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.
It's fairly common for a website that's less than 24 hours old, to be taken back down for further maintenance and updates after initial release. You have to keep in mind that this was a site that was discovered just yesterday that wasn't necesarilly press released as a new occurrence. It could have been taken down for a number of general web development reason. Hardly somehting that should sway one's investment decisions.
That is granted that you are talking about the new one discovered last night of course
More odd is that that website gets so little traffic tht it doesn't even rank in the top 30 million for web traffic on Alexa. I had an old blog that I made that had only 3 or four posts on it. In about 5 years time, with the most recent post being in 2014 and up until early this year it ranked on there. I honestly feel like just the few of us clicking that link will eventually get primary trucking enough traffic for some ranking info to pop up on there. It really, really, isn't that hard to get the bare minimum of traffic to make that happen.
I'm not sure if I should believe the posters that say ACGX definitely owns 25% of peoplevine and that owning more than 30% would cause issues, the one saying ACGX definitely own 50% of peoplevine, or ACGX that once again will provide no details in the numbers and leave us all to guessing.
In answer to complaints from investors about the lack of transparency in updates, ACGX releases yet another news update providing no numbers. No explanation of how much was paid or how the payment was completed.
Does this new deal decrease the percentage of ownership that ACGX has in PeopleVine? Does ACGX own 1% of Peoplevine? 2%? I guess we'll say 25% because that's what people post here, so it must be true right? I guess that's as verifiable as their financial documentation, so why not?
What percentage did ACGX own to begin with? We still have never been told.
Their valuation of $.50 for PeopleVine stated that it was because the last investment was at $.50 per share. Were all the other investments at $.01 and the final one a $5 investment at $.50 just to be able to make that claim? Who knows? They provided no detail to that effect.
But still we wait with excited expectation of the coming unaudited financials that could potentially be made up.
All as the dilution continues to trickle in, as investors continue to say this is so undervalued citing unproven documentation from the company as the reason why. And then we all wonder why the share price continues to crumble and press releases pick up less attention on each go. Smh
That is more than $11.6 billion U.S. dollars 0_0
I generally never believe in things that sound so outlandish but I'll ocnced that if this is a thing and that $2.2 billion dollar deal also exists, this will likely blow was past $10 per share. WAY past. I definitely wouldn't mind hearing official confirmation from the company
I think so too! Over $17,000 on the bid at $.0158. These huge bids keep coming in. Definitely ready to move up more. I'm liking this
Picking up really fast here! BID is above current price and ask keeps creeping up. These have been some huge bids too. I saw the bid stacked with over $24,400 in orders about 10 minutes ago.
Looking REALLY good.
BID almost 1.2 million. ASK 20,000. I think I know where this is headed! lol
Over $24,000 on the BID at $.015! Holy cow!
You're absolutely correct! My shares on Scottrade are still showing as DOLV and untradeable. I bought some JBZY today, so hopefully they'll all be JBZY at some point.
Seems like completely unnoticed by the board, CETH was taken over by a Chinese energy company mid 2015 but they may have gone defunct as well :/
I randomly looked CETH up today and saw that there was a purchase at the ask price o_0
Also looking it up shows it as China Energy Technology Corp instead of Convergence Ethanol Inc. It still shows as delisted on I-Hub though and also can't be traded in my account. I was wondering if maybe it was a reverse merger situation but it still seems to reflect being delisted on the Nevada SOS as well. No idea what to make of this.
Haha, that is extra funny to me because I'm going to be MC Hammer for Halloween! Something tells me JBZY is going to have me Hammer Dancing all the way to the bank.
Too Legit To Flip Indeed! XD
fluxambassador:
TOO LEGIT TO FLIP
If I'm not mistaken, all DOLV stop losses are rendered null and void because of the ticker change to JBZY today, meaning that they have all been canceled. So there should be no concern about stop loss selling being an issue.
