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.
Undoubtedly ones have done so if they have had concerns. Thanks for the information that's publicly available for all.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Fair enough Sam.
$TTCM
PEPSI
So in other words get used to past prologue nothing burgers. Got it.
$TTCM
PEPSI
He's the CEO bro. Ones might not like it but hey.
$TTCM
PEPSI
So "crazy valuation" and Penelope and Dixon don't mix unless crazy is in the sense that the evaluation is out of this world.
Old stuff you just posted there man. Nothing new.
$TTCM
PEPSI
He was a roofer you state? If that's true then there is no shame at all in it. It's a respectable occupation.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Ok so are you saying you did that? You are the one who stated that you had a conversation with Penelope and Dixon and you are the one who stated in your post "misrepresentation of figures."
So then you will post the conversation on this board for all to see then? Will you? If not why not? Something like that all of us would take notice of if indeed they stated something shocking like that.
Penelope and Dixon are one of the premier appraisers on this planet that are bound to follow specific rules of conduct when it comes to dealing with clients. Those rules include not sharing any type of information without the owners consent.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Excellent post.
$TTCM
PEPSI
So now Holly isn't a good guy? Pray tell. When did that all happen. His resume is highly impressive by worldly standards.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Here is another good question. You mentioned sometime back a discussion you say you had with Penelope Dixon. You know where you stated
"Misrepresentation of figures."
That was in response to Huggy having asked you:
You stated:
Can you please clarify this and share the back and forth conversations you had with them regarding this.
That type of information would not be given out to people and certainly never without permission, so many of us find this quite interesting.
Thanks.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Something new? No. Nothing new.
"So what's really going on here??" What type of question is that?
2004, 2006 and 2007??? Seriously man what BS.
$TTCM
PEPSI
You received my response in regards to the boxes. Assume what you want, my observation and review of that issue is a solid argument using basic logic.
Your discussion about AITX is meaningless and the assets part man you have asked me several times Huggy with always a response as to my opinion. What more are you trying to gain regarding such a circular conversation? Do you have anything that proves otherwise? I have asked you this question and yet nothing.
The company states what it states in the 8Ks man.
Dude, this isn't the Hunt For Red October. It makes me think of a part in that movie where the Russian Ambassador is talking to his US counterpart Dr. Jeffrey Pelt. Andrei, the Russian Ambassador says (near the end of the movie) to paraphrase that they are missing another sub. The response:
$TTCM
PEPSI
So if LaMountain didn't buy those shares in the open market, where is the disclosure in the SEC form? There should be a little star on there in the ledger that says that those shares were given as part of a promotion or they were received or converted as a promisary note. It says neither because they must have been purchased on the open market.
If the company discloses that they are promoting the company or something like that, it's all about disclosure. There is nothing illegal about promoting. Need to disclose. And so what you disclose it. It doesn't change anything.
It's the same thing that goes with the SEC filings. Form 4s, Quarterlies, 8Ks. It's all about disclosure. It's not the SECs job to tell you if you are doing a good job or doing a bad job. People get in trouble for not disclosing things. Goodness, disclosures are coming out right and left on this stock.
$TTCM
PEPSI
That appears to definitely be a rhetorical question man. That's not what you previously asked so this extra step really wasn't necessary but ok.
"Shouldn’t you be asking David those questions?"
By all means man, go directly to the source! Contact the SEC and inquire as to all of these probing intriguing questions. Perhaps the announcement that LaMountain was made CEO was just a rouse. Maybe he wasn't made CEO. And just maybe Custer and his calvary will arise from the grave one day and come to the rescue. 100% Bullshit.
The address is included and everything. Wow
$TTCM
PEPSI
To the contrary. David LaMountain is the CEO of Tautachrome. So just like I asked. Where is the disclosure? Wouldn't David LaMountain being the CEO of Tautachrome have to disclose something if something were going on? If yes and there has been nothing disclosed wouldn't he be potentially in big-time trouble for that?
You reference OCMillionaire and others as if that means something? It means nothing for purposes of this discussion.
It's interesting that you say "Shouldn't you be asking David those questions?" What should those questions be since "you" is general obviously. How about this. Why don't you (since you are so concerned about this) contact David LaMountain and ask him those questions and then report back with screenshots of the conversation between you and him?
What do you think?
$TTCM
PEPSI
It can mean whatever a person wants it to mean. In other words, it can mean to some that hey the axe is going to fall. It can mean to others because so much time has gone by. Hey, there is nothing to it. So your statement regarding how long it takes to "litigate scams" reads as if there really is something there. Is that your contention? Why such a statement? Just saying it takes 4 years these days on average is just a general. So to carry that thought out a little. If there really was something going specifically relating to David LaMountain since there is a reference beginning point as shown by the link, there would be more, perhaps much more since then man! That only stands to reason.
Why the general reference to how long it takes to "litigate scams?"
