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.
Hello my friend didn't want you to feel lonely and neglected. Thanks for the private posts. I agree with the group ... you and ollie would be a great tag team. Your attentive to the board and responsive to the members post. So IMO-LOL, today's activity netted not much operating capital for NUBV. One drum of ther secret ingredient that is the hub of the technology costs $35Gs. That is cash up front ... as they are not credit worth. Have a great night and say hello to Steve.
PS: All that liquidation he has been doing of late IMO ... he must have a huge nut to crack ... those end of month bills are a son of a B.
Newbie, I hope you learn a lesson before you start to play with a lot of dough. These is a good please to learn avaluable lesson. Learn ho to read financials. There are many great ideas and business concepts that won't see the light of day for many reasons. Most fold due to financial problems.
Andy I just hate to see people getting scammed. Nickolas has scammed many. He rifled Impact Beverage, Inc. National Beverage, LLC, Enhanced Beverage LLC, Zann Corp. Quench, Sabinsa, his own brother in laws spring water company and the Investment and technology groups that originally backed this concept. Justice needs and will be served to the likes of Nickolas. NUBV won't make it because it's missing 95% of all the key components to help drive a successful startup company. It cannot source the technolgy components to bring these water to market. That's unfortunate because this technology should have successfully launched in 2004 and would have pre-empted and surpassed all enhanced water today. It should have been the Glaceau Vitaminwater ... now it's too little too late. Nickolas was and still is a greedy, incompetent SOB. It is hysterical to see him get scammed by a better bunch of crooks. Never have and never will invest in BB stocks. I'd rather go to Vegas.
Just trying to keep you smiling. It's a dog eat dog world out there and some are wearing milkbone underwear.
Zen you are sounding like canplay. Facing reality for some is a real son of a b****. Reading all of the info available this investment makes no financial sense other than the business concept is exceptional. Unfortunately, it sits in the hands of greed and incompetence. What competent CEO is going to pay NUBV to have the privelege to run the company. Just sell the patent to somebody and take the money and run and allow a return to investors. Unfortunately, it is not their exclusive right to sell the technology...IMO. There are no water walkers or rain makers in this cast of NUBV characters.
NJ Charmer Posted the following last week. What more do you need to know? The new CEO will have to Pay for this job ... Oh I am sorry invest for the position to run the company.
Posted by: NJ_Charmer
In reply to: A deleted message Date:3/29/2008 12:03:12 AM
Post #of 19079
Ok I have a nice update post for you all.
I posted about a week ago stating that I was able to verify some facts from canplay. And I also stated maybe everyone should do your homework before just bashing him. I had yet another conversatin with Jason Pratt and discussed in detail the lien. I also had a conversation tonight at 9:15ET with Luke. It was a very interesting conversation and I know all of you always claim one thing you want proof. I have half the conversation with Jason recorded but it got cut off, I have the whole conversation with Luke recorded to my cell phone. I am going to attempt to play it on my cell phone via speaker phone to my PC to record over the week end and upload it to an FTP for everyone to hear. I am not supporting Canplay as he does run his mouth a little much but once again he was right, the lien is for 350,000 and that is the legal issue, now that it is being tied up there is intrest and the amount has gone to 365,000. The legal issue they arehaving is trying to find a CEO who is willing to take the position with this mess and invest that much of there own moeny. that is the issue and so far there are no takers.
Nickolas just got out of bed and remembered he needed to pay the mortgage and 2nd mortgage on his million dollar home. LOL-IMO
Slotting Fees - NUBV can't even begin to think about getting this to market with no cash and here is why. Charmer verified and shared a bunch of info last Friday one of which is no money. Thanks Dude.
This is what it takes to get a product to retail. How will NUBV deal with this?
Beginning in the late 1970s, supermarkets began charging slotting fees for the placement of "new" products on grocery shelves. We consider a supermarket as a single store or chain of stores with greater than $2 million in annual sales. The term supermarkets includes conventional, combination, superstore and warehouse formats. Convenience store chains also charge slotting fees. New products is a term to describe innovative concepts, brand extensions, line extensions, upgrades, replacements and seasonal offerings.
Slotting fees originated from a 1970s bidding war for space to locate "branded" in-store cigarette point-of-sale devices called a "merchandiser." These end of aisle cigarette merchandisers place the manufacturer's products at eye level while a competitor's products are placed on the bottom shelves. It didn't take long for slotting fees to spread across the grocery aisles to other products and to markets in other areas. The success of supermarkets in collecting these fees from small and some large manufacturers illustrates their power in the marketplace.