Scottrade for me, still reflects DOLV and also says I can't sell it. I assume this will be rectified mid-day or at latest by tomorrow and considering this is he case with numerous brokerages, selling should be miniscule today and mostly a run up on buys.
Almost there buddy don't worry ;)
StockZoom
Monday, 10/23/17 09:39:53 AM:
Come on only 0.052 ???? I was hoping this hits 20 cents
Someone sticky this! This is one of the most informative posts I've seen on this board, even though it doesn't have directly linked sources. Paints a solid picture of what all the excitement is about.
And most read by even more! Over 325,000 reads! I've been on this site since I was in Junior High School and have never seen this level of activity on one stocks board. JBZY is gonna keep on rocking!
Holy cow, this was an amazing post. You really put things into perspective for me here! I've been annoyed trying to comb through posts on here with almost none of them having any info and having to do all the digging on my own elsewhere. This really put a whole lot of it in one place for me. Thanks, JBZY seems to be the penny play of the century!
I've been thinking the same thing. A big part of today's dip was the big DOLV news today. With this being the only other purported billion dollar reverse merger play, we're likely to see some of those profits trickle over here. Factor in the fact that FRFS has a float about 1/5 the size of DOLV's and it's very very likely FRFS will be seeing $.10+ soon, especially if news hits.
Not too worried here
That settlement just helped them avoid giving GS another billion shares or so but the usual never ending dilution continued regardless. Most recently another 21,000,000 shares as per the October 4th 2017 OTC markets update.
This company could sell this down to .0001 and people would still be saying "so undervalued" "no reason to be down here," and "it's not the dilution, it's GS selling!"
Noe the desperations set in enough that traders are proclaiming "debts gone!" as the company continues to dilute to pay off their debts, stating that OTC investors dont care about audits as OTC investors keep posting here that they care about audits, and stating "this is a $18 million revenue company!" When the company only PROJECTED that revenue. Luckily though since there's no way to verify their reports, I assume they'll hit their projections and beyond. Lol
If by "they" you mean ACGX management, you are correct. They seem to have made this pretty clear. They do not care about their unverified claims being passed on to shareholders, or at least not yet.
But I can assure you that I and many others do care and if I alone were to sell tomorrow, the price would likely hit .001 or below. This is clearly an issue that needs to be addressed instead of being passed on as a non issue, when it has been repeatedly proven to be a going concern.
I'm growing tired of ACGX's continued games, ommissions within releases, full on neglect to include relevant explanations of their actions, and neverending dilution.
Then why have OTC players come to this board and angrily railed against the company for not releasing an audit and stating that they were selling all of their shares?
Why am I as an OTC player thinking of selling 20 million + shares with the lack of an audit being one of my top reasons? Why has the lack of an audit been the key factor of debate on this board for years on end?
The evidence suggests not only that OTC players care about audits but that they do resoundingly. How can you simultaneously claim that OTC players don't care about audits and also claim that people should buy ACGX because their financials show increasing revenue, when an audit is just the proof that the said financial is confirmed as being legitimate?
One could literally have chosen to come to this board dogging the company for seven years straight about a lack of financials, 10 times a day, to the tune of what would now be more than 25,000 posts, and ACGX would have still done nothing to alleviate investors concerns to that regard.
After claiming $86 million revenue in 7 years, I think it would be fare to have one audit done before $.01 is attained to not leave investors hanging dry having to cling to silly "we're not at $.01 yet" and "they're saving money" rebuttals. It's about time they started to do the bare minimum in that regard to bolster investor confidence but instead they've taken one of the most interesting aspects of the company private after giving "some" unexplained amount of preferred shares to an unamed investor.
So you want to see the price of ACGX at $.01 or above, whilst one of the key factors holding back the price for nearly a decade is the lack of an audit, yet you feel they should refrain from an audit until the price has increased by nearly 800% to $.01? Seems a bit counterintuitive unless the release of an audit before .01 were to make the ACGX revenue claims unravel immediately.
