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.
Then FBEC has to do nothing but maybe cover the legal fees it incurs during arbitration.
Best case scenario I suppose.
What part of his contract did he not fulfill that is disclosed in the SEC filings and not from rumor and whispers of emails?
Anything the talent less CEO stated seems to not hold a lot of water after he threatened to sue the old CEO then does an about face and issued him ALL the shares he was owed.
Looks like Hammans is owed almost about a full quarter of salary and stock if it's pro rated as well as his $50,000 stock granted upon signing it seems.
"Therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
1. Job Description: Working with the CEO in managing the day to day operations of the Company and its various subsidiaries, inclusive of, but not limited to new business development.
2. Term: The term of this agreement is for a period of twelve (12) months; automatically renewable with mutual consent.
3. Compensation:
a.
Salary: EMPLOYEE will receive an annual salary of $100,000 to be paid in equal monthly installments of $8,333. The Company has the right to convert all/part of the monthly salary to Common Stock of FBEC. Amounts unpaid will accrue annual interest of 12%. The Employee has the right to convert part of/all of the unpaid salary to equity at any time. The conversion rights and features will be determined by the Board of Directors at such time the EMPLOYEE makes a request to convert the salary to Common Stock, respectively.
b.
Expenses: The COMPANY will pay certain costs and expenses of EMPLOYEE directly related to the performance of his position or tasks herein, provided that said expenses are submitted to the COMPANY and approved either verbally or in writing in advance . Unapproved expenses will not be considered.
c.
Stock : EMPLOYEE shall receive $50,000 in restricted Common Stock at the time of executing this agreement, and for each year (12 months) thereafter that this agreement is effective. The price of the stock will be equivalent to 50% discount from the lowest trade at 20 days prior to issuance.
4. Confidentiality:
a.
This Agreement. The provisions of this Agreement are confidential and private and are not to be disclosed to outside parties (except on a reasonable need to know basis only) without the express, advance consent of all parties hereto or by order of a court of competent jurisdiction.
b.
Proprietary Information. EMPLOYEE agrees and acknowledges that during the course of this agreement in the performance of his duties and responsibilities that he will come into possession or knowledge of information of a confidential nature and/or proprietary information of COMPANY."
"The Board of Directors has received the resignation of Darren Hamans on July 30, 2015 as a member of the Board of Directors. Mr. Hamans was appointed In connection with the Board Meeting on May 8, 2015 of FBEC Worldwide Inc., a Wyoming Corporation, the Company had acknowledged that the majority shareholder and subsequent Board of Directors appointed Darren Hamans as a Director and Member of the Board of Directors of FBEC Worldwide Inc. The Board of Directors had authorized the Employment Contract for Darren Hamans, inclusive of Salary and Stock. This Employment agreement has been terminated with no further obligations of any considerations. Mr. Hamans has entered into a new consulting agreement as an Independent Sales Representative for the HEMP Energy product."
Not a surprise.
We are still locked into that contract with the ex CEO and his amateur IR firm remember.
We have to rely on them to get the word out and pump. Look how good of a job they've done since last year. The PPS is in the tank and Volume is effectively a liquidity trap for big block buyers.
No major change in the companies operations it seems from this.
New CEO still has to use these no talent guys. Unless he realizes how big of a joke they are and ditches them. Then they can arbitrate with him!
Arbitrator will prob pro rate his contract and could end up more that the 5 million shares offered since that was and established bottom that the other party initiated negotiations with.
Even then the new CEO can decide to change that deal just like the freshly ex no talent CEO we had did, which brought this whole issue up. So it seems it's all up in the air atm.
Aside from the thousands he's been paid and millions of shares issued?
Good Question. We'll know how good of a job he thinks he did when he lines his pockets.
Bringing us from the highs of near 12 cents we saw under the previous CEO to the lows he took us to? Probably millions of shares as a "reward".
It's about time.
We can finally say goodbye to that talent-less hack and he can't damage this company any further, except the PPS. Now he just has millions of shares to dump on us himself. What great news!
That sounds about right.
Agreed, this hasn't shown it is any different than the run of the mill PR/Ihub pumps.
No effort to create a sales force or push a product to bring in real revenue.
Constant security issuance's at discount prices, increasing company debt and lack of liquidity will cause big block buyers to stay away as we've seen. The downward trend would continue in that scenario regardless of how many shares they say they are retiring.
Hovering around +/- .02 cents for so long creates a large wave of tired holders looking to exit as soon as there is any upward momentum.
New management with experience in the industry this company is in is key, something we lack entirely with the 1 employee CEO and the amateur IR firm we've signed a monthly fee +share issuance agreement with.
Very disappointing showing so far.