Food marketers are quick to justify slotting fees as the cost of the competitive store-admission process. By charging slotting fees, the retailer is seeking a profit from selection of a grocery item for stock. The retailer profits again when the public buys the items in a second commercial transaction. Furthermore, retailers typically require volume discounts and substantial advertising promotions to coincide with a new product's entry. These lucrative promotions require discount coupons, in store demonstrations, radio if not television spots, newspaper co-ops (with the retailer) and stand-alone advertising. A common retail practice is to set a volume target for six months and then charge the manufacturer a subsequent "failure fee" if the product doesn't meet sales expectations. Besides the failure fee, the store can discontinue a product after the demonstration period and order the manufacturer to buy back the product. This allows the retailer the opportunity to sell the space again.
Unfortunately, slotting has broadened in the food trade to include costs other than first time product trade deals and allowances. Besides failure fees there is a "staying fee," which is an annual form of rent charged by some chains. When a major warehouse chain purchased another warehouse retailer in the early 1990s, the latter's suppliers received notices from the new owners that they would be asked to pay an up-front fee in exchange for the "supplier's right" to continue to do business with the company. This type of slotting is defined by industry as "pay to stay." If a smaller manufacturer has a product with potential and marketing research, they will be allowed into the chain for a "free fill." This practice involves the manufacturer supplying the retailer with free product in lieu of the slotting fee. Bakers can be requested to provide a "free fill" for a new store.
The amount of money paid in slotting fees depends on the size of the supermarket chain and the number of products being introduced. Slotting fees, which are very negotiable, typically start at $3,000.00 per product for a regional chain and as high as several hundred thousand dollars for a national chain. There are press accounts following a 1990 joint industry task force on new grocery product introductions detailing slotting charges for a new product in excess of one million dollars.
It is hard to argue the legality of slotting fees because of the different forms of slotting and differing industry practices. One thing is clear - there is a legal obligation for the manufacturer that pays a slotting fee to one retailer to then pay the same fee to other retailers. By law, the manufacturer must offer that same "discount" to the retailer's competitor. The same problem exists for the retailer who requires payment from certain manufacturers for premium shelf space and does not offer the same or comparable deal to competing vendors in the same product category.
The following are a few anecdotal slotting reports. Please understand that in all of these the names are disguised to prevent identification of the source.
A New England supermarket chain was purchased approximately five years ago by an individual who used the proceeds of slotting fees to cover a portion of the equity for the purchase. A "pay or stay" slotting fee was required for each item in the supermarket.
A New York area supermarket chain regularly charges $20,000.00 for each new item introduced by a food manufacturer, as well as "requesting" annual contributions to the purchasing manager's Christmas party.
A West Coast supermarket chain was solicited and paid a one million dollar fee to change from one food manufacturer's products to another's. The justification was cost of computer reprogramming.
A national supermarket chain recently quoted a six figure amount to a specialty baker to carry its items for a single period with no assurance of retention.
When opening new stores, one Eastern supermarket chain takes a six-month grace period before paying its first invoice. This "extended fill" gives the new store time to generate cash-flow, while the baker waits for payment.
It is not out of the ordinary to have requests of $200,000.00 and above for slotting from larger chain stores. If an independent cannot afford the fee, they lose out.
The issue is growing beyond direct payments for carrying a product. For example, many food manufacturers are regularly forced to purchase space in a home shopping food catalog and send representatives to a variety of food shows and events.
More and more retailers are requesting that manufacturers pick up other costs -- marketing research, advertising, product demonstrations, and so on.
Great post and read. NUBV fits the model as a blue print scam. IMO
The patent originated under the ownership of Impact Beverage, Inc. that owned Enhanced Beverage, LLC. That is were the original right of ownership lyes. Nickolas absconded (stole the ownership monies) and the patent. Nickolas fraudulently presented to LDHC that this was 100% XND technologies which never had the rights to begin with. That is documented on this board. This would never have cleared due diligence in a major corporate deal. Nickolas cannot provide any documentation of waive of rights to the ownership by the coinventor and investment partners my friends. Instead of attacking the credibility of my information why don't you ask the directorship to state or prove otherwise. JABS why don't you share what you know about the lien ... you are apparently an insider. If I had to guess you are affiliated with Nickolas. If so who is to believe the source of a crook.