I'm personally thinking about selling 1.5% of the float just based off of there being no audit. Other traders here have sold off about the same citing the lack of an audit being the reason for doing so and there are probably various others like us teetering on the edge of doing the same due to the lack of an audit, among various other glaring issues. An audit + not diluting 471 million shares his year, would currently have ACGX well into the pennies right now IF their claims were true.
This would be a win win for traders and the company, so clearly something else is amiss. This would be a simple fix to address concerns that have been dogging this company for nearly a decade. Why suffer from the same concern depriciating the stock price year after year without ever addressing it? We mine as well not even be dicussing QB yet when they're pretty to even be regarded as a Pink at this point.
Positively unverified. The funny thing about the no audit's saves money argument I've seen thrown around here is that the company could literally release one audit for just one quarter; just one! They could have a pre-release stating that they are being frugal and will move forward with some more unaudited financials afterward just to shore up the balance sheet but one audited just for one quarter to prove their claims JUST ONE TIME, as a thank you for investors staying by their side as they claimed $86 MILLION in sales since 2010.
This simple gesture would serve to alleviate nearly an entire decade worth of fears and concerns among investors about that one issue. Yet for some reason year after year traders here hope to see an audit that never comes.
One would have to imagine that any above the board company with a near decade worth of questions pertaining to the same key issue that has depressed their share price, that hoped to increase their share price, would incorporate such a simple fix. The fact that they have continued to allow this simple fix to go unanswered, and especially if they do not do so in the near future, would suggest that their intentions are likely nefarious. I hope that they do address this issue instead of playing the same tricky game.
It's one thing to blindly believe ACGX's claims that they have pulled in these astronomical sales numbers yet still have to dilute half a billion shares in 10 months time to pay off debts. It's a whole other level of denial to believe that this ACGX can't pay for an audit for just a single quarter out of the year to alleviate issues from the same question being posed for nearly a decade as they claimed an average of more than $10 million revenue per year.
The argument that ACGX is smart to not to have audits completed because they're saving money and that unaudited financial do not hold the price back, when traders have literally come to this board stating that they have chosen to sell 10's of millions of shares largely due to the financials being unauduted, is pure fantasy. I myself am teetering on the edge of also personally selling tens of millions of shares due to the lack of an audit.
For those on the "no audit's saves ACGX money team" while simultaneously on the "people should be buying shares of ACGX because it is netting greater profits" team, something is clearly being lost in transalation.
Think about it this way:
Possibly because they want to stay off of the radar of governing bodies saying just enough to get some investors to blindly follow them regardless of what glaring realizations are brought to the surface, so that they can continue diluting their 20 million or so shares every week.
That could explain why after nearly $90 million in sales in 7 years they still have their investors hitting mess boards like this one, claim in ACGX is smart to savin money but not having an audit completed, while there are companies with almost no revenue with audited financials.
The incredibly small amount of sites publicly showing that they use people vine that I mentioned in my prior post is probably why the company never, ever makes any public admissions to how many clients they have.
At the end of the day everyone invested here has to admit to themselves that if ACGX did not periodically post their unverified financial information, none of us would be here because they've otherwise provided nothing aside for partnerships that we dont know the details of, a tech arm that is now a private corporation, and an investor that got "some" preferred shares.
Imagine some major corp through an official news release when adress g the question of how many preferred shares an amount of preferred shares an investor was provided with, answered on the record with: "SOME!"
I'm getting a bit tired of having to repeatedly email the company to ask for clarifications of things that should have already been made straightforward and publicly explained.
ACGX is a marketing company that barely markets itself and released their most important recent PR on a national holiday, thus garnering minimal attention.
I hope for everyone's sake here, that they start providing more intricate details and stepping their game up on the whole.
