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.
Wow money. Im up for adoption if youre wondering where youre gonna spend all that money when this hits a dollar. Just sayin.
If i had your point wrong i apalogize. I am baseing my info on the 8k and 13d. I am trying to say that neither one of us can provide court documents to support our theories. My comments are based on the fact that if a chapter 11 was fully awarded to Soupman they should have been protected from GBI under said chapter 11. That is why i believe the judge did not grant the chapter 11 petition.
Correction sir. I dont believe any final documents exist that support your theory that the chapter 11 bankruptcy was approved so the burden of proof is on you and once even again can you provide rhat court documentation. IMO if it did in fact go through Soupman would have been protected from the GBI takeover under chapter 11 as well.
Once yet again I ask for hard copy proof of that final order signed by the judge that you have yet to provide and I cant seem to find. I would have no problem agreeing with you if you could please provide that documentation for I trust my eyes far more than my ears.
If I said the bankruptcy went through, it was an accident due to typing on a cell phone because everything Ive said is leaning towards the opposite. I do however agree that GBI can do anything they want with it since they are the new owners which brings back up my last question. Why does GBI own the company when the past owners were under the protection of a chapter 11 bankruptcy that YOU SAY went through. Would you be so kind to provide us a link to the court documents that show the final approval of that bankruptcy signed by the judge. I cant find that anywhere and I know you wouldnt just make that up without hard copy proof, or would you.
If the CHAPTER 11 bankruptcy went through, why would GBI have to pay creditors of a company that is under the protection of chapter 11 bankruptcy and why wouldnt the petitioners of that chapter 11 bankruptcy stull own the company?
Would you know what the benefit of a rm would be over the removal of the q? That part I dont understand.
I cant find documentation that the bankruptcy was ever finalized or approved by the judge.
Some of the people here are obviously more educated in this matter than i am so please feel free to correct me if im wrong.
IMHO the bankruptcy was replaced with the deal between GBI and Soupman. If the chaptwr 11 bankruptcy had been approved that should have allowed Soupman to continue to opereate under the protection of chapter 11 without paying debts to creditors including WC and of coarse shareholders.
This sale or auction went more like what i would have to think a chapter 7 bankruptcy would go if that would have been the case. Since it was chapter 11 there should have been no auction of assets if the bancruptcy had been approved, but there would have been a bunch of creditors that would not have gotten paid and yes, including us.
Since a bankruptcy of any kind is started with a petition to a bankruptcy court, a judge has to decide whether or not that is the only alternative left.
WC found the alternative to get creditors paid but that alternative did not allow Soupman to retain ownership which is the whole reasoning for chapter 11 bankruptcy. That is why Soupman challenged WC on this issue.
When the judgement was awarded to WC/GBI, that tells me that the chapter 11 bankruptcy was not approved and Soupman was sold instead. IMO that is why the burden of payment to creditors was put on GBI when they purchased the assets.
To me, since a chapter 11 bankruptcy was never finallized and the sale of the Soupman was, Soupman AVOIDED bankruptcy and was sold INSTEAD.
Soupman has a clean slate and new owners now and thats it for now IMO. I believe that allows the new owners (GBI) to operated under the SOUPQ ticker because it didnt go bankrupt after all. I would believe that would allow the q to be removed as well.
Now what GBI decides to do with all that has yet to be seen and is completely up to them. Myself, I cant find a logical reason for GBI to not persue any ticker changes other than removeing the q.
Thanks jlee. It sounds freakin awesome. We do have a simallar version, fish chowder made with cream but its not very spicy like a bisque sounds. Also they list langoustine as an ingredient alternative which is the correct name for our version the bulldozer.
One thing ive learned from owning this stock and being stuck to this message board constantly is that we may be one country but our cultures vary drastically from one region to the other but all of our cultures seem to agree that Soupman may be the best thing to happen for us this year.
Thank you kindly for answering my question without judgement. Im not at all ashamed of my local culture but however very much appreciate the respect you gave me.
Makes ya wonder huh. I keep forgeting it every time I go to heb. The lobster bisque sounds real good. Ive never tasted lobster. Im from a shrimping community on the tip of texas gulf coast but we have what we call bulldozers. They look like lobster without pinchers. Very deliciuos but doubt they are the same. Now that everyone knows about my hillbilly status, I have an embarrasing question. Whats the difference between bisque and soup. Here we pretty much have soup, stew, or chili and a really nice beach.
