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.
Re no Twitter updates - I noticed that; but also noticed that the Kalaka Mexican Kitchen website (and the short-lived El Cazo Mexican Kitchen website) never linked to Twitter, but only to Facebook (and to Meta-owned Instagram).
Maybe not using Twitter had something to do with Musk's plan to start charging companies to advertise; or maybe it was just a decision by Nixon to simplify his social media advertising strategy, perhaps because Facebook 'ads' hold some advantage over Twitter 'ads'. (Facebook pix also show up on Instagram feeds, but I don't know if that is automatic or requires human action.)
Illegal Burger Facebook update (12/12):
https://www.facebook.com/illegalburgerco/ (45 mins ago; Ancho Cilantro Chicken Salad)
Will keep on the lookout for a Kalaka Mexican Kitchen update.
There was actually a Weird New Jersey Facebook article thread about it:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/weirdnewjersey/posts/999269584481612/?paipv=0&eav=AfYIO1tG34yqS74HF2dt_DINo57_OkaufFOgk81fMAQOJwRFruQV7duW5Qu4R3ZDtY4&_rdr
Somebody actually asked: "Am I missing something??"
In other news, there's a Weird New Jersey Facebook page.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/weirdnewjersey/
Rumor has it that the little red suitcase pushed it.
For Joe Botts - the Chair is Down:
https://www.nj.com/cape-may-county/2023/09/how-a-mysterious-chair-perched-on-a-nj-rooftop-became-a-social-media-sensation.html
Its defiance of gravity permit has been revoked.
[Admittedly people new to this forum won't get the joke. People who've been around for a while might not get it either. Truly a piece fit for 'Weird New Jersey'].
Given what the rules are for who can offer quotes and bids, that seems highly likely to be true.
Otherwise Schwab and Interactive Brokers are inadvertently advertising that their I.T. departments aren't very good at fixing reporting "glitches."
Yeah, they are great pictures, aren't they?
But that's another thing that kills me about them.
Nixon has obviously hired one or two decent marketing-types to stage and take those photos to make their food look very appealing. But they are limited to Facebook in onesies and twosies (even though he's now posting updates every few days), or posted out of how-to-order context on Instagram.
How he displays those picture on his websites is very inconsistent.
He has more pictures of menu items on the Illegal Burger 'menu' pages, but he doesn't have pictures for everything, and for those he does, his layout is poor.
His Kalaka website doesn't really make much effort at all to connect pictures to orderable items.
It's all so-near-and-yet-so-far.
--
And speaking of near and yet so far:
The Illegal Burger website main page has a click-button for 'Start a Franchise.' It's off to the side and on the bottom (right) on the webpage that displays on a desk-top browser. That's OK, I suppose.
But it's a real hoot that on the phone-version of the website, "ORDER ONLINE" is at the bottom of the limited screen real-estate, but immediately under that is a button for 'FRANCHING INFO."
Just exactly how many 'homies' that want to score some tasty illegal chow on their phone decide, 'Hey, while I'm at it, why not start a franchise?' Or accidentally order a franchise instead of that tasty chow?
Ha - "off-share" was supposed to be "off-shore." Guess which word I type more often these days?
I could, however, sure use a return trip to the shore; the Jersey shore, of course.
The 'helpful' thing about the Expert Market is that it is basically a dead-end for retail traders. For retail traders (in the US; probably elsewhere if that 'hole' in the rules was closed), it pretty much only allows liquidation trades. The Expert Market is the nanny blanket that protects retail traders.
However, the 'experts' and other professional institutional buyers are supposedly allowed to bear the risk and trade among themselves.
According to one of Brenda Hamilton's blog posts (or it was an SEC comment letter), there was a 'hole' in the SEC rules that allowed retail traders using foreign brokerage firms (off-share and Canada) to trade Expert Market stocks. I think that hole has now been closed.
Expert Market market-maker rules (thanks to a PM):
https://blog.otcmarkets.com/2021/03/25/understanding-the-expert-market/
This blog was published March 25, 2021.