You see the glaringly obvious accounting issue with this PR.
Enjoy yours as well.
Unfortunately for us FBEC could now have to cover additional fees to people to contain this situation which affects SHs overall. That new management couldn't arrange an acceptable deal instead of a 'take it or leave it' approach is disappointing.
I'll agree to disagree here.
That FBEC offered him anything indicates they owe him something.
I think he should have been given a pro rated amount of his signed employment agreement not an arbitrary number chosen by new management based on unknown metrics.
Which means he's entitled to a pro rated amount of his original agreement. Looks pretty cut and dry.
Time served based on what metric? That seems arbitrary.
Why wouldn't they just pro rate his original agreement?
This is probably the main reason for the disagreement.
New management is trying to change the original agreement and Darren is trying to hold them to it.
Bad business practice on the side of new management trying to alter an already agreed to contract and an ex employee that seems to want to get what was agreed to.
I think if that happened to anyone they'd try to get what they believe is owed them based on an original agreement and not what a new CEO decides.
What was the 5 million based off?
Why did management see fit to try to change the terms of his agreement?Based on what did they arrive at the 5 million share number? Why is that a fair number?
Why not 1? why not 10?
Suffice to say he probably should have been offered a pro rated version of the original deal.
He refused a 'take it or leave it' offer from new management that was not based off the original agreement right?
Why should he accept something that has no basis?
I did. As indicated at the time of that resignation the business relationship would remain and work would be done in good faith.
FBEC new management seems to have decided not to pro rate his agreement based on time served either.
If FBEC new management honored the contract to the letter I imagine there wouldn't be this issue.
Relative to the initial deal the 5 million shares offered is not what he agreed to. New management choice to try to change an already agreed to arrangement seems to be the problem. How is that his fault?
I wouldn't say it's greed, there was an obvious agreement between the old management and Darren that seemed fair and equitable at the time of the ending of the direct employment, as they both indicated a working relationship would remain.
However the new management seems to have decided otherwise.
Seems FBEC was dealing fairly at one point with him and changed their tune.
Wouldn't you be upset if you agreed to one path and a new party arbitrarily changed it for no public reason?
It appears there was no bad blood between FBEC and Darren at the time of his resignation.
Did the problems start when the new CEO came on and decided he wasn't going to honor the agreement struck with old management? Looks like.
FBEC does it's books and an auditing firm is 3rd party and does not produce the financials they simply review it and based off the reports and the explanations given by the company and their internal financial representative they will sign off on an Audit.
When there are problems with the internal accounting and the firm cannot comfortably sign off on financials they usually resign.
That's just how it works.
Relative to what was initially promised I imagine that to be a drop in the bucket. Hence the Arbitration.
The company obviously owes him something or else they wouldn't have offered him that. So there may be some truth to his claim.
Auditors review the work done by the Company.
They are third party and do not actually produce the financials.
That is done by the company and their stated financial representative who is listed as the current CEO.
How did you come by this email?
FBEC agreed to pay the old CEO his 250 Million shares and agreed to pay the rent of his office.
This was after they put out a news release accusing the CEO of improper and possibly illegal activity.
It's in the SEC filings.
Agreed, I believe that's why there is arbitration and not a straight up lawsuit.
It appears there is a position being taken that the company did not fulfill it's terms of the agreement in some fashion.
Or possibly the American Arbitration Association.
About the American Arbitration Association (AAA) and the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)
The American Arbitration Association (AAA), is a not-for-profit organization with offices throughout the U.S. AAA has a long history and experience in the field of alternative dispute resolution, providing services to individuals and organizations who wish to resolve conflicts out of court.
The AAA role in the dispute resolution process is to administer cases, from filing to closing. The AAA provides administrative services in the U.S., as well as abroad through its International Centre for Dispute Resolution® (ICDR). The AAA's and ICDR's administrative services include assisting in the appointment of mediators and arbitrators, setting hearings, and providing users with information on dispute resolution options, including settlement through mediation. Ultimately, the AAA aims to move cases through arbitration or mediation in a fair and impartial manner until completion.
Additional AAA services include the design and development of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems for corporations, unions, government agencies, law firms, and the courts. The Association also provides elections services as well as education, training, and publications for those seeking a broader or deeper understanding of alternative dispute resolution.
Established in 1996 as the global component of the American Arbitration Association, the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) provides conflict-management services in more than 80 countries with a staff fluent in 12 languages. Through a worldwide panel of hundreds of independent arbitrators and mediators and global cooperative agreements for hearing-room access, the ICDR provides a flexible, party-centered process over a broad range of industries and geopolitical issues.