Hardly former. You have permission to identify me at which time i will validate or refute your source. Secondly, how many partners did Nickolas have at Impact Beverage, Inc.? I will validate that as well. Thank you for your post as I get more credible by the day. So the crook finally came half way clean that he had partners that he ripped off.
The attorneys are on it. If you are a business owner than Iwould like to hear your opinion on the financials and why you would invest on that basis.
How is my phone discussion any more or less accurate than any others posted on this board. with Ted, Steve, etc. I was one of the first on this board that actually spoke to Zouvas and encouraged you guys to stop talking to the ex-officio and start taking to the new interim CEO. But no, many continue to talk to the dubious ones that destroyed your investment and boost your confidence to invest and lose more. I feel bad for you guys. In fact, I have provided companies, contact names in prior post that others have contacted and backed my posts. Thereby, I have credibility. Believe me, this is not embellished.
The lienholder does not necessarily care if this rolls or not. They are interested in one thing and that is recovering their loss of $350,000. When this transferred to NUBV, the lien monies come right off the top. I submit to you the deal of XND to LDH may have not be legally consummated because of the lien and the Impact Beverage, Inc. shareholders. You talk about dilutiuon. The lien holder plus the Impact ownership would equate to more than 40% ownership in the company.If they agreed to get paid in stock I would agree with you. I can tell you that is not the case. That is why these guys are in hiding and Nickolas got canned. I'll bet you Ron et al wish they never met Nickolas. How hard and how long do you think Luke Zouvas is going to work on this thing when he isn't getting paid cash ... legal services for ownership shares. This young attorney has never seen such an entanglement like this in his life.
Call Luke, I would not be disclosing the lien claim if it was not slipped to me in a phone conversation with Luke Zouvas. Once he stated it to me and was not professional in responding to our request of further dialogue, it was time to let the rest of the investors know. Otherwise, if we were in negotiation to resolve I would certainly never disclose our discussion in a public forum. These guys are just as dubious as Ron,Steve, etc. IMHO. Information is knowledge and with knowledge comes power. There is strength in numbers and we should be uniting a front to get these guys to come clean or fold the tent.
Thank you flush bob. I wish you the best in recovering your loses else where. The lien was stated to me verbatim from Luke Zouvas on my initial phone call as he thought we were the lien holders. The Quench Water debacle needs to be asked of Steve Nickolas or perhaps Jason Pratt at National Beverage.
Was not responding to you ITS CARNAGE. I am providing this board for a request for information. I am providing those who ask. I am an owner to the patent rights. I am an industry supplier of the ingredients. I am NOT an insider. I have huge $$$ invested for over 5 years. These guys in SD need to respond because I like you want a return on investment. In short pay up or shut up ... otherwise this product won't see the light of day. Nickolas dug these guys a huge hole that quite frankly they can't dig out of. Money and relationships are critical to the future. This group has ZIP at this point in time.
Ted's inability to answer your question is the answer. If the patent wasn't encumbered his retort would have been an ABSOLUTE NO.
NUBV is encumbered in their ability to practice the technology ... plain and simple.
1-they no longer have anyone that has the know how to practice the technology. Not even Nickolas knew how when his water exploded out of the bottles due to microbial gases with Quench Water. They need Andrew Stewart the architect of the patent. Stewart has as much right to practice this patent as NUBV as he did not waive his rights to it. Stewart is an owner of Impact Beverage, Inc.
2-they have not responded to Stewart's phone calls or e-mails to negotiate a resolution. They haven't responded to the other owners from Impact Beverage, Inc to reach a resolution.
3-there is a lien against the patent from prior bad business dealings by Nickolas. The company doesn't have any cash to pay off the lien.
4-they can't purchase the proprietary ingredients because of prior Nickolas dealings. These are the true keys in producing these enhanced products that differentiate to that of the current marketplace ... Propel, etc.
5-There hands are truly tied and have made no attempts to take the handcuffs of because they have no working capital to do so.
6-IMO Nickolas is one of the big liquidators on the board because he is personally broke, has no means of income and has a huge lifestyle that he needs to support.