This blog post also discusses the Grey Market.
Well well, 2 more Facebook updates (12/10):
https://www.facebook.com/illegalburgerco/ (2hrs ago - ad for Milkshake & Truffled Potatoes!)
https://www.facebook.com/KalakaMexicanKitchen/ (5 hrs ago - weekend brunch)
Not only is this a Sunday update (although it makes sense for the Sunday brunch), but it a day-after-the-previous updates.
To correct a mistake of mine:
Thanks much. What I post is as much for myself as for all of us.
Joe Botts is, of course, right that this is revoked. But the obvious question is whether it will stay that way.
Although Nixon isn't releasing PRs, there are 'bread crumbs' that a bit of serendipity helps us find.
This company certainly doesn't seem to be behaving like one that is typical of a revoked stock, but each one has to interpret what there is to see individually.
(Collective analysis does, however, sometimes lead to some interesting things that we don't see individually.)
The following link is to a PDF file:
https://members.catylist.com/api/images/data/og/media/user_uploads/6532d7a524e3bd0001a2c60e_1530_16th_st_flyer.pdf
This is a 'flyer' for commercial space to lease by "The Zall Company".
It looks like they are not only advertising available space, but are touting 'success stories' for lease sales they have brokered.
Under the main heading:
DOWNTOWN DENVER 2023 LEASE ACTIVITY
and subheading:
NEW RETAIL/RESTAURANT OPENINGS - 2023
they list:
Tazika Taco & Tequila Bar 1519 Wynkoop
There's no date on this flyer, so we can't tell if the lease for Takiza Taco is currently considered a success (i.e., it will open this year even though it's now December), or whether this was published much earlier this year when it looked like Takiza Taco would open (which it still hasn't).
Just scraping for scraps here.
2 new Facebook updates today (12/9):
https://www.facebook.com/illegalburgerco/ (1hr ago - The Criminal gourmet hotdog [ironic name for sure])
https://www.facebook.com/KalakaMexicanKitchen/ (51 mins ago - Spicy Watermelon Margarita)
Now, if only PRs and public corporate filings would come out with even half the frequency of these fine Facebook updates.
BTW 2 new Facebook updates today (12/8):
https://www.facebook.com/illegalburgerco/ (a 'reels' post dated today; an auto-flip-through of products, to music even!)
https://www.facebook.com/KalakaMexicanKitchen/ (2 hrs ago; lunchtime offering, with a promise of lunching getting "a whole lot better")
... and they thought nobody would notice or think otherwise! Schwab must think retail traders are just a bunch of shlubs.
I posted it to decrease my remaining post count for the day. 😏
What do you think about it? Do you think it proves anything?
Slight correction, FINRA smackdown reported here:
https://www.silverlaw.com/blog/broker-todd-lesk-of-lesk-financial-in-coral-springs-florida-barred-by-finra/
Hamilton's blog reported SEC case against him.
'Same difference.'
Linda Hamilton's blog reports new FINRA smack-down of stock fraudster:
https://www.securitieslawyer101.com/2023/raymond-pirrello-jr-founder-and-executive-of-prior2ipo-charged-in-investment-fraud/
So she's either a secret agent for FINRA working to get the goods on Nixon, or she's a white knight on Nixon's board who will prove that WCVC shareholders will not get rooked.
See definition 2:
https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=rooked
[Or there's some unimaginably Lovecraftian third option that is so unspeakable that it hasn't yet been spoken yet.]
Exactly, although funny thing, I was thinking of the British originals, Steptoe and Son, the 'rag and bone' men.
The Monty Python and the Holy Grail 'bring out your dead' scene also fits; this stock isn't ready to 'go on the cart.'
The "Offer of Acceptance" is a boiler plate phrase that means the targeted company didn't fight the delisting. No one has been able to get more info from the SEC about that offer containing other conditions.
'For shareholder protection' is also boiler plate language, as it certainly doesn't protect possible bag-holders who now can't sell their stock on the market, and can only liquidate it.
