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.
Well said. These patents have had a lot of work put into them and they are refining them as they expand on them. It's a process and it's looking pretty good!!!
Me too. I'll gobble those cheap shares up long before it gets that low.
Link to docket on Friedland case.
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/23861139/United_States_Securities_and_Exchange_Commission_v_Friedland_et_al
Now that this snake in the grass is in the hands of the SEC, OWCP can move forward unencumbered with their R&D and protecting our IP.
We have a stronger team than ever with big time names in R&D in this sector.
We are filing new patent applications with one patent already granted.
We are funded through 2018.
Our share structure is solid.
Studies will be completed in 2018.
10-k coming.
These prices won't be seen again, get in while you can.
$$$ OWCP $$$ GOING TO RUN HARD
What are the actual facts about any dilution… taken straight from the SEC filings (or from OTC Markets).
Outstanding Shares on 04/03/2018 = 147,758,908
Outstanding Shares on 03/01/2018 = 147,758,908
Outstanding Shares on 09/30/2017 = 146,316,600
Outstanding Shares on 06/30/2017 = 146,022,694
Outstanding Shares on 12/31/2016 = 139,447,782
From 12/31/16 to 04/03/18 it has been diluted by only 8,311,126 shares which is 5.9% increase over a 14 month time period. There is a little dilution but that’s normal for any company, and this increase in OS is quite small. Certainly not what you would see with a share selling scheme. OWCP is the real deal.
Go $OWCP
Their patent work is real, one granted, more to come. You're right about impatient investors whining because OWCP isn't busy making sure all their anxieties are pacified. OWCP is busy doing what they need to do to build our company and protect our IP.
Selling at the 52-week low?? Not a smart idea, Especially with a company like this that shows so much promise.
Dr Zeevi worked for Neuroderm which sold for $1.1 billion to Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma.
.....tick tock tick tock
$OWCP Long and Strong
Strong BUY. Load up at these prices while you can, when this goes up it's going hard and you'll be chasing it. Of course do your own DD.
$OWCP
tick tock
This is what I honestly believe about Dr, Zeevi.
She didn't sell her company, but rather the company Dr. Zeevi was a big part of sold for over $1 billion, which was the biggest deal like this in Israel history.
That's what I wrote in my post, it is true... I'm not trying to spin anything.
Go $OWCP
Yep..and I'm posting true facts so new investors will know the truth.
I honestly feel this is going to turn around soon and run back up.
tick tock
Dr. Yacoby Zeevi worked for Neuroderm which sold for $1.1 Billion. People refer to the company they work for as their company all the time. Totally normal phrase used in America. I took it as him meaning it that way. But yes he misstated it. She didn't sell her company, but rather the company she was a big part of sold for over $1 billion, which was the biggest deal like this in Israel history.
So Dr. Zeevi is a big deal.
Here's some awesome facts about OWCP's latest addition to their leadership team.
Dr. Yacoby Zeevi has more than 20 years of extensive scientific experience with both private and publicly listed companies in the biopharmaceutical industry. She joined Neuroderm (Nasdaq:NDRM), a clinical-stage pharmaceutical company developing next-generation treatments for central nervous system (CNS) disorders in 2008 as the Vice President of Research and was promoted to the position of VP R&D in 2010. From October 2016 until her recent departure, she served as Chief Scientific Officer. Neuroderm was sold to Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma for US $1.1 billion in July 2017.
That's still a HUGE deal, and Dr. Oron Yacoby Zeevi was an integral part of that deal.
The OWCP management team keeps getting stronger and stronger.
$OWCP Long and Strong
————————————————————————————————
OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp. Appoints
Dr. Oron Yacoby Zeevi as its Chief Scientific Officer
Ramat Gan, Israel, February 20, 2018 /PRNewswire/ —
OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp. (OTCQB: OWCP), (“OWC” or the “Company”), a developer of cannabinoid-based therapies targeting a variety of different medical conditions and disorders, today announced the appointment of Dr. Oron Yacoby Zeevi as its Chief Scientific Officer (CSO).
