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.
Not only that, but have a look at their website. What's written is largely incoherent, literally, and there are headers for sections for which there is no content.
Also, they repeatedly mention that the company is right outside Princeton, which adds zero value to anything.
This is probably the level of deals that came out of the C of C presentation.
Let's put this another way: they don't give a shit about retail investors.
Exactly. He must be coordinating with the groups that buy during a dilution.
We know that in the past he treated large-ish shareholders differently than us regular retail guys, gave them info we didn't get.
Sorry, it's not a difficult concept. Investors aren't going to buy shares in a company whose management is paid more than the company earns.
They did a reverse split in 2014, 2 in 2015, and again in 2020.
Just looking at the above, would you buy shares, now? You're attempting to revive hope in the stock, which is fine, if not pumping, but there's no underlying context for it.
It's as likely the Tooth Fairy will put money under your pillow tonight as it is that the Three Stooges will turn a profit and share the wealth.
Of course you never say never, but this management team isn't incentivized in the slightest to care about share holders. I mean, at this price, why won't they buy a few million shares on the open market to signify insider confidence in the company?
Regardless, not sure I'm understanding your point. That if was once higher and now isn't so therefore might be higher again? Its chart indicates bankruptcy is the more likely outcome.
Let me ask you this. Who is buying shares of a stock of a company in which the CEO earns more than the company's gross revenues? How will demand for shares outstrip supply (raising share price) in this scenario?
If investors thought highly of this company they would buy shares at the market price, like company insiders do. Ok, wait.
"A collateralized debt obligation (CDO) is a complex structured finance product that is backed by a pool of loans and other assets and sold to institutional investors. A CDO is a particular type of derivative because, as its name implies, its value is derived from another underlying asset."
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/032315/were-collateralized-debt-obligations-cdo-responsible-2008-financial-crisis.asp
The high in 4/20 was .60, it was nowhere near a dollar. Then, in June the glorious 1:500 reverse split.
"performance quoted represents past performance and does not guarantee future results"
A standard disclaimer, of course, but tailor made to this situation. A bout of irrational exuberance in the past does not make for a credible argument about realistic potential, going forward.
I refer you to the dot com bubble and the era of CDOs.
Hey, they only have to dilute to the tune of about 125K shares to pay their dues. No problemo!
Remember that there are 5 colleges within about 20 miles of the ZRFY home base. This includes a branch of Rutgers, which might theoretically be an entree into their entire system.
No mention, ever, of them selling to any of these colleges or even marketing to them about any of their products.
The Meadowlands Chamber of Commerce, seriously? A bunch of dentists' offices, dry cleaners, and small office supply companies, all looking to get more business, not spend money. Not exactly the big time.
Buy back with what? They are in the business of selling shares, period. And they're not going to suspend their own salaries.
It gets harder and harder to believe that people continue to think this is a legit company that's in the business of selling software and that revenues will lift share price. It's a mistake to think this is a collective enterprise just because it's a public company and we own shares.
If I had to guess as to why they delay filing every single time, it would be because they might feel they'll be under less scrutiny if they do it at an "off" time. Sort of like releasing bad news on Friday nights in the summer, but every quarter.
Your knowledge of the reduced nicotine market is wanting. Yes, for ages companies have been able to strip nicotine out of tobacco plants, which, by most accounts, tastes terrible.
XXII is the first ever company to genetically modify tobacco plants, which is a whole new thing. Do you trash stocks for a living or is it just to demonstrate how little you know?
And we believe you, why?
Yeah, but Kay's a pro, a first round Sleaze Hall of Fame-r, backstopped, for some unfathomable reason, by BlankRome.
"A shareholder" can't do shit, in my vulgar opinion. Kay is a serious player in the world of ripping off shareholders and you cannot beat him at his own game.
Again, think about you and him or a shareholder and him. Who's the pro in that crowd? Who would the smart money bet on?
Take tax losses and move on, please.
Yes you have.
You seem unable or unwilling to grasp the basic reality of this company and management team. They are sociopaths concerned only with their own compensation - what ever has led you to believe they care about profitability or shareholders?
Things have been working out just fine for them, thank you, these are not nice people..
Any company that promotes anything having to do with Michael Flynn is beneath contempt. Under oath, when asked to state if he believes in the peaceful transfer of power, the man took the 5th.
Next up: Kay puts out a press release about a group of jailed pedophiles who have decided to use the ZRFY meeting software for their group therapy sessions.
