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.
jj itronics filed a 8K so they still submit to being reporting company. The other companies that lost NIR lawsuits we not reporting and I dont believe they filed a 8K
twilight not even close. The judge had no imput as to the settlement. Two parties are free to contract as they wish. The judge did say something like - "itronics all of your claims are worthless and you owe NIR the money that NIR claimed. Show me where NIR gave in? They didnt have to and that is why you see a $8 Million dollar judgment against itronics. Doesnt sound like a settlement to me. Sounds like on the way to the execution itronics finally gave NIR the farm and everything in it.
Twilight you are the one telling me that the notes were "expunged erase removed from the liability side of the balance sheet" blah blah blah. What a hoot. if it sounds like an idiot and reads like an idiot---well twilight you are just an idiot. Cant blame it on sarcasm Where is the other stooge kjulie?
Itronics filed a 8K saying the notes were "cancelled". Now they will probably never release the settlement because it will prove they lied. If they didnt lie then file the settlement in a 8K as itronics is required to do. Look if the notes were cancelled (which they were not) then that would be great agreement to release into a 8K.
harpo you are dense. Now you want me to speak up after I have been doing just that this whole time. We all KNOW that the notes were not cancelled according to the court filings. The stipulation says enough to KNOW that NIR is in the driver seat if itronics doesnt pay those shares. The only thing you seem to know is what itronics ceo john whitney wants to put in a misleading PR
twilight did they settle or didnt they settle? Lets hear more about how itronics erased NIRs notes from the liability side of the balance sheet. Bunch of dimwhits
harpo that is just plain dumb. Hedge funds dont put out PR about what they do because they do not have to. itronics has to and that is why they filed the 8K. What is unusual is that itronics puts in a 8K the the notes were "cancelled" and there is no such language in the stipulation. We all know that the notes were NOT CANCELLED.
So now you hold on to a quote by Ribotsky that was probably written by itronics for the PR. What planet are you from
What ya got here is a company that fought NIR in court for years including appeals and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal bills. Itronics lost the hearing in January giving NIR Summary Judgment. Before NIR filed their judgment itronics HAD to settle with NIR. Itronics files a 8K with a PR saying the notes were "cancelled". I bet NIR under no circumstances would cancel their notes after they just beat itronics in court. Itronics issued a false and misleading PR and filed that PR with the SEC. When I point this out Twilko Kim Harp & Solder freak out. Just because itronics settled with NIR doesnt mean the notes are cancelled. And just because itronics issue a PR stating that doesnt make it true. I think it makes it misleading. Itronics can prove me wrong by releasing the Settlement to the public but they will not. It would prove them wrong in their PR and it will show the investing public that they are going to be issueing billions of shares to NIR over a period of time.
Twilight how long have you been pumping itronics because if you been in intronics for a long time you would be able to answer your own questions. If you followed the court case then you would know that itronics claimed that NIR sold itronics shares immediately and even claimed that NIR sold shares without having them (the short claim) NIR wouldnt have to hold the shares for any period of time because they would be converting shares on the notes between NIR and itronics.
The real question is whether itronics has converted shares for NIR yet, why dont you tell us as you know more about itronics than we do.
Post any feedback if you can.
Dont know of any managment or ownership changes other than what has already been reported in the OTC filings.
Yogo
Still doing DD on this one and will post as I receive. They just did a restructureing of the company so it is a super low floater. As news starts to come out I think we will see more activity imo
twilight your insults are pathetic but overall what you write clearly has entertainment value.
NIR would always accept cash but how is itronics who never showed any profit going to pay in cash? We can all tell you this, if itronics pays NIR in stock then it will be sold immediately.
Our understanding of the law is far superior than yours or your buddies on the itronics board. We just dont drink from the same punch bowl.
NIR wasnt "winning" NIR "WON" and I bet that itronics will never release the settlement because twilko and crew will then continue to try to "spin" something that is clearly bad for itronics investors
They are saying itonics liability to NIR goes off the balance sheet. We all know that is not true but look at what they believe
"It is now payable in seashells which I will receive in two years. We now have a new agreement. This does not require the judge to rule. I can now remove the debt (notes) from my balance sheet. Walla! Thay have been expunged! Itro is now free of the notes payable on the liability side of their balance sheet. Since I will be paying you in "free" seashells, I do not have to replace the note with any other liability. "
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62895794
SMF these clowns believe that itronics is not going to show an $8 million debt to NIR. These guys believe that POOF the notes have been "erased"
Read this classic
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62871582
Are you sayin George Soros shellacked itronics? This is great. Not only NIRs $8 Million of notes are "Gone" "Dissolved" "Cancelled" "expunged"
but now Soros cares about itronics. Please tell us did Soros sell short itronics for NIR?
"Gone" "Dissolved" "Expunged" "Cancelled"
All your words bro. It is great reading. Your post about the "seashells" is an all time classic. I will repost for you-
"It is now payable in seashells which I will receive in two years. We now have a new agreement. This does not require the judge to rule. I can now remove the debt (notes) from my balance sheet. Walla! Thay have been expunged! Itro is now free of the notes payable on the liability side of their balance sheet. Since I will be paying you in "free" seashells, I do not have to replace the note with any other liability. "
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62895794
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62933454
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62917502
Harpo, how can you say they are successful when they have not filed a financial report in 3 years? Are we to believe your inside info?
