like that solution, then others have been provided. I keep answering the same questions 1971, and you keep asking them again and again. I know I have answered the Colorado question recently. Please find it.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. But obviously you could trade them rule 144 or you can wait until we will free them up in a future S1 and trade them then or you could invest in FUTL right now. I'm not sure why this should make you feel that you have been taken. But if you do, you do, and there is precious little I can do about that right now. Perhaps it is best for FWDG to just not give additional dividends as people are generally unhappy with them. I can relay this message to FWDG so that they can stop getting people's expectations out of wack or at least better explain what they intend to do and what that will ultimately look like via restricted shares if they do give them out. In this way we can cut down on all the residual angst everyone has been expressing.
Kind Regards,
Cameron
Which is? What is my REAL trade, Ben?
No there is no date yet. We just filed an S1...once that is approved we will look at a second one and that will take time as well. So I have no date.
What is your legitimate question?
At this time yes.
Yeah...you are so clever.
Sorry, need to give respect to get it. Talk to the air.
Ben,
It is YOUR choice to show up here everyday...I'm so glad you do.
And I have been saying for a while that we will file the first S1 to raise capital for the company and then do a second one and since I do not know how long this will take I said "some time from now". You can get an opinion letter from an attorney for $250, which I have provided for many parties, and there may be costs with the brokerage house you are working with, you will need to check individually. If the cost is prohibitive then you will need to wait. So, let's say costs are $500 as a hypothetical, then if you have a small amount of shares at today's price then it would not make sense to do it. If you are worried about $500 dollars that you are not going to be able to get right now then all I can do is say it is what it is. Being mad about that $500 dollars is something you can focus on or you can broaden your horizons and identify more positive efforts for making money. Again, that is your choice. Perpetually harping about something that isn't going to change in a day isn't going to help your state of being. Just my opinion.
I disagree. You can free up your shares as some are doing via rule 144. But if you choose not to do that that is your choice. If you do not want to invest in FUTL proper than that is also your choice. If you want to vent about losses taken in FWDG I suppose that is your choice as well and you have come to the right place where this is both inflamed and encouraged here, but it seems to me that FWDG site might be better for that. Just my opinion as they are not the same company no matter what is being suggested. Look for good things in FUTL to come but don't complain to me when you miss the run. I am telling you that this company has a future if you choose not to believe me that is your choice. If you want to wait for the dividend shares to become unrestricted when the company is able to file an S1 to that effect, which as you know will be some time from now,(after the one we are getting ready to file for example) then that is also your choice.
You invested 45,000.00 in FutureLand Corp.? Or did you mean FutureWorld Corp.? They are different. I understand 45,000.00 in FWDG means you are sitting on mighty losses until it turns around, assuming it will. But with FUTL you shouldn't be sitting on major losses at this time. Major buying hasn't occurred except around the current prices and a little bit above.
Of course. Thank you.
I think it is exciting. 1000 pod contract. Each grow pod can produce upwards of 48 plants per. And we participate in revenues on the back end. Yeah going to be quite a lucrative deal.
Cameron Cox
PJ123
The reason I could sign off on that was because it was an extension for FutureLand Corp. (FUTL) not FutureWorld Corp. (FWDG). The unfortunate thing is that because there are biased comments being places regularly here, people are subject to jump to any conclusion as long as it is a bad one. I, of course, disagree with this perspective and still believe people should be very pro not con FUTL. Thanks.
Cameron Cox
I fail to see what your point was or how I proved it. If I had spent money on advertising for that site you would have said oh why did you waste our shareholder money on that! Please.
JMO...because we did not pay to advertise at this venue? We have been at the venue the last couple years as I'm sure you are unaware...Cannabis Watcher was there 2 years ago with me and HempTech had a booth there last year with CBScientific. FUTL and FWDG were represented there as well. So, tell me your point again?
I have answered the S1 Futl divis question many times before now...like kids in the back seat...are we there yet? Tell me what I have said about this since you clearly know, then you will have your answer. I can't waste time repeating myself weekly.
Forward split soon...don't have an exact date for you.
CB is not my concern.