The last time Nickolas tried to market the product was Quench Water which collapsed the reason ... Nickolas tried to practice the patent without his technical guru Andrew Stewart and the bottles exploded from bacterial gas formation in transit to Japan. Nickolas then tried to replace the shipment by shipping plain water and got caught upon analytical testing and all contracts were cancelled. THE BOTTOM LINE ... THIS COMPANY DOES NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO PRACTICE THE PATENT EVEN IF THEY HAD THE RIGHTS TO DO SO. WE CAN HELP BUT ZOUVAS REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE US SINCE OUR INITIAL DISCUSSIONS. THIS IS NOT A BETTY CROCKER COOKIE MIX WHERE YOU THROW EVERYTHING IN THE BOWL, MIX, FORM AND BAKE. As investors you need to force these guys to resolve the issues. You have control, we have control and Zouvas needs to come out of hiding. the longer this goes without a PR the less credible it will be. SHOW YOUR TEETH AND SIT ON THE SIDELINES UNTIL HE ADDRESSES YOUR CONCERNS.
Just another one of Steve's hiding tricks. He is tough to hide as he is very tall handsome guy with a huge baratone voice.
They are. Fact #1 They do not have the rights to practice the patent without releases from Andrew Stewart and my investment partners from impact Beverage. The do not own the patent outright. Fact #2 they will not be able to purchase the key ingredient that masks flavor and makes the product shelf stable. That is our proprietary technology and my group controls that. Until Zouvas returns our calls and resolves this professionally the product won't see the light of day.
They say there is strength in numbers. Well there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 150 shareholders. If you really want to illicit a response from the directorship. Stop trading for a few days ... shutdown the activity and see how the directorship responds to that. Shareholders can take control through a collective force because there are no reserves on the otherside to fight back. Shareholders are the only cash value in this company at this point everything else is red ink. Take a position and show your teeth. They can only practice the technology if the have 100% ownership rights to the technolgy which they don't have. Force their hand to come straight. You will help us all.
This has serious potential but sits in the wrong hands. I do not tell anyone to buy or sell ... I simply provide information and try to stimulate your thinking to make the proper choices. How this board invests is their own business. This board I believe is provided to offer a place for point counter point discussion and to stimulate provocative thought and informed action.
DONE BOTH AND VERY SUCCESSFULLY
According to Nickolas on February 15th the market cap was estimated at $1,050,000 on outstanding shares of 2,100,000,000. If there has been a net purchase of roughly 300,000,000 shares since at about an average at best of .0007 ... that is only and additional $210,000 of additional capitalization (estimated shares OS 2.5 billion w/market cap @ $1.25mm). That doesn't even pay the bills for this small company. Are there any other business owners or senior executives that understand the metrics at what it takes to run a business other than Kevin and myself that can weigh in on the posts? $1.5mm dollars since the companies inception is chump change. That's all gone and then some.
You are right. Nickolas absconded with our monies sometime ago; however, that doesn't mean we lost are legal rights. Zouvas has acknowledged that and is one of the big issues to resolve. I would love to see this on the shelves just like you so I could recover my investment just like you, but I am here to say it is a long shoot. They need some rain makers in place and that is not going to happen because #1 they can't afford to pay cash for the talent and build the necessary infrastructure. Who is going to work for nothing? The only alternative would be ownership and that would mean major dilution to the shareholders.
They have lined their own pockets. Zouvas told me he isn't working for cash because there isn't any. Zen can you verify 7 billion shares in current ownership. The directorship holds the lions share and that is only paper with no cash behind it when you look at the financials there is $30,000,000+ in worthless paper ie carryover debt. They have debt and paybles to the trade in major sixfigure money. This company started in the red big time. The shareholders monies if propery allocated would zero them out instead. I'll guarantee you Nickolas grapped a big chunk if not all before his exodus.