As Ive said all along, the ticker will remain. It was management that was the problem and GBIs goal was to fix the problem. There isnt and never was any logical reason to go any further than that. It never mattered if GBI is a company or a single person. They bought the company to simply be in control of management. Their original idea did not include ownership. They simply did what it took to save a perfectly good ticker that they own sh!tloads of shares of. IF IT AINT BROKE, DONT FIX IT (unless you just like wasting time, energy, and $$$$$).
HE HE, LOOKS LIKE CHECK MATE!!!!
LMFAO. Im 6 feet tall and weigh 140 with 1% fat content and a 6 pack. Of coarse my idea of exersize is good ole fashion hard work. You keep your rice cakes and membership at the gym. Meanwhile I will eat stuff that tastes good and use my body as nature intended.
In Texas we like calories and carbs. Mmm mmm real food. Something tells me when the pps goes up, so will you.
Shhh, its nap time.
You know the old saying, if you cant beat em, join em.
I really believe they purchased the shell as well.
100% agree. I really hope they have something put together for PM tomorrow though.
Right. All the ducks are definetly in a row. WOW. I sure hope they sieze this oppertunity, its very rare.
Thanks Tkane, for bringing out the obvious that GBI intends to preserve our ticker. It would have been WAY to expensive to recall what was on the shelves and repackage all the stocked product in the warehouse simply to get rid of the ticker from it. They could not legally sell any of the product containing the ticker symbol if they had no intention of useing it. As shareholders we own the ticker with or without the q.
Court records wouldnt show future plans, just the outcome of court proceedings. But it can still have encouraging info.
GLTY, you are a gentleman and a schollar.
Ah zeus, say it aint so. I didnt know you sold.
All things considered, im not in a hurry just to get a pr out for now as much as im hoping for it to hep soupman back to its feet in the eyes of the public. I am hoping to leave some of my share for the real LONG haul.
Saw his picture on linkedin yesterday, he even looks the part of a winner.
I dont understand your point but I dont have the bill collecter knocking at my door iether.
Turn about is fair play.
I think the judge has to sign off on it. I would think that would that would delay it quite a bit.
Thanks for the help. Its gotta be there in some form. It may be imbedded in the barcode. Regardless GBI could not even place an old box on the shelf without changing the label if they dont own the ticker. That would be misleading and false advertisement.
Prolly doesnt work for me or a judge. Dates on packages however do.
Exactly
YEA BUDDY, now if the packaging date is later than 09/13/2017 then we ALL have our answer.
Ive got one more thing to check.since im at work someone might want to check also. When you buy some soupman at the store is the ticker symbol still on the package like it is in the picture in the intro to this message board. Im sure everyone sees where im going with this.
Bull, it was pure manipulation and it still is.
My concern is that when we get the news that all the shareholders were waiting for it skyrocketed at warp speed for a half a day then suddenly dropped without any further news. Every time it tries to go up it is immedietly knocked down.
1. Whos doing it?
2. Why are they doing it?
3. Is that even legal?
4. Is it a form of insider trading?
5. Why would a company put out a pr just to get sh!t on?
6. Is the judge still involved?
ALL the dd and press release should have allowed it to at least a dime. Hell, it would have been there in 2 more hours of trading on Thursday the way it was going.
What about the poor shareholders that would have been happy to sell at 6 cents.
As long as soupq exists in our positions and there is a price on that position it is gonna be real harder to get people to buy that nonsense about the assets and shell mumbo jumbo with each passing day of tradeing. All that could have happened I guess, but it just didnt.
As far as GBI having the soup and not the shareholders, isnt that the correct order of things. Hell, some of us arent even smart enough (hint hint) to figure out that GBI didnt cancel any shares.
As long as its tradeing, the q coming of depends on how much soup is being bought at the supermarket, not how someone feels when the trade here. As far as it winding down before the q comes off, well, same thing.
Just checked, youre still safe. The q is still there. Carefull, that third days losses may eat up the first and second days proffits. Im sure youve noticed how fast it rises.
Ive been leaning toward still another scenario all along. Ive always maintained my belief that their shares are the key to their motivation.
If GBI would simply manage/own Soupman and allow it to continue to operate under the same ticker, that would allow GBI to aquire other ventures without SOUPQ shareholders proffitting from them. With the SOUPQ ticker still there they basically have a real nice piggy bank to dip into and fund those outside ventures. Without SOUPQ they have to depend solely on how well they can get the soup to sell in order to get their investment back.
That all boils down to this. GBI is new to the soup business but their mother WC is a hedgefund. My money here is banked on GBI useing that ticker for everything thing they can get out of it. After there done with it, I couldnt tell you.
Well, back to the .0005 range wiggle. We call that a #&×€/+?$ standoff where Im from. Someone ussually flinches about this time. GLTA.