Hemptech is also not my concern as it pertains to their contracts for grow droids...when I have something to tell you about what we may be doing together and it warrants you getting pertinent information I will disseminate it.
We have internal help with matters of operations as it pertains to things like social media posting and many other things we do here...what difference does it make who it is? I am not going to tell you things like that...Sometimes people make mistakes and we correct them. That is all I will say on that. If I post something I will take responsibility for it. If I don't and I need to clarify something that was posted, I will do that.
Anything positive? Yes, and I will let you know when I am ready to do so.
That is FutureWorld, but no that has not been done as clearly you must know because people would have received them.
No it has not been filed.
No it has not been finalized.
1971 I did not know that who posted material on Facebook was not something you could see, I can see it I figured you could as well. I do not purport to be an expert at it. In fact, once I got into such a terrible rangle on the site because what I was responding to someone was being communicated to the entire world and I thought it was private:) It was a mess. People were asking why I was including them in the conversation:) I'm able at computers but not very tech savy so for that I apologize. So, when I am approached from people saying YOU posted it and I did not, I get a little defensive. But as it pertains to what was expected I will comment on it when I can. Good or bad. Who is the Colorado Flower Company? I think much of this information is out there over the last year. Colorado Flower Company is a Colorado Company. Headed by an attorney in Colorado and some of his affiliates. When we get things worked out they are interested in growing cannabis on our land and leasing from us. That is it.
In the version of the page I see...it states who posted whatever was posted. Perhaps you have another version. Look next time and see if it says who posted. If you see my name then you will know I posted it. If not you will see who did. We do have more people working in the company than just me. I can't do everything surely that makes some measure of sense.
Dad,
This is getting a little ridiculous. Did I post something on the Facebook page or did I not? Do I run the company or do I not? This is not a game of semantics. I am not the Lord over Facebook posting...it is not my primary and only land piece that I guard so ferociously that others in the company cannot try to keep up with the pulse of what is going on. This is not a perfect science keeping the "public" up to date on what is happening...social media has its draw backs for sure but to suggest since something was posted and I did not post it means I do not run the company...I'm confused at the pettiness of this. No I did not post that and yes I run the company. If this is going to be the nature of my involvement here then I will opt to stay away. If, however, it is going to be something different then I will continue to be available. The point with whether or not I have drones and I say I run FutureLand suggesting that I'm not in the drone business as suggestive of some point you are making that is not related...again, this kind of stuff we don't need to do. I personally think it is all this "kind" of stuff that taints what anyone on ihub is trying to get across that might be positive. I hope this is not lost on you. Sometimes I think you are the reasonable one on this board...sometimes I wonder if your aren't getting caught up in it. The truth is that on this site the inmates have taken over the asylum and maybe I'm now the idiot for talking to them. If that is true then I accept it, but thankfully I also have a tolerance level and my pain threshold is only so deep.
Actually, I did not post that...if you will check you will see. But I know what it is referencing and it was anticipatory based upon what that person was seeing at the time that they believed was about to happen. As soon as I have something to say on that matter I will say it. My personal feeling is that that opinion was let loose a little too soon. Thanks.
Geraldo! I had no idea!
Then you will be bitterly disappointed...
Nothing has changed since last update. INCC and Colorado Flower Company would both be willing to proceed to the best of my knowledge if we could get the water rights established and move forward. But this is not the easiest process so as we work through it we have decided to pursue other deals in the short term as this may still take a bit of time to accomplish. How much time? We aren't completely certain. Many are moving away from Colorado for these kinds of reasons. But we have also discussed leasing some of the land to HempTech for some grow pods that they will be doing and that is still in the discussion phase at this point.
Yeah Dad, respectfully, I've tried to get them to alter their view points and wasted too much time trying to "work" with them after wasting the time of writing and responding in the first place...so basically I'm done attempting recourse with ihub.
HempTech will be announcing that news and I'd imagine they will do it next week. I will not steal their thunder.
Or I could stay here, Ben. Where everything I say is deleted or screened or where I can't actually respond in kind...right?
Thought you left? That was what you told everyone before the new year...