Yes, another bullseye observation about what happened, and, really, how sleazy it would be to delist and then just dissolve the shares (which is basically what shells do).
That is a great question about who sets the rules for delisted stocks.
The only thing we know is that the SEC accepted the 'offer of settlement' to delist the company, plus the SEC didn't go after the company for fraud.
Your observation about the current share structure is valid, but that share structure was 'on the record' before the company was delisted.
Liquidating shares means the current holder gives them up, and somebody else gets them. Some brokerage firms offer liquidation as a service to their customers, but what they do with them is up to them. I haven't actually read anything about what is done with them in those circumstances. From the customer's point of view the brokerage simply provides the record needed for IRS tax write-off purposes, to prove that the shareholder abandoned ownership.
What seems to be true in the case of Schwab is that a "vendor' has approached them with an offer to buy all shares that anyone wants to liquidate. That is far more eyebrow raising than just the situation of a brokerage making liquidation available as a service
As you ask, why they'd want the shares given the current share structure only raises more questions.
If Nixon had a legal obligation to offer to buy back shares from shareholders due to some planned maneuver to actually become a private company 'the right way,' he'd have to contact all of the shareholders in person (i.e. mail to all, or maybe a message through their brokers). He could not simply do the buy-back anonymously.
Part 2 of that story is that Schwab told my phone buddy that they, Schwab, don't offer liquidation services (i.e., they don't buy dead shares for their clients out of the goodness of their hearts like some brokerages do).
So, if I heard that correctly from my phone buddy, and he heard it correctly from Schwab, then the plot thickens even more, since it's now all the more obvious that someone is stepping forward like the junk man in the streets, not merely calling out for any old junks stocks, but WCVC in particular.
"Vendor" is a very generic term. A person who 'vends' stocks is a broker-dealer or market maker.
See:
https://www.femaleinvest.com/investment-dictionary/market-maker
for the comparison of "vendor" with "market maker".
I think Schwab was purposely being vague about identifying the "vendor". But the point is that the "vendor" can obviously buy your shares in your Schwab account.. That's what market makers do.
Well, sure, silence from Nixon always leaves room for doubt (but he wasn't silent about hiring Hamilton).
But now this nice vendor has stepped forward to help us all confess our sin of having hope in WCVC, with his very generous offer to help us liquidate our shares, to quit dreaming and get on with real life. (But what is he dreaming of doing with those shares?)
Within the last hour I had a phone chat with a fellow shareholder who called Schwab to get further clarification on why they are showing a bid.
The new explanation was that a vendor was 'making an offer' to shareholders to buy their shares at a liquidation price for tax write-off purposes. Allegedly the actual offer was not .0001 per share, but .0001 for the whole position (or something like that).
Regardless of the actual liquidation price, isn't it awfully nice for a vendor to suddenly step forward, after 2 years of revocation, to help shareholders out for tax write-off purposes? Isn't that swell? And here, all this while. we all thought that nobody cared.
But ... why would a vendor -- any vendor -- suddenly have an interest in helping us by buying our non-tradable shares? I mean -- and I check with Joe Botts' posts regularly to be sure -- this is still revoked, so what the heck would a vendor do with them? I mean, what can he do with them to help all mankind? Recycle the paper the stock certificates are printed on?
It is, I admit, nice -- in a feelgood sort of way -- to see that someone wants to show us (or our shares) some love for free. But in this age of justified cynicism, this sort of 'help' just seems a little too good to be true.
Dontcha think?
Old news about a closed legal case against WCVC in 2021 (I just paired down some Google-search key words):
https://trellis.law/case/8059/2021cv030450/bonneville-international-corp-v-west-coast-ventures-group-corp-inc-et-al
It looks like a media company tried to sue WCVC/Nixon/Illegal Burger for a few bucks, starting in April 2021, but the last two visible case events on Oct 4, 2021 say the case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning WCVC was off the hook and the case could not be brought up again.