From their website, M.E. is also promoting this:
"Support anti-vax activism, free clinic care for the vaccine injured"
That's total compensation, not salaries. I was referring to his pay, with the stock stuff he awards himself it, of course, totals that much.
For some reason, my other post is not on the board menu. Regardless, check out these guys:
https://www.mountainentities.com/
Now look at the Patriots OnCall (didn't realize it's one word) tab on the top right: They are pushing General Flynn's sedition tour and giving a lot of space to vax deniers. Mark Kay, do you have no shame?
Holy shit! Check these guys out
https://www.mountainentities.com/
Look at the Patriots OnCall tab on the top right. They are supporting General Flynn and vaccine deniers. What the fuck is wrong with Mark Kay? Again
The executives are way overpaid, of that there's no doubt. But stating that they're making $1M, as you did, is over the top. All together they make half that, no need to embellish the sad truth about this mess.
To put into another context: In America the average CEO compensation is about 4% of revenue. Kay pays himself more than the company earns, that's over 100% of revenue, and makes up the shortfall by selling shares to suckers like me.
It's not wasting or losing money, it's clearly someone who works for the company. Part of their strategy to support share price after a dilution, this and the interviews Kay gives with their various IR venues posing as news.
Not sure about that but he's known by the company he keeps.
Plus, his patents are, apparently, of dubious provenance.
Hmm, I'm not sure. There are many examples of morally bankrupt people who have become very successful and rich. There used to be a saying, maybe there still is, that "behind every great fortune is a great crime".
Although not criminal, Gates, Zuckerberg, and Jobs were all said to have stolen the ideas that made them. Morally bankrupt, yes, financially bankrupt, not so much..Morally bankrupt people might lie to investors, but they also might know how to run a company.
The management at ZRFY wins the daily double, though, both morally and financially bankrupt. Inept liars, all of them.
I forgot to originally note that the company is morally bankrupt, too.
How do you get to 8 cents when revenue can't even cover operating expenses?
And no, management isn't going to do you a favor and forego their salaries.
It seems that ZRFY is theoretically, if not technically, bankrupt. And if the guy from CA, who's suing the company, wins any sort of substantial settlement, it will be, also, declared.
My response was to another poster who cited some hypothetical sales numbers. I never wrote that Yanis is a re-seller, it's that other place that's one.
That makes fanciful thinking seem like it's grounded in reality, by comparison.
Each employee could sign at least 360 subscriptions a year? Maybe all of them together over the course of 5 years could hit that number.
I wasn't able to find anything like this, so good work. They're a majority minority run company so well situated, theoretically, to get government contracts.
I wish them well, but, personally, if I ran a publicly traded company I would not necessarily be touting a contract with them. They do seem to be a bit of a rag tag operation - any port in a storm, I guess.
But, hey, Hewlett Packard was a rag tag operation when it was being run out of someone's garage. Yanis could be the next Big Thing.
I'll never defend Kay, but your assessment of the meaning of a virtual office might be erroneous. It's not uncommon in this day and age, when everyone is working remotely, to lease a WeWork type place for times the company needs have in-person meetings.
It's no reflection at all on the size of the company or its revenue stream. That being said, knowing how Kay operate, and checking out the Yanis website, I'd guess they might have a few more than 3 employees, with the emphasis on "few".
This is offering is all the info you need to determine that there's no revenue of note arriving through sales. They are diluting to raise money, period, which means there are no other means.
All in all, this company and its stock are a shit show. Anyone who dismisses the obvious to throw money away on it, basically deserves what they get. They've been warned and warned and warned.
I can't say definitively, of course, but it's going up on below average volume, which sort of indicates a counter trend. I look for it to go down again shortly.
There's been no announcement from the company about revenues and that's the only thing anyone wants to see now.
I think I saw elsewhere that they're about to double the number of outstanding shares (again), so look out below.
(again)
The Apex "contract" is a nothing burger. They signed on Apex as a channel partner which amounts to no new revenue, yet.
Stocks go up and down, often seemingly irrationally. As long as there is a critical mass of people like yourself, who think the Apex thing has significance (at this point), then people will succumb to their delusions and buy.
After some years of observation, I believe that ZRFY / SFOR employ some social media / stock board posters to pump up the company around the time new shares are being minted. The rise in the share price lately is most likely collateral damage, i.e., innocents who believe the hype.