You think the SEC, if they are investigating things, don't know what's going on? I certainly wouldn't think that the SEC is incompetent or that clueless? What do you base that on? Do you have specifics of what it's all about or should it be assumed? Oh, it was just a "scam" when that might be far from the truth? That certainly doesn't cut it.
IMHO
BTW: Where is the disclosure? Wouldn't a CEO have to disclose something if something were going on?
$TTCM
PEPSI
Didn't you already ask if he bought shares? Why are you asking the same question again on this discussion board man? How about this. Ask LaMountain. That would apply to anyone with such a question as that.
You also asked a question on this board if he was a consultant. To paraphrase since it's all speculation. I replied to that: "I asked you a simple question in return. Isn't a person who buys stock over 5% required to file? Are they or not?"
Just like you speculated on the consultant angle, I was pointing out that there are other possibilities. Do you have file if you buy stock over 5%? You never answered that.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Looks like nothing came of it because he is still around and is allowed to be a CEO of a publicly traded company.
Do you know of any actions ever taken against David LaMountain other than what you have shared which doesn't mean anything?
$TTCM
PEPSI
This is the damn contention not your question in return. You asked if it was regarding being a consultant. I asked you a simple question in return. Isn't a person who buys stock over 5% required to file? Are they or not?
Simple question and since you are speculating it's open for other possibilities.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Speculating? What does it have to do with anything? Nothing. Why would it have to have anything to do with consulting? How about this question. If someone buys stock over 5% they are required to file right?
Smoke signals but no fire...
IMHO
A nothing burger from years ago that has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Gotta love that.
Noted.
$TTCM
PEPSI
You send all the information I'm the world brother. The "scam" myth remains just that.
$TTCM
PEPSI
"Involved?" BS man.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Lolol. Same damn "scam" myhs Huggy.
Explain how the "assets are blatantly fudged??" as you claim.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Scam myths man.
$TTCM
PEPSI
So now Coca-Cola is a clown security? Can you explain how this is so? What in the world are you talking about?
What BS
$TTCM
PEPSI
Damn straight and spot on!
Solid post!
$TTCM
PEPSI
I have been asked similar types of questions in the past (responded) and the reply that comes to mind immediately to this post is this. You have something different that you can show that states differently?
No? If ones who are not for this stock had something different to share other than what the company states, wouldn't it be fair to assume that it would be posted all over this discussion board? But nothing? Why? Because such contrary information doesn't exist? If it does then post it. But nope nothing will most likely be posted in that regard. If so post the evidence right away and I'll have a look at it.
Does it matter to you what I believe l? I'll tell what I don't believe. I don't believe statements being made to the contrary that to date have not been supported by anything.
I don't believe in Bullshit "CONspiracy" theories to the contrary man that have no basis in fact. Show the proof.
Will be happy to take a look.
$TTCM
PEPSI
The company states differently and that's YOUR opinion. So there is that.
Prove your statement man.
$TTCM
PEPSI
So you claim. Financing is a normal component afforded to all companies in the capital markets.
It states clearly that the company intends to seek "short-term" debt financing.
"50%???" LOL. Whatever man.
BS..
$TTCM
PEPSI
A general statement. So what. No one is asking anyone to "donate" anything to "con" artists? Bullshit man.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Yes it wasn't 50% at all. That is a significant difference considering what you claimed which was not correct and according to the recent 8K financing shouldn't be any problem ahead.
Recent 8K:
$TTCM
PEPSI
100% Bullshit. Just like this statement which is NOT factual.
That was well off the mark.. 37% dude.
-------------------
From the recent 8K
$TTCM
PEPSI
Agreed. Need much more than that lol
$GVSI
PEPSI
Good morning to everyone who is in $GVSI
PEPSI
Exactly to my point. Statements being made that can't be backed up by facts to support them such as "Magic assets," "scam" and a host of other words is pure fiction.
The 8Ks are real. Anyone can read them as we all know. The company states what is contained within the 8Ks is factual.
So yes in FICTION any "scam" myth is possible. What's terribly lacking is the proof. Does it exist to show otherwise? Where is it?
Heard it here first? What Bullshit.
IMHO
$TTCM
PEPSI
So stating "Magic assets" somehow is proof of what? Nothing.
It sure as hell doesn't prove in anyway statements about it not being factual as well as other statements unproven (no basis in fact to prove the contention) on this discussion/opinion board (scam etc., etc). Far from it.
In fiction anything is possible...
Noted.
$TTCM
PEPSI
That statement proves anything? So making such a statement like that is proof of what?
Nothing.
BS bro.
"Made up?" The 8Ks claim differently. All unverified and not verifiable from your statement means is that there is no proof to the contrary.
Noted.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Of course the "no heart" and "no brain" goes along with "Magic assets." Those things that happen in The Wizard of OZ.
It's easy to make statements of fact (opinion) with nothing that backs up the claim man.
$TTCM
PEPSI
No "Magic?"
Noted.
$TTCM
PEPSI
Now The Wizard of OZ gives out "Magic assets?" I thought he gave out other goodies, like hearts and brains?
$TTCM
PEPSI