Keep in mind, that after NIR successfully sued ITRO for 2 years, and now ITRO owes NIR over $8 MILLION
BUT you are of the belief that ITROs debt to NIR has (and I quote) "disappeared"
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62895794
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=62865967
That reply says it all
Check this out
Welcome to Nir Group on Facebook. Join now to write reviews and connect with Nir Group.
www.facebook.com/pages/Nir-Group/135131259869121
Twil hopefully NIR goes under before itronics has to pay them back or release the terms of the settlement
Dude you are losing it. A 8million dollar debt is not removed from the liability side of the balance sheet. What a hoot. You are trying way too hard to come up with something. Look how you contradict what you write in the very same post. A Note is a contract, governed by contract law.
The only truth to what you say is "The contracts were replaced by the settlement agreement." That doesnt mean they were cancelled. NIR will still convert because ----- they were not cancelled.
The outline of the terms of the settlement is filed right here
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=w_PLUS_mAbOG6hljee_PLUS_H9tL48Wg==
Where in this does it say that the notes are "cancelled" in this court filing? It doesnt, but it does give some outline as to how NIR will get paid back.
We do see that itronics can pay in shares or cash, that is a good thing if itronics pays in cash. Hopefully they can.
PS if itronics doesnt pay they have a 8million dollar judgment against them for losing the lawsuit. Itronics may be behind the steering wheel but NIR has a gun to their head.
Expunged means erased dude. You are trying too hard and making yourself look foolish.
You really do not expunge business contracts, especially with a SEC reporting company. The SEC requires disclosure and the SEC would NEVER allow you to erase a contract. If we were to believe your use of expunge then itronics would have to go back and amend each and every 10Q and 10K for the past 5 years to make those adjustments.
If the notes were cancelled then NIR would not be able to convert into shares. The court agreement FILED in NY court says that itronics is going to pay NIR in shares.
Harp itronics is not the first company to enter into a settlement with nir. nir sued itronics and won, not the other way around. The formula is key to see if there is going to be excessive dilution or if itronics is going to preserve the shareholders. That is what itronics is hiding. Doubt that the agreement is unique nir works one way, convert and sell. but hey, we may never know until itronics releases it
m it is not in NIRs dna to take over a company and actually know how to run it successfully. They convert and sell then convert and sell. Read the court docs, itronics even testified to this fact
Harp. Dont think it would interfere as been following other companies that NIR settled with. It is always the same MO. Get shares for payments. The formula in this agreement is key.
You are a hoot twilko. Again you are backwards
The 8k included the PR not the other way around. But that doesnt make what is in the PR exactly true. The PR says that the notes were "cancelled" NOT expunged. Where do you get this stuff?
Dude you are going in circles. Everyone on this board is claimin that the 8k that itronics filed of a press release was proof that the nir notes were cancelled. Im telling you that a press release does not make something true even it if it filed in a 8k. The court filing says that NIR will be paid back in stock according to an agreed formula. So lets see the agreement that shows the formula. You as investors should want to see such a thing and not cloak it. You should be happy that the litigation is over.
Material events are required to be disclosed. It is pretty simple. The judge is not bound by anything other that the rules of law. The judge never entered any secrecy documents. Read the court filings. So you understand, if there is a confidentiality clause, that clause cant be used to avoid the SEC rules or laws. So the reporting obligations of itronics trumps any agreement and they cant be held liable for complying with the SEC.
ya saying that NIR were maybe the dopes to manage norma at 1.5 mil a year. But what if NIR was like magnetar on their own list of companies they invested in? Designed to fail and NIR works out some swaps offshore with merril
You are asking if the SEC requires disclosure? Are ya serious? Did you see the 8k that everyone brags about here? And that was just a PR.
If there was a confidentiality clause then you would not be able to read the court filings. Either way you look at it, you cannot contract to hide an agreement that the SEC requires you to disclose. Simply stated you cant enter into a contract to avoid the SEC rules. The point would be moot if itronics just filed the settlement with the sec like every other company that has a significant litigation such as this. We have been watching this case for a long time and were rooting for itronics to win. But they didnt.
No. If the SEC requires disclosure then itonics has to dosclose it. Very simple. You can not contract your way around federal rules and laws. The court filing doesnt have a confientiality clause and if it did, the NY courts would block its publication.
Why is everone on this board brainwashed with some conspiracy theory. It is quite amusing. If you dont think that NIR is some great investor then you are labeled as a fear mongor or a shorter.
Very logical harp, but disclosure required as a matter of law could never put you in default. Think it is in the shareholders best interest to see such an agreement.
So far so good as far as NIR not hurting the stock price
iBox has been updated
Florida Micro files disclosure documents with OTC Markets
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/FLMC/financials
You asked the obvious question didnt you? Itronics 8k'd the Press Release NOT the Settlement Agreement. Big difference dont ya think?
Nice to have CEOs as investors too. The complicit CEOs should get just as much blame when those stocks get cratered by NIR. Just keep those shares printin.
Only itronics submits to be publicly traded under section 12g. Itronics files 8ks for a reason, the have to report material news to their shareholders. Nir has shareholders too but they are not publicly traded.
Any information on the deal?
Any shareholders have any DD?
How long ago did the a deal take place?
you may be right but only itronics has the responsibility to file the agreement. It would be important to read the actual settlement so we know the formula referenced
Anyone know anything about Florida Micro?