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.
GC - You can count me in, too.
GC - Thanks for the correction. At least that's one of my theories that probably isn't right...
Prado - That's certainly a possibility. One theory I've come up with (harebrain and WAG alert!!) is that the original incorporation was a typo, and the company fixed it at the same time they up'd the share auth to 250M. Then the transfer agent decided to dump all the authorized shares into the market like they did to BHUB without the company's consent or knowledge. And now it's a mess. Authorized shares are only that..authorized. The company is supposed decide if / when they are issued.
Here's another idea, though. They bumped up the authorization in December. This was before the USSE deal was announced, if I'm not mistaken. Was the USSE deal and then SIAM deal fabricated so AC could dump the shares and run? Could be a possibility as well.
The bottom line: I have no idea what to think any more.
Dirt - I agree that MM manipulation only goes so far...I think it's part of the equation but a relatively small part. I believe there's still some dilution going on and that's the main player behind the stagnant pps right now. Based on the Q1 financials, it appears their break-even point is about 2500 CT's per quarter. Things are looking much better, but they still need 800+ sales per month. I believe they'll get there in Q3. All bets are off if they get a big (like 5000) order!!
I, for one, am glad you're here. You're knowledgeable and a smart ass...what's not to like.
Lex - I should have prefaced my post with, "Assuming there is a SIAM." Better??
MBL - I think you're right...I can't find it in the PR's. I think I morphed something someone else on the board had said...Like I said, I've been known to be wrong!!
Yes, they need 51% of the outstanding shares, but according to the "agreement", SIAM gets the voting rights to the shares while they are in escrow (68M). That would give them control as long as they bought more than 4.5M shares out of the float (assuming the 145M total O/S is correct - they would need more than 72.5M shares to have control.)
Here's another wrinkle...If SAT sent a bunch of bogus shares into the market, would that mean that SIAM would have to buy 51% of those shares, too? (in order to have control)??? I don't know.
This is all just my opinion, of course!! I've been known to be wrong..
GC - I was going off memory (I don't have the old ones saved), thanks for the old verbage...And I have no idea why they would make such a small change if things weren't still mostly on track...all the stuff about the financing by SIAM is still in there.
I guess it's time to wait some more.
Mystery - I last looked through the BP 2-3 days ago, and just noticed the changes this morning. So sometime recently...
I was just reading the business plan on the website, and on page 14 under Operational Plan, they have changed it back. The part on the plant in Canada had been changed to "has been acquired", but it has been changed back to its original "...where an existing building is to be acquired."
I looked through the rest of the plan and didn't see any obvious changes, but this is interesting. Does it mean the deal is still on, but is taking longer? Or is the deal off and he's looking for other financing? Or have I completely lost my mind?! Wait, I know the answer to the last question...
http://alcarchemicalsgroup.com/company-info.asp#3
http://alcarchemicalsgroup.com/BP_07_11_r1Feb07.pdf
Does anyone know who the woman on the home page is (with the goggles and weird blue liquid)? If AC put his picture and his daughter's picture on the website, is this the elusive Carmen on page 1? Just a thought. Sorry - this is what I've been reduced to!!
Edit: Or is this actually Mysterymate? Sorry, Mystery, I couldn't resist.
Minne - My lawsuit theory was assuming it could be proved that they manipulated the price intentionally, and in cahoots with SAT so SAT could buy the shares back cheap. If they just said, "We ran into a snag but it's fixed now", you're right, there probably wouldn't be a basis for a lawsuit (or at least it would take some investigation to figure out just what they did).
But I do like your theory...I posted a similar one a few weeks ago, so I have to like yours (unless I hate myself...hmmm)!!
Minne - The scary part is that's as feasible as anything at this point. That would explain why the accumulation / distribution chart isn't dropping like a rock and why the share price hasn't completely tanked (although it's pretty close to tanked now). If that's the case, it certainly would be very good for those of us who have stayed. And would probably prompt lawsuits from those who sold and lost money.
Who knows??
All Kenny Rogers All the time
Dude - Too much information!!!
We've definitely started to run out of even semi-legitimate topics here!! On that note, here's what I'll throw in. I think it's an interesting coincidence that other companies that had Select as their transfer agent have also put out no news or very limited news since Select's activities were exposed. Even BHUB has only put out one or two PR's since then (I can't remember the other company that was posted here that did the same thing).
Here's a guess: The companies are being quiet while the SEC and Canadian equivalent investigate and sort out the problem. At least ACMG hasn't been halted at this point!!
I just think it's an interesting parallel.