Brasco the only contradication is you. The company is a shell ... it has a directorship, interim CEO and a couple of drones answering the phone. It does have a great business concept and product. With that said, you can't get it to market with no capital, no company infrastructure, no distribution partners, no manufacturing partners, no customers, no credit to purchase ingredients, a lien on the patent to the tune of $350,000 according to Mr. Zouvas that will remain encumbered until they can pay that off which isn't anytime soon. Then they must deal with us at Impact Beverage 27.75% ownership in the patent as well as Andrew Stewart coinventor. Unless Zouvas returns calls and emails this won't get resolved anytime soon. Our attorneys are taking the appropriate action as we speak. If this product sees the light of day ... it won't be until 2009 at best. How long will this stock have investor support if they don't see a rollout is imminent? The metrics speak for themselves if you understand a P&L, Balance Sheet, Cash Flow Statement. With that said, the aforementioned is not bullish my friend. To believe otherwise is a contradiction or just shear ignorance. I look forward to an intelligent response and rebutal from anyone on the board. I wish the facts and the current situation was contrarian to what I just stated, but it is not. I have been consistent with what I have posted and look forward to your response. IMO and GTA
We are trying to keep the attorneys out of this and talk directly. I have had preliminary discussion with nothing to follow in return. It is in the hands of the attorneys and Zouvas et al have been put on notice. That S*** is only getting deeper. Long time to resolve this one I am sorry to say.
I agree. Unlike many of you I have tasted many formulations of enhanced water with masked flavor and the potential is huge. Water is the most precious commodity on Earth. Southeast Asia where disease and malnutrition are prevalent is a huge market. Unfortunately, great concepts, ideas, products can't get off the ground without financial backing. Unfortunate for such a great idea be in the hands of such dubious individuals. It's good that Nickolas is out as he busted this idea several times already and burned many a bridge in doing so. At these levels, there are only 2 directions to go ... through the roof if they can get it together in time or unfortunatey bust. Time will tell. GLTA
Just tongue and cheek my friend.
My pleasure ... just trying to help those that are numbers and busy accumen challenged. Is there anyone on this board other than myself that is in the food and beverage industry?
Andrew Stewart patent holder - Just heard from him. Mr Zouvas et al is not responding to his emails to resolve the patent ownership issues. If anyone has the vine with Luke and the boys it would be in everyone's best interest to encourage a dialogue or this will get more entangled and convaluted. Kevin, I would like to reach out to you for your support in encouraging some first steps. We certainly don't want this to get antagonistic as this will not allow for a timely resolution to move forward. He is starting to believe they are all cut from the same cloth. I hope they haven't cut and run. I am not getting any response either.
Homer the 1mm shares you bought today couldn't even stock one 7 Eleven store with 6 cases of water. Get real. You and your buddies need to up the anti and buy blocks of 100mm. Come on pump it up. Are you aware of distribution agreements that you are not sharing with the rest? I know our board friend Brasco is holding back. He has got to know something, but is playing close to the vest. IMO
I love the enthusiasm on this board. You guys just need a ton of more greenbacks. NUBV needs at least $1,000,000 market cap to get on their feet (they are bone dry) ... this isn'going to happen at these levels. Trading $30,000 a day is just S**** and Giggles. They are not credit worthy and can't even buy the ingredients to make the product. THEY NEED MONEY MONEY MONEY!!! This board needs a quorem to buy the equivalent of 5 billion shares. Is that possible or do we have a bunch of skirts on the sidelines shaking the pom poms like Brasco. Fact, you guys get excited on blocks of 1mm shares which is the equivalent of about 6 cases of water at the retail level. Boy that is getting RICH. Come on Brasco I challenge you to give us some info that will instill buyer confidence. Brasco don't take it personal ... all in good fun ... just responding to your comments. IMO
How can you make that statement. NUBV hasn't provided any nutritional information or an ingredient declaration. Just great looking bottles with brand labels. We need to see more meat on the bone. We need to see PRs and website information similar to RudyBeverage. That would generate buying confidence and possible give this stock some legs. As has been stated in other posts a good deal of the dialogue on the board is superfluous diatribe and won't influence the movement of this stock either way. Needless to say, this stock has more upside potential than downside ... the question, is it sustainable? We need the answers to Who, Where, How, When.
Go to yahoo.com click on finance get nubv.pk quote and then click message board.
Brasco checkout Erie Plastics Pop N Shake Cap Technology this is the real deal and evolution in the beverage business. Cap technolgy with ampules of powder or liquids that discharge Nutraceuticals into your favorite beverage (water, juices, Gatorade, you name)at time of consumption. Fortify at the time of consumption WOW!!! The unique patented process is now moot.
I cut and paste the following from the website.
© 2007 Erie Plastics
Contact Us | Site Map
Pop N' Shake
Refresh. Replenish. Reinvigorate.
Today, getting satisfaction on-demand is simply irresistible to consumers who are on the go. And when it comes to beverages, they want FRESH. And they want it now.