It does seem more likely that there may be some sort of con game going on here, with every single release. Initially I felt like I was reading too far into each announcement but it started to become clear that every single thing had a key ommission that made it so that things could b argud in either direction positive or negative. After seeing this just so happen to occur time and time again, it seems likely that the reasons are intentional.
1. Lawsuit closing announcement says the investor will receive "some" shares. Provides no further detail.
2. Most recent alert says # of shares ACGX has in ACGX and that $.50 was the most recent investment. Does this mean that everyone else invested at $.01 and someone bought $1 worth at 50 cents a share, just so they could make thet claim? No explanation and just leaves shareholders to imagine the price of people vine alone is $.50 when when combined with all other aspects of the company it can't even crack a quarter of a cent.
3. Financials? Unaudited. They've been claiming an average of $10 million+ revenue for 7 years straight and still refuse to have their financial cliams verified.
4. Press release saying they forged a partnership, provided no details of the partnership. Is it a partnership just because the owners of the companies are best buds and go out for ice cream together? This could in fact be the case, since it provides no details.
5. A view of Peoplevine's ahrefs backlinks showed about 78 company websites with the "powered by people vine" statement and link on their sites. This was as of when I last meticulously went through them about two weeks ago and sorted through their total 303 domain links at the time and only came across 78 that had it listed. The good thing was that a bunch of those were strong long term customers for years but unless they're charging WAY more than their competition, that doesn't seem very impressive and hardly warrants the $.50 claim. Luckily that's just a small portion of the revenue they claim.
6. Add the fact that they've added 471 million shares to the float and it's not at all surprising to see that the price is so low. Literally the only thing they have going for thm is their increasing revenue claims and whether or not the claims are true is essentially a closely guarded secret. I bet 7 years ago ACGX investors were saying, "oh wow $10,000,000 revenue, I bet they'll get an audit now!" Nope, jokes on us.
I'm actually a bit taken aback by your refusal to believe dilution has taken place here. I'm not guessing that dilution occurred, I'm reading the clear statements from ACGX that confirm that dilution has occurred. The company very publicly releases statements of their prior dilution in each financial filing. There is no need to call Paul for the answer to a question that is prominently answered in every single quarterly and annual report.
To claim that dilution has not occurred, is to literally refuse to believe the companies own accounting of it's share issuance's.
The "giving away shares" reference is in respect to the issuance of 471 million shares this year alone, to pay off note holder debts.
I also own over 21 million shares but that doesn't really have anything to do with the topic at hand regarding the clear and meticulously documented dilution from the company.
The thought that you would believe the company is not diluting when both otc markets tally, and the companies own documentation available for public viewing confirms that they are, is a bit baffling really.
For example, when you read Paul Sorkin's personal statement from the recent shareholder letter stating that, "During the second quarter the Company issued about 300 million shares to debt holders to reduce debt" Do you conclude that this actually did not occur? Because the filings are riddled with similar declarative statements of share issuance's.
You can read that direct statement of dilution written by Sorkin himself here, so no reason to contact him to ask for what he has readily provided: https://www.otcmarkets.com/financialReportViewer?symbol=ACGX&id=175455
That's just one example of very, very many.
"And in trips didn't dilute at all."
While that would produce some level of solace and comfort in thinking they might look out for shareholders in that way and potentially not dilute if the price hit the .000 range, they also did dilute massively in the trips.
ACGX was in the triple zero level on 7/17/15 through 4/3/17 and during that time period diluted over 459 million shares as shown in their filing below:
Dilution is defined as the issuance of new shares of common stock that causes the overall value of shares to decrease. Keeping track of Otc Market tally's on September 18th 2017 about 4 weeks ago, there were 21 million less shares than there were on on October 4th 2017 about a week and a half ago, meaning that dilution has not only been occurring but it is also occurring currently.
Paul did not say they weren't diluting. He claims instead that they were not selling because he's been giving away hundreds of millions of shares, so that those people can sell them.