Merry - Yes, these are guesses (why I put it in the theory category). These are the two companies that appear to meet the information the AC put in the business plan. So I'd put it in the educated guess category...But this is still a fishing expedition.
Nanovas - The current theory on the board is that Alcar is using one of the buildings of another company in the industrial park. Two companies are candidates, Petressa Canada and Société PCI Chimie Canada. I don't think anyone has gone to either company and asked...If you're close and want to check these out, you could be the Ihub hero if you find anything!! The companies are listed on the industrial park's website:
http://www.spipb.com/english/accueil.php
Edit: Or should I say allegedly using!!
Duck - I'm in Denver, too. I have a weird work schedule and am usually up until 0200 or 0300. Crypt - We should get together for coffee.
OK, this is kind of strange. I cleared out the browser cache and then typed in the web address for the business plan:
alcarchemicalsgroup.com/BP_07_11_r1Feb07.pdf
The page came up after I cleared out the cache. Maybe I didn't clear it all the way out and this was still there, but I didn't get the prompts below the browser line like I did before. I don't have the expertise to know if this was legitimately on a different host...
Thanks for the information...I'm kind of a computer moron, but here's how I got to it (by the way, it's possible I just got it out of the cache...I did clear it out yesterday, but I might have opened the page since. I don't remember). Anyway, when I type in the web address, the one for the business plan pops up in the browser list as well. I selected it and the business plan popped up. I guess if it's in the browser list, it must have come from the cache. I don't know...like I said, I'm kind of a computer moron.
GCduck - Good morning as well.
Crypt - I know the Lightsmedia saga, but I'm unfamiliar with the secure.net stuff. Is that why I can still pull up the business plan - that it's with a different web company? I don't know that part of the background...If you can fill in the blanks, I'd appreciate it.
Good message, Pete. The whole risk vs reward issue has been the main reason I've stayed long. I don't have that much to lose, but lots to gain!! I'm staying in...
It's the address for University of Quebec at Trois-Rivieres. I have no idea why it's in with Alcar's information...
Slim - That's an address I haven't seen before. It doesn't match any of the "old" company info as far as I can tell. I'm still checking, so it might still be an old address...but interesting none the less.
A reverse split is almost always a bad thing...the only exception to that is when a r/s is done in conjunction with an uplist to a major exchange. I've seen those work. But otherwise there is no upside for investors, IMO.
Onecup - Welcome to the board. If you figure this thing out, let us know!!
True...I haven't gone that route yet...
I just sent an inquiry to the Canada Post on a forwarding address based on the Vercheres location, and included both Alcar's name and AC's name.
I received a reply from the Canada Post Office. They won't release forwarding addresses due to confidentiality. Another road block!!
Hi Ward - I agree. And I sure hope Moody is done...that whole taking shares in lieu of salary last year is what he's dumping now, IMO. I think you're right - next month should be when the last of his shares free up. I'm wondering how many shares per month he was getting...
Hey everyone...been busy and haven't had time to post. The financials are looking much better (not great yet, but give it time). I like the increase in gross profit percentage (>30%). Sell about 2500 CT's a quarter and they might actually turn a profit. I think that's definitely within reach. Then eliminate the liabilities (that might take a while), and then work on a buyback. All it takes at this point is a couple of good contracts.
We're not quite out of the woods, but it's looking much better.
Recording phone calls does vary by state. In Colorado it is perfectly legal to record a phone call you're a party to without notifying the other person. In other states, this isn't legal. And it's not legal anywhere to record a phone call (or listen in) if you're not one of the parties involved (unless you're the NSA).
Hope that helps.
The hotmail e-mail was most likely sent from a phone or PDA. But nobody knows for sure...
I sent the Canada Post a request for the forwarding address. I'll let you know if / when they respond. I couldn't get through on the 800 number, either.
Fredoboy - At least that matches AC's e-mail to MN1 that they were moving the office...but where did they go? Nobody knows!! If you're inclined to go back to the industrial park, I'd take a tour at Petressa and snoop around there a little bit. We seem to think that this company is the most likely site for the plant. I don't know if you'd get anywhere, but it might be worth a try. Petressa says they give tours. Just a thought.
I like it...I'll send it out. Thanks for the work you put into it.
I came up with the same information (maybe I used your link...I don't remember), and have been working it off and on since. I just haven't posted anything since I haven't found anything worth reporting yet. But I think it's a reasonably likely our SIAM is related somehow.
My current theory (and only that) is that it may be principals from SIAM India, BHL, and possibly others who make up the consortium, and that is why we can't find any direct link to these companies. It could also explain why they want to remain secretive for now....if they divulged names, we'd link them to their respective organizations fairly easily. Again, just a theory.