That's where Pop N' Shake makes a splash.
Pop N' Shake is a patent-pending closure technology allowing consumers-from kids to seniors and everyone in between-to create their own blended drinks when and, most importantly, where they please.
Here's how it works
With the turn of a beverage cap and subsequent pop of the chamber, activation occurs and consumers watch a favorite flavor, vitamin or mineral fuse with their preferred, bottled drink. A few shakes later and voila-they're able to enjoy a great tasting beverage fortified with healthy active ingredients.
Pop N' Shake technology makes all the difference.
A unique dispensing closure system designed, developed and produced by Erie Plastics, Pop N' Shake incorporates advanced, first-of-its-kind technology that places it above the competition and yields:
Dual tamper-evident design
A patent-pending moisture and oxygen barrier securely separating active and inactive ingredients and prolonging shelf life
Micro-dosing of liquid or powder ingredients
Allows for accurate measurement for specific fortification
Pop N' Shake parts and processes
The Pop N' Shake closure system consists of these parts:
Shell—holds the chambers securely in place and incorporates a tamper-evident band
Chamber—holds ingredients and includes a coated, aluminum foil seal, providing the moisture and oxygen barriers necessary to keep ingredients fresh until the precise moment of consumption
Dust Cover—the closure is capped off with a dust cover/tamper evident security system
At Erie Plastics, we utilize leading-edge tooling with the most sophisticated hot runner/valve gate systems available to produce Pop N' Shake components—allowing for reduced cycle time, valuable cost savings and optimal part quality.
By developing the closure system, manufacturing its parts, and designing and building the fill, seal and assembly equipment, we've created a vertically integrated closure system as well as an efficient, turn-key solution for beverage manufacturers.
The right product at the right time
Erie Plastics developed Pop N' Shake to fulfill unmet market demand for a safe, clean and easy-to-use dispensing system for infused beverages. Pop N' Shake opens a new window of opportunity for beverage manufacturers and marketers to reach consumers with fun, distinct and functional beverages—for the pleasure of flavor, health perks or both.
Erie Plastics–a leading producer of plastic packaging
Established in 1960 and certified to ISO 9001:2000, Erie Plastics is an award-winning, Top 100 injection molder in the U.S. specializing in designing and developing plastic packaging components and closures for the food and beverage, personal care, consumer, pharmaceutical and household cleaner/detergent markets. With a client base of U.S. and Global-500 companies, Erie Plastics services customers from its headquarters located in Corry, PA., as well as its Székesfehérvár, Hungary facility.
If you checkout the yahoo message board. A post there states that an inside announcement of Dr. Michael Brown. Check it out for yourself as I don't wish to misquote the post. There are a couple of interesting posts. Here I just pasted the message for others to read...as follows.
I just got off the phone with a rep from Nutripure who was very honest and forthcoming about the state of the company. First and foremost, everything is currently halted. They have the bottling company selected, lables are created, advertising is fully planned, there are sales agreements in place for when/if all issues are cleared up and they are cleared to move forward with production. All finances for the company are frozen and unavailable to proceed in any way. There is confusion about who is actually the acting CEO. They've received notice that Steve Nickolas was no longer acting CEO, but I did certainly get the opinion that Steve N. is still on board and working to try and resolve the issues. I also received a very strong opinion that Steve N. has done nothing but work constantly for the betterment of the company. The gentleman I spoke to actually spoke very highly of him. Luke Zouvas, the company's attorney is listed as the acting CEO online, but they've just received notice that it is a third party who was one of the original investors in Liberty Holdings - a Mr. Brown who's first name I didn't hear due to phone static on my cell.
There are clearly legal issues being handled currently. The company has no money according to Luke Zouvas whom I spoke to last week on this, and have been running on external finances until this point, but have everything in place to move to production once they have the needed funds to cover the final costs of prod.
This is a judgement call. I'm willing to take a risk for the possibility of a high return if the legal issues are resolved and production comes to pass. From everything that I've seen and heard, there are some very strong backers for this company that it sounds as though may be taking the bull by the horns right now.
I'm buying (even though I already have a good deal of it), but with the understanding that this may or may not happen.
I wouldn't risk retirement fund or college money on it, but it may have possibilities.
That's the un-biased information on it. Neither pumping or bashing this stock will do absolutely anything to it's trading value.
I agree dumping at this level makes absolutely no sense.