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.
The man is gone. Why not let him rest in whatever he deserves and finally get your head out of his butt?
Threeflight,
You're right about Bob.
Bob was a good friend of ours for 20+ years. We broke bread with him, he attended our wedding, we attended his, and the list goes on.
I can personally attest after a long period of close and personal observation, Bob was genuinely a good person.
I didn't say he was murdered at the hands of another person. You said that, not me.
I will reaffirm my opinion about him being a good person. Bob was selling a penny stock and had sincere intentions to grow the company. Absent any showing of fraud by Bob, a penny stock investor has to take responsibility for their losses resulting from a high-risk investment.
Don't let your losses resulting from this stock blind you from your acknowledging your own responsibility.
As I said before, Bob is guilty of trusting the wrong people to do business with. Maybe this makes him negligent, maybe this makes him naive, but it doesn't make him the person you describe him to be.
Bob was genuinely a good person.
Unfortunately, I think he paid the price with his life for unwittingly getting involved with the wrong business associates, and somebody wanted their pound of flesh.
Perhaps a background check on some of these scoundrels would have been prudent for a venture of this magnitude.
RIP, Bob. You were a true philanthropist and capitalist.
Hmmm... so it is true.
Interesting how Russell Armstrong, who owned 60% of MMR, also died unexpectedly (suicide), and then Armstrong's business associate (Alan Schram) suicides himself the day after Armstrong.
And now Bob dies "unexpectedly." I see a pattern.
I wonder what the cause of death was? Dare I speculate?
I heard a rumor that Bob passed away. Could be a hoax that was sparked from all the selling yesterday. You never know these days with all the fake news going around. I guess time will tell if this is true or not.
I already know the news. Heard it earlier today. Thats why I was asking if he knew something.
What do you mean? Sarcasm?
Or do you know something?
Hmm...are you suggesting that BL goes to the local prison and uses the Eenie Meenie Miney Moe method to select his business associates?
WTH are you talking about? Why would a RS cause the shares to trade at sub pennies? Because of the flight of shareholders?
Go trolls!!
Youre talking about constructive notice with regard to putting the alleged infringer on notice for possible patent infringement; Im talking about a constructive "waiver" or, more commonly referred to as, "waiver," which relates to the failure to enforce/assert a right and the loss of that right, therefor. It's like the "use it or lose it" concept. These are two completely different legal concepts.
Lol! Are you talking about MMRF constructively waiving its right to enforce those rights asserted in the letters because MRF slept on those rights? In the real legal world, waivers arent granted to defendents that easily. Waivers are very fact sensitive and highly discretionary on the judge's part because waivers are an exception to the rule. Plus, I'm sure all those letters contain the typical boilerplate trailer that reserves all right rights, etc.
You are correct, Lickity. I've known Bob personally for 20 years and he never loses. Never.
I agree.
Right. It says in event of a BK, the agmt shall terminate. The BK is a condition subsequent, which means all obligations which have matured (or not yet matured) under the agmt continue until such event as the BK. But just because the legal obligation to continue to do business under the agmt has terminated/ended by operation of cond subsequent, that doesn't mean that non performance by a party (while the agmt was in effect) is excused. That's just plain silly. MMR would still be entitle to damages for the non performance during the active term of the agmt, unless MMR itself was in breach. To structure an agmt otherwise is just plain nonsense and is unprecedented.
Yes, indeed, EZ
Another article about how the big companies are joining to fight patent trolls. Seems like a double standard being exercised here. These companies fought hard to enforce their own patents, which helped them become who they are today...but now that theyre on top and have become targets for having such status, they want to scare everyone with the "patent troll" monster so that they can maintain their status at the top. They need to quit whining and stop trying to hide under Congress' skirt like a scared little tattler.
http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=OBR&date=20130730&id=16757017
Or maybe some insider information is circulating...
Yes, indeed, Mark...panicking they are. So sad to see them sell now after they have held for so long and we're on the brink of something big. I expect a buy-out within the next 12 months and likely sooner.
I added lots. Thanks for giving me a good price!
How do you know this is soley a PR? This info is public record and gets reported about regularly when big names like Walgreens is joined or amended in a lawsuit. Cant stop the public from reporting public info to the public.
Wth? Did you just call MMRF a scam? That's a very bold statement. MMRF is far from a scam.
Yes, indeed, Bourne..MMR's patent is superior to all those other patents that were sloppily listed.
Well..I doubt there will be many here that can confirm this new information because this would be deemed insider info. Tipper and tippee liability has just become a reality for all of us who have read that post. Uh, oh.
Same here, Bernie. Keep accumulating.