Yup. And it's also too much to ask management to forego salaries as a show of good faith to investors.
.08 represents over 10X the current price - what is there that can make that happen? Realistically.
Hah! I wouldn't. Or won't until there's a subway line from Kentucky into mid-town.
I'm very up to speed on NYC real estate.
I wrote :
"a decent 2 bedroom place in Manhattan will run you at least what Kay's place is valued at."
Google, "2 bedroom apartments for sale in Washington Heights" or ".....Hudson Heights", both are very liveable Manhattan neighborhoods - it's nice up around the Cloisters, as I'm sure you know. I definitely didn't write that's what one would cost on Central Park West.
Mark is a model train enthusiast, as is indicated on his car license plate.
Yup. They all live in nice towns that are near really nice towns. I can't imagine someone making Waller $$$ choosing to live on Staten Island, different strokes I guess, but, seriously, Staten Island? Did you see the 2 garage set up at Kay's house? Weird.
Where Kay lives comes closest to being a noteworthy place, but even still, it's not Buck's County or the Main Line. Ram's place lists for that much because it's so close to NYC. To put it into a regional perspective, a decent 2 bedroom place in Manhattan will run you at least what Kay's place is valued at.
George is on Staten Island, Ram in NJ.
Thanks very much, reading it now
I don't know much about the legal consequences of fiduciary duty but they sort of are making a compelling case against management. If anything, hubris will be the cause of their downfall.
Weird that the doxxed management with home addresses. Kay's house looks weird with sort of 2 garages, like it used to be a place with a doctor's office or something. George's house looks like he gambles away his salary and Ram's house is a pretty typical looking boring NJ suburban place. None of them are getting style points for the way their houses look.
Good luck to the plaintiff, I suppose if he does drive the company into bankruptcy that everyone will lose whatever slim chance they might have had to recoup their losses.
Couldn't find that link, could only find the link with the letter about scheduling.
I'd feel a lot better about this if we knew a little bit more about Mr Zanfardino and the law firm he's engaged. The woods are thick with people and law firms initiating litigation in the hope of a payout to make them go away. I found the law firm, Cohn Lifland, website and they do claim to have extensive experience in this field.
He appears to have a used car operation in California that seems large and upscale so I'd doubt his lifestyle was affected much by SFOR share decline, especially after taking tax losses. My guess is that either he's looking to settle or he's just pissed, but either way is not going to hire a $1000/hour (or thereabouts) attorney for very many hours..
Paying him off will cost ZRFY a lot less than prolonged litigation, if it comes to that.
Actually, it was Ropes and Gray that was the law firm that argued (very) poorly in front on the Appeals Court about the patent infringement. It's true, that BR represented them in other cases but they were all small potatoes in comparison.
Winning meritless cases is exactly what good law firms do, legal merit is in the eye of the beholder. Why would a shareholder want to drive a company into bankruptcy and wipe out any slim hope of recouping losses from their stock?
You can't really sue the CEO of a company if they say they "expect" so-and-so to happen, that deals are in the works. Kay deceives shareholders, for sure, but he's expert at couching his words with plausible deniability. All that training at Morgan didn't go to waste.
A couple of years ago, as is well known, Kay publicly denied there would be a r/s when one was in the works and happened a few weeks later. He denied it on one of those broadcasts put out by his IR company and immediately scrubbed that interview from their archives.
I honestly don't see much on which he can be sued. Some investors don't want to take responsibility for their own mistakes. Just because someone's been duped doesn't necessarily mean that they weren't at fault, also, that their greed or grandiose dreams didn't factor in. A lot of people saw through Madoff's scheme and a lot of people didn't because they didn't want to, they wanted to believe the fantasy of unrealistic returns on investment.
I don't think that lawsuit will go anywhere, Kay and co. are represented by BlankRome, a truly great law firm. The costs of mounting a lawsuit against them will be prohibitive and I doubt anyone will take on paying for litigation that might go on indefinitely.
It sounds good, but ain't gonna happen. There's no justice in microcap stock land, it's strictly caveat emptor. People getting snookered by Kay's bluster are no different than those who go to gamble at casinos because they advertise glamorous and fun filled evenings.
Kay's the tech equivalent of a gentleman farmer and is a master at fudging his statements and predictions and covering his tracks. If someone believes that a 74 year old man can successfully run a start up software enterprise, the problem is someone's belief.