Every single quarterly and annual report has a specific section where it shows all of the dilution. Just open one of them run a control + F search for: issued an additional and you will find very many shares diluted. Currently we're up to at least 470 Million shares diluted in 2017 alone.
The problem is more so that in the face of said low volume, they diluted about 475 million shares. The most recent 21 million being within the past 3 weeks. If volume stays at the same pace and they continue to dilute at the same pace, ACGX can only fall deep into the triple zero range.
I recall a literal 2 week span last month where people were saying "dilution is done!" Because they did not dilute to the tune of tens of millions of shares for a whole 2 weeks. Dilution is clearly ongoing regardless of increasing revenue.
So essentially you're trying to say that ACGX management specifically does not want us to know about major events. I say this because this so called big news of Kroger was never press released by the company. I guess this would also explain why this weeks release came during a National Holiday.
In fact, running a google search for "ACGX Kroger" just pulls up your posts on various websites claiming ACGX landed a major Kroger deal and people responding to you wondering how you knew. Apparently all stemming from a tweet from Paul Sorkin involving a different cardboard box. Not the cardboard box I had been referring to, lol.
This Tweet to be exact:
$ACGX Helping clients with their #CustomPackaging #FoodPackaging #Boxes #Corrugated #ProductDevelopment #AllianceCreativeGroup #ACGX pic.twitter.com/F6gj3FHdih
— $ACGX (@ACGpaul) February 27, 2017
Remember when people thought that months ago and the big news came and the major news was that they designed a brand new cardboard box? I regret not selling when this hit .0042. I'm starting to think the cardboard box really was the most valuable and real announcement.
Nearly half a billion shares diluted in 2017 and the only tangible thing to show us that work is actually being done, is a cardboard box.
All these revenue claims are sheisty, unverified, not filed with the SEC, and quite honestly the only reason this didn't slip to $.0001 long ago.
For those that continue to wonder why the price of ACGX continues to falter, this company has an addiction to diluting shareholders while providing little by way of details within their announcements. This leaves traders having to rely on each other to get information, or just generally performing their own DD to sleuth out the sort of information that should have been readily available and supplied by the company.
In the 2 weeks between 9/18/17 and 10/4/17 ACGX diluted another 21,428,571 shares. That leaves nearly half a billion shares diluted in the first 10 month of this year alone.
They continue to display an abject need to dilute shares to cover minimal debts, while simultaneously claiming increased revenue and profitability through financial statements that are neither audited nor filed with the SEC. They ended filing with the SEC back in 2009, which should be red flag enough.
$27,313 on the bid at .0013 for a stock that more often than not, doesn't even trade half of that dollar volume in a full trading day. One of the things that keeps ACGX stagnant is the neverending flow of bid sitters.
In the time I've been here, almost 6 months now, I've legitimately seen either one or two people mention that they were buying at the ask. All the others gleefully announced their bid buys and then complained because no one hit the ask to make the price go up for them. The never ending trail of bid sitters being undermined by other bid sitters is an interesting self inflicted punishment.
The bid is stacked higher than the entire average volume of buys and sells for an entire trading day. Lol
I hadn't even thought about this angle but it makes a lot of sense and very well may happen. Though more of an aesthetic/topical aid, retiring 1 billion authorized shares would be a solid step toward building investor confidence.
I think he said revenue would start rising in Q4 and then further growth throughout 2018.
Yeah, I didnt even realize the market was open today until after 12 pm. I just returned from a hiking trip for the 3 days weekend. I'm sure many others are still away. One marketing faux pas after another, for this budding marketing company.
Could that be tricky wording masking that someone bought as little as 1 share at $.50 (for the purpose of being able to make that investment at $.50 claim) and just opening up a new avenue to further dilute after they eventually take it public? Just trying to get a better grasp of what this all means, being that this essentially just makes ACGX a trucking company that makes cardboard boxes now. I had been excited about this due to the tech angle, so I was hoping they wouldn't spin it off into private company.