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.
I am working to remain involved with this process and do everything in my power to enable the receiver to effectively communicate to shareholders. That means more free work on the website and time spent coordinating shareholders.
Once I talk to him I will let folks know what my role will look like moving forward.
And what about the unlawful activities of the rest of the crew? Even after the judgement comes down and the court rules in favor of Dave on a number of motions, you still have the audacity to come on here and maintain that Dave is the primary issue. How about someone takes ownership for THEIR decisions.
Dave made his share of mistakes, most notably the way he communicated with almost everyone and for not being completely truthful about his posting on here. Those things are true. But at what point are you going to acknowledge the wholesale denial on the other side of the fence?
Etrade has been ok for the last couple weeks from what I've heard of other posters. I can't buy or sell anything with the information I have access to without risking being accused of insider trading. Just sitting on mine till this thing is over.
Come on, there needs to be a plot twist at the end. And just when you think it is finally resolved - BAM the fat lady sings. Roll the credits.
Here is the receiver that was appointed BTW in case folks want to check him out:
http://www.rlf.com/Lawyers/MarkJGentile
I'm going to take a break for a few hours to reflect on the events that happened today and make a few phone calls. I'll check back in with everyone later this evening.
That's precisely what would be so ironic. The SEC suspends trading and we get de-listed from the pinks due to a spike in share price based on the news of a settlement only to see the stock get completely taken down by the SEC when a judge orders the company into receivership and it drives the value of the stock up.
Calypso Twilight Zone
When I was in the court room listening to all of this, I really wanted to stand up and just speak my mind about the copying effort, the website, and all of my interaction with these four people over the last year. No such opportunity availed itself though and the judge delivered a decision before I could organize an effort to officially petition the court on behalf of the shareholders I had been in communication with.
You make a good point, which is why I suspect that the receiver will probably move to completely suspend trading of the stock entirely (which he has the authority to do).
Isn't that the truth - on both accounts. I don't even get to deduct the hundreds of hours I spent on my taxes for last year.
I currently still maintain the company website and have paid for the domain registration and hosting through September out of my own pocket. I've offered to assist the receiver and the company's attorneys with marketing the patent to maximize its value and communicating the upcoming changes to shareholders.
I'll let folks know on this board if I am able to get some traction in this regard.
How crazy would it be if appointing a receiver to liquidate the value of our patent assets actually drove the value of the stock UP instead of down. That would be a perfect end to this whole drama.
Well... to say it was the one the company wanted wouldn't necessarily be entirely factual. It was the receiver that the company put forth, based on a recommendation from their current Delaware legal counsel. In speaking with Calypso's current legal counsel on the matter, I didn't get the feeling that they made the recommendation in bad faith against the values or desires of shareholders.
Hey at least the judge thought the website was nice. I guess he didn't have the back story on how it came to be - ie via shareholder intervention.
Receiver Order and Memorandum Opinion
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/49946173/Calypso%20Order%20Appointing%20Receiver.PDF
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/49946173/Calypso%20Memorandum%20Opinion.PDF
Redacted Trial Briefs
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/49946173/Calypso%20Redacted%20PTB.pdf
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/49946173/DW%20Redacted%20PTB.pdf
Thank you to bacatcha for allowing us to use his drop box account.
Time frame would all be up to the receiver if he chooses the appointment. Since the receiver is aware that the company does not have any cash assets, he will probably move forward as soon as possible.
It is not guaranteed that the receiver will do this, but generally that's how it works.
I have contacted him and will do my best to broker the concerns of the average lay person. I have also reached out to Lance to see if he wants to still be involved in any capacity.
That is a rough estimation from my understanding of what is claimed against them - whether those claims are valid and enforceable is another matter entirely.
I sent you an email with the receiver appointment and memorandum docs to post up on drop box for everyone to read.
It sure will. The way I see it, we have about 7 million in debts. Drago only gets 28% of a settlement with T-mobile, but if they buy the asset outright at an auction, I am not sure how that works.