Dr. Yacoby Zeevi has more than 20 years of extensive scientific experience with both private and publicly listed companies in the biopharmaceutical industry. She joined Neuroderm (Nasdaq:NDRM), a clinical-stage pharmaceutical company developing next-generation treatments for central nervous system (CNS) disorders in 2008 as the Vice President of Research and was promoted to the position of VP R&D in 2010. From October 2016 until her recent departure, she served as Chief Scientific Officer. Neuroderm was sold to Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma for US $1.1 billion in July 2017.
Dr. Yacoby Zeevi is the inventor of over 50 issued patents and pending patents. Her expertise lies in industry-oriented innovation and scientific research, accelerating and orchestrating the evolution of new ideas through R&D proof of concept, intellectual property development, chemistry and manufacturing controls (CMC), early efficacy and safety trials, regulatory affairs and market landscape mapping in fields of unmet medical needs. She earned her Ph.D. in microbiology and immunology from Ben Gurion University in Be’er Sheva, Israel and also holds a degree of Doctor in Veterinary Medicine from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Dr. Yehuda Baruch, who will now assume the role of Chief Medical and Regulatory Officer of the OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp. commented: “I am very pleased that we have reached a stage in our development where we were able to recruit a scientist of the caliber and background of Dr. Yacoby Zeevi. Her past scientific experience and achievements will greatly benefit our endeavors”.
Dr. Yacoby Zeevi stated “I am very proud to join OWCP and cooperate with their excellent management team in order to advance the Company to the next level. The Company has achieved a great deal in its clinical development to date and I am sure I can help in accelerating its growth.”
Mr. Mordechai Bignitz, Chief Executive Officer, commented on the appointment, “I am proud and honored to have Dr. Zeevi agree to join OWCP and assume the role of CSO. She brings with her immense pharmaceutical discovery and development knowledge, a unique set of skills and an exceptional track record, which contributed significantly to the success of her previous company. Her addition will complement our management team extremely well”.
About OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp.
OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp., through its wholly-owned Israeli subsidiary, One World Cannabis Ltd., (collectively ‘OWC’ or the ‘Company’) conducts medical research and clinical trials to develop cannabis-based pharmaceuticals and treatments for conditions including multiple myeloma, psoriasis, fibromyalgia, PTSD, and migraines.
OWCP is also developing unique delivery systems for the effective delivery and dosage of medical cannabis. All OWCP research is conducted at leading Israeli hospitals and scientific institutions and led by internationally renowned investigators. The Company’s Research Division is focused on pursuing clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of cannabinoids and cannabis-based products for the treatment of various medical conditions, while its Consulting Division is dedicated to helping governments and companies navigate complex international cannabis regulatory frameworks.
For more information visit: http://www.owcpharma.com/.
You made the following statement in a previous post about what the SEC complaint said.
I-GLOW writes:
"What part about OWCP providing a Fraudulent Opinion Letter to expedite the removal of the restrictive legend are you ignoring."
Where does it say this in the SEC document? Paragraph and page please.
What's obvious is that YOU'RE WRONG...again.
The FACTS have been presented by the SEC in their complaint against Jeffery Friedland, his wife, and their companies in Colorado. Those are the defendants in this case. OWC or OWCP are not implicated in the Friedland's fraudulent activity which started in January 2017.
The SEC complaint document does not state anywhere that Jeffery Friedland used the same attorney as OWC. Anytime I have worked with a lawyer, I have hired a lawyer somewhere near me. Friedland lives in Colorado and had 2 or more companies in Colorado between 2014 and 2017. It goes to reason that the lawyer(s) Friedland used in his affairs with his two Colorado companies is not the same lawyer used by OWC, a company located in Israel. Jeffery Friedland would have no problem finding lawyers in Colorado.
FACT: There are over 1.3 million attorneys in the United States.