I can't say this means anything other than that 2021 was an 'interesting', albeit, dark year for WCVC. Not filing kept things like this from coming to light more quickly.
2 new Facebook updates today (12/6):
https://www.facebook.com/illegalburgerco/ (4 hrs ago - advertising M-F 'happy hour' drink prices)
https://www.facebook.com/KalakaMexicanKitchen/ (7 hrs ago - advertising their catering food with a video)
Last update was 2 days ago. So far, the update rate (every 2-4 days) is pretty consistent. Not 1-4 times a month like before.
Dead bodies are treated by morticians, not expert physicians.
Brenda Hamilton is not a mortician for dead companies, nor a hired gun to kill them.
I'm a 'big picture' guy, so I'm not concerned about a day-to-day game of 'gotcha,' I don't see any point to it, or any reason to be satisfied that the prediction -- made each and every day -- 'that it won't trade tomorrow' comes true.
I do hold a few bad-buy stocks in my portfolio as cautionary tales to myself. But I don't go to any of the boards for those stocks (if they exist) to post declaratives that they are dead and will never come back to life, for those are dead companies.
West Coast Ventures Group (by any name it will use in the future) is not a dead company.
You used to ask 'what's the stock price/worth?' For whatever the reason is, my account shows a real dollar price and value.
The way I understood the Expert Market rules in the US was that retail buyers could not buy or sell (with the exception of liquidating), but 'experts' could buy -- basically grey market trades -- just like pre-public stocks could also be traded on the grey market to institutional players who were willing to bear the risk.
However, unlike being relegated to the actual grey-market of no-ticker stocks, there was still some (obvious) validity to the stocks having a ticker symbol, although I admit that I don't quite 'get' what that was, since Expert Market stocks were not supposed to be quotable by market-makers, making them virtually identical to grey market stocks.
The price in my account's Positions table says .0001 per share, and credits my position with the corresponding dollar value.
Delisting for shareholder protection is my personal wild theory.
Nixon always had the option to simply withdraw from being under SEC/Edgar authority to file, although I assume he'd have had to then qualify for trading using the OTC alternate reporting method (filings validated with an Attorney Letter) if he wanted WCVC to keep trading.
After NRG reverse-merged into WCVC, WCVC was no longer a shell but a real operating, reporting company. Even after it stopped reporting, it was always an operating company.
WCVC was sent to the Expert Market for not filing. Expert Market stocks supposedly can still trade, but allegedly only 'experts' can trade them, bearing the risk for lack of financial disclosures.
So, it never made sense to me why WCVC was revoked for not filing, since it was in the place (Expert Market) that the SEC allowed it to be for not filing.
Between the time WCVC stopped filing and the time it was sent to the Expert Market, WCVC slightly more than doubled its O/S.
Once on the Expert Market, WCVC still traded (from Sep 2021 to Feb 2022), although there was no evidence of further O/S expansion.
I recall reading that there was a loophole in the Expert Market rules that allowed foreign/off-share traders to trade Expert Market stocks as though they were retail buys, and possibly even short them (though I'm not a huge fan of Chicken Little style 'shorty scares'). Expert Market trading volume for WCVC was not merely a few shares here and there. It was pretty noticeable (in the millions).
So I've been wondering aloud (while humming the Jethro Tull song) whether Nixon purposely got himself revoked to stop that trading.
It's all speculation.
What do you think?
A 3-yearTrademark opposition from Dec 2020 to Dec 2023 implies a pretty serious interest, riight?
No settlement details are public, but feel free to speculate.
[Also consider that Nixon/Illegal Brands IP didn't just roll over when the Trademark Opposition was filed, which often happens when a big company goes after a little one. Nixon knows he had a strong hand; but as I've said before, once news of the Bacardi buy-out of Ilegal Mezcal became public, I hope that Nixon didn't overplay his hand, UNLESS during settlement negotiations Ilegal Mezcal sort of happened to mention the buyout to provide Nixon further impetus to settle.]