The company has 200 million shares worth roughly 4 million at 2 cents a share or 8 million if you figure 4 cents a share.
If the patent auctions for 50 million (half of the bottom end of what folks think it is worth), Drago still takes .28% (not factoring in lawyer costs) and all the debts are cleared, that leaves shareholders with roughly 14.5 cents a share.
All speculation of course. It may not be the worst thing that could have happened to us.
Now if it were to sell for anything less than 10 million, we'd probably get shafted and wouldn't see any of it.
Yes the judge has made an early decision. I don't think anyone was expecting it.
The shareholders may end up getting something depending on how the patent sale goes.
I would imagine. Especially considering that their individual decisions apart from the direction of the board open them up to substantial personal liability. A lawyer would have to comment on that.
Williams was also right about the SEC exception that would have allowed us to have a shareholders meeting to elect directors that everyone in this company has ignored over the past two years.
A lawyer in Delaware with a bunch of corporate governance and experience. It was who the Calypso lawyers had recommended be appointed at the close of the trial I believe. I am still doing research on him.
Williams was not voted off by the way and the vote itself was not noticed correctly and was illegal. But Cristian did have the right to call the meeting.
I assume that they will be auctioned off or liquidated, I am not sure precisely what this means for shareholders or the Drago settlement. I am not sure if the receiver will have the power to re-visit the drago settlement or not.
This is still a very fluid situation.
I have contacted Calypso's legal counsel and the assigned receiver on the matter and offered to assist in helping him communicate to shareholders what is going on.
The post-trial rendering by the judge is particularly eye opening.
True, but the court specifically instructed the receiver to liquidate the assets of the company and dissolve the company.
Order Appointing Receiver
Judge also posted post-trial memorandum opinion
Documents available on Lexis Nexis. Will get them up ASAP!
Sued for what exactly? Making public information available to shareholders?
That is not what the pre-trial brief said - you took it completely out of context.
There is not a shred of truth in this statement. I have accosted myself to help this company better communicate with the shareholders. Just because I happen to have an effective working relationship with Dave Williams (because I am a trustworthy person and I do what I say I am going to do and for not other reason), doesn't mean I am in his pocket. Give it a rest.
If folks are interested, I can formally start to keep track of who owns shares and what their positions on the major issues are. I have interacted with owners of roughly 40 million shares in the last year and have a pretty good idea where another 70 million or so are sitting.
Dave Williams is currently on the board as per the status quo order by the court so yes... with Dave Williams.
Custodian Survey
Provide your feedback, lets see where posters on this board fall on the custodial issue.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board_surveymenu.asp?board_id=2196
I agree that the judge is likely to appoint a custodian considering the potential value of the asset involved.
That's the ridiculous part... When you factor in the variables and account for transporting the documents to the scanning facility the difference might be 500 dollars.
I will go through the invoices and do a side by side comparison if folks would like. I am confident in having chosen the right company.
Keep in mind that the company also benefitted from the document archival process. I provided Kyle with the same DVD that Dave got.
What the heck are you talking about??!? The money was given directly to the companies that did the document archival and transport. Dave didn't see a red cent - I made sure of that. He recommended a good company that did a good job. Just like Kyle recommended her associate, who also did a good job. Give it a rest - you won't find any impropriety because there was none.
Did you even contribute to the copying effort? I think those that did were glad to see it resolved and were happy to have contributed.
Please modify this to read "Redacted Briefs". These documents are not the trial transcripts. The transcripts from the trial itself won't be available for another 3 1/2 weeks probably.
I sent those briefs over to bacatcha to post up on the drop box. After folks have had a chance to digest them, I would be happy to answer more questions about the trial and the testimony that was given. As expected, just about all of the language relating to the settlement has been redacted and as such, I won't be able to talk about it. If the judge opts to include the testimony in the transcripts from the trial, you'll have some more details there.
Interestingly enough, the language about Dave William's alias here on iHub was not redacted as I thought it might be. I contacted him personally and asked him how he felt about this being available to the shareholders at large. He said that if it is part of a public document, he doesn't object.