As of 2016, there are 1,315,561 Licensed Lawyers in the United States of America.
http://www.denniswpottslaw.com/united-states-attorneys-map/
According to the SEC, here are THE FACTS ABOUT THE 3 DIFFERENT OPINION LETTERS TO THE OWC TRANSFER AGENT (years 2014, 2016, 2017)
——————————————— 2014 ———————————————
"29. In August 2014, Friedland purchased 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock for $119,000 pursuant to a subscription agreement that he signed on behalf of Intiva, and the ownership of these securities was identified in OWC’s SEC filings (albeit with “Invita” rather than Intiva). On or around August 18, 2014, OWC provided an opinion letter to its transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with its issuance of stock to Intiva."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC issuing 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock to Intiva in August 2014. Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent. According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 is information not given by the SEC.
——————————————— 2016 ———————————————
"31. On January 21, 2016, Friedland and his company Global entered into a two-year “Media, Public Relations and Investor Relations Services Agreement” with OWC (hereinafter, the “Global PR/IR Agreement”), which Friedland signed as Managing Director of Global.?Under the terms of the Global PR/IR Agreement, Friedland agreed to develop a media, public relations, and investor relations program to create interest in OWC on the part of financial journalists, institutional investors, and the general investment community. In this role, Friedland agreed to “create a higher level awareness of [OWC], as well as the anticipated impact with the investors[;] [Global] will provide both an introduction of the company to the overall American population, as well as specifically target investors.” The agreement also states that Global would assist OWC in reaching investors by writing news releases, shareholder letters, corporate summaries, profiles, and website copy, and would establish OWC’s Facebook and Twitter accounts. The Global PR/IR Agreement stated that it could only be amended if executed by the parties in writing.
32. Pursuant to the compensation terms of the Global PR/IR Agreement, OWC transferred 5,134,375 OWC shares to Global on February 5, 2016. OWC provided an attorney opinion letter to OWC’s transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with the issuance of OWC’s stock to Global. OWC disclosed in reports it filed with the SEC in February 2016 that Global owned these shares of stock – 6.3% of OWC’s common stock at that time – and that Friedland controlled them as Global’s President and CEO, but neither OWC, Friedland, nor Global made any disclosure as to how the shares were acquired by Global."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC entering into a 2-year “Media, Public Relations and Investor Relations Services Agreement” with Friedland and his company Global and they paid him according to the agreement a reasonable amount of 5,134,375 OWC shares to Global. On January 21, 2016 the PPS of OWCP stock was .04 to .08 and therefore 5,134,375 shares would have been worth $205,375 at .04. It’s fair to say that if someone had done a PP with OWCP during that same time period, they could have gotten a PPS of .04 or less.
Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent. According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2016. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after February 5, 2016 is information not given by the SEC.
"36. On March 15, 2016, OWC issued a press release via PR Newswire announcing that Friedland had joined OWC’s Advisory Board to advise on business development efforts, and that Friedland would serve as the Company’s U.S. representative."
——————————————— 2017 ———————————————
"39. On or about January 3, 2017, Kathy Friedland organized Lane 6552 LLC, a company with no apparent business purpose or operations, with herself listed as the company’s sole member and principal.
43. On or about January 14, 2017, Friedland submitted a request to OWC’s transfer agent to reissue Global’s 5,134,375 shares of OWC stock to Lane 6552 LLC and remove the restricted legend from the securities.
45. In order to sell his restricted shares in the public marketplace, Friedland needed to have OWC’s transfer agent remove the restricted legend on Global’s 5,134,375 shares.
46. Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552. The letter was signed by a disbarred attorney. "
According to the SEC, it was this 3rd opinion letter provided in January 2017 to OWC’s transfer agent that was fraudulent with “misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552”. The SEC complaint is very clear that it was Jeffery Friedland who provided this 3rd fraudulent opinion letter (not OWC).
Since Jeffery Friedland was on OWC’s Advisory Board as announced in a PR by