Lol! Investors getting out? The share price is holding and showing strong support. Which stock are you watching? Try this ticker symbol: MMRF
Hmm...resulting in a share price collapse in one day? Define "collapse" and then let me know duration of time between the $36 and $2 decline.
What was the outcome of the class action suits? Was there a trial and a verdict of guilty on the facts? Was there a settlement? I can sue Coca Cola right now, but that doesn't make my complaint factual. You've done well at mining for this data thus far; now pick-up your shovel and give us the rest of the picture.
How many shares and how soon prior to the restructuring were the shares sold? This is a relative issue, because even if the shares where sold 12 months prior, any paranoid person would suggest that the CEO was dumping for that purpose.
Oh, no..a new company, who's assets are mainly in intellectual property, ran in the red for 5 years..that's highly unusual and a major red flag. I think not.
Declining revenues? See supra.
Misleading headlines? I've never been mislead; I'm sorry if you've been unrealistically zealous about the updates coming from the company.
I'm gonna stop here because I just realized you answered your own question: "Typical penny stock." So I don't see those as blaring red flags...simply those things any investor can expect of a typical penny stock; but not all penny stocks are guilty of CEO SEC violations; in fact, only a very small minority are guilty of such, so let's not generalize when not applicable.
"I agree. No need to worry too much about such a remote possibility of wrongdoing when there are clearly defined red flags staring us in the face - like the ceo's former company being forced to restate its earnings several times resulting in a share price collapse from $36 to $2, class action lawsuits for insiders including lorsch selling millions of shares prior to news of the earnings restatements, filing of bankruptcy, plus the 5 year history of mmr that shows huge ongoing losses, declining revenues, misleading p/r headlines, big spending and compensation packages all funded by ongoing dilution of shareholder value. All in all, your typical penny stock."
True, I don't think we should be naive, but we also shouldn't allow the fear of a remote possibility that the CEO might be doing something--which has consequences which serve as a very effective deterrent to 99.99% of CEOs--that is prohibited and therefore conclude that the investment is tainted and destined for collapse. If so, then we can make this assumption about all companies, avoid the investment in all companies and our presence on this board would be moot.
Your assumptions are extreme and create a slippery slope. You're assuming facts not in evidence. Why don't we just assume that the NYSE is one big conspiracy, that the earth will collide with the moon, and that the easter bunny is actually running MMRF from planet Jupiter. Let's try keep our discussions within the realm of reality without assuming that CEOs are behaving illegally.
I agree, Blackjack.
Yes, I'm seeing a trend. If these options were authorized but not issued, then they contribute to the dilution of outstanding shares; however, the float remains the same, so, overall, I see these insider purchases (or aquisition of shares) as a good thing. Hang on tight and get ready for another ride...
Indeed, Mick..not related to MMRF.
One meeellion dollars... ::pinky to mouth like Austin Powers::
This "thing" did not get "closed out." This thing was essentially an agreement to agree or, in other words, an extension offered by one party to another because the rules of court were not flexible enough to allow for a further extension; plus, this extension was not just a typical extension, but was more of a "suspension" of litigation in good faith by both parties, so that they can continue their negotiations in working-out a settlement without using the hired guns. If WBMD is acting in bad faith, then that's another issue; but I doubt their attorneys would be advising them to act in bad faith, as they have a professional responsibility to uphold; and I'm sure MMRF's attorneys are experienced enough to smell a ploy when it's in front of them. So take a deep breath and think of a happy place.
The market was up today in general. WBMD trades on the Nasdaq which was up 1.3% It closed up with an effective 2.7% if you count the trailing trades in afterhours. That's still very high for a company with .83 beta, though. It did half of its average volume, though, so it doesn't appear that the news created a frenzy, which suggests that the news was probably not a factor.
"Has anyone noticed the rise WebMD "WBMD" stock has risen since the announcement of the MMRF PR?"
Ummm...false. If a complaint was filed, then the defendant can show up in court and challenge the complaint on its merits. By showing up in court, the defendant effectively waives its right to service of process and the service becomes moot.
I see. So if these patents are so blatantly invalid according to your "public domain" argument, then why doesnt WebMD just show up to court, waive its right to challenge service of process, tell the court that the patent was public domain, obtain a dismissal on the merits and be done with it. The same goes for Walgreens. Oh, and why havent these patents been officially challenged at the patent office?
Seems to me that patents and copyrights are not protected until put in physical form. If MMRF were suing the Feds, then the Feds would have an argument under the "prior art" defense; but MMRF isn't challenging the Fed, theyre challenging the WebMD, etc. How does this apply to WebMD? Were they using the MMRF patented technology before MMR applied for a patent?
Yup. There are also no pending challenges to the MMRF patents, currently, so all that talk about the patents being under review at the Patent office is unfounded.