The ICDR's administrative services include assisting in the appointment of mediators and arbitrators, setting hearings, and providing users with information on dispute resolution options, including settlement through mediation. Ultimately, the ICDR aims to move cases through arbitration or mediation in a fair and impartial manner until completion.
Based of SEC Filings which are the only factual statements the company needs to legally provide there is no substantiation of that position.
There are filings indicating FBEC allowed the old CEO to keep his shares and pay the rent for his office.
It takes more than 1 day to change CEOs. We all know that.
The CEO changeover must have started in beginning to middle of August.
"poisonous fruits"... A filing to support that would be helpful.
Back in Aug when the Current CEO started his takeover the PPS started to slide.
Hard to tell how the current CEO expects to reach the highs the old CEO got us to.
The chart says the highs were reached by the old CEO and the lows reached by the Current CEO. Clear to anyone.
FBEC cannot continue to blame the old CEO for the state this company is in.
If he was that "poisonous" Why are we still paying the rent of his office.
His actions brought us to highs around 12 cents.
Current CEO has done nothing of the sort.
Facts not falsehoods. Facts not opinions.
PPS was in severe decline due to old CEO failure to deliver ... That is an opinion not a fact.
The low was reached when the current CEO was in his position. That is also a fact.
All the new agreements that hand out millions of shares to companies and people at discounted prices signed by current CEO also a fact.
PPS under the current CEO eroding from highs established by old CEO also a fact.
All facts. No falsehoods.
On 9/15/15 PPS hit low of .011 During the current CEOs watch, good fact.
There are no filings that stipulate otherwise. Charts tell the same story.
Past CEO brought the company into enough good standing to reach highs around 12 cents.
These are facts.
FBEC The current CEO has eroded the PPS from the highs established by the old CEO, the chart shows that fact.
FBECs current CEO has done lots as the only employee.
He's written a lot of agreements to other parties for shares in our company for very low prices causing continuous conversions.
He's brought out PPS down to abysmal levels of volume creating a liquidity trap.
Under his watch the PPS has eroded from highs established and held by the old CEO near 12 cents.
He's not made any sales to speak of.
He's locked us into an exclusive IR deal with amateur promoters.
The list goes on.
Nowhere does it make reference to FBEC.
No SEC filings have been provided to support that case or position.
It was read. Proof to what? Those articles are unrelated to FBEC and reference the dealings of the accounting firm, not FBEC.
FBEC Accounting firm quit and they hired another firm with questionable background and "the Company did not consult with Pinaki & Associates LLC regarding either any matter that was the subject of a "disagreement" or a "reportable event" (as those terms are defined in Item 304 of Regulation S-K)."
That is a fact stated in an SEC filing.
Current management has been careless in it's methods causing the current PPS.
Unfortunately not seeing proof here, reports from 2009 and 2011 re: another company do not explain the inconsistencies and lack of transparency seen between the old firm quitting and the new firm coming on board of FBEC, merely that MB either quits or resigns from companies that have inconsistencies and potential for fraud occurring, which has more negative connotations than positives for us.
SEC reports are the only true factual documents to base an opinion.
We rely on these to know where the companies we buy shares in are headed.
""Prior to retaining Pinaki & Associates LLC, the Company did not consult with Pinaki & Associates LLC regarding either: (i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either contemplated or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on the Company's financial statements; or (ii) any matter that was the subject of a "disagreement" or a "reportable event" (as those terms are defined in Item 304 of Regulation S-K). The decision to hire Pinaki & Associates LLC was approved by the Company’s Board of Directors.""
So the old firm quit and the new firm wasn't made aware of any of the companies recent deals before they signed on.
The lack of accounting transparency is troubling.
I believe someone mentioned earlier in their DD that this new firm doesn't have the cleanest of records either.
"Prior to retaining Pinaki & Associates LLC, the Company did not consult with Pinaki & Associates LLC regarding either: (i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either contemplated or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on the Company's financial statements; or (ii) any matter that was the subject of a "disagreement" or a "reportable event" (as those terms are defined in Item 304 of Regulation S-K). The decision to hire Pinaki & Associates LLC was approved by the Company’s Board of Directors."
FBEC that number is almost a year of volume.
Even if that number is used which is on the low side.
The high side number would be multiple years of volume.
Agreed.
If everyone followed the CEOs example where would we be?
" In this article the Wolf says, "I've started to treat the whole sector like a giant game of Frogger, I ride the wave and then jump.""
This security is not creating any waves for us.
Agreed.
This CEO can't effectively bring new awareness groups to bear on this security. Now we are locked into an "exclusive" IR contract with an amateur IR group that is still wet behind the ears. Our PPS has suffered since they became involved.
Instead of a stock that is able to be traded in large blocks we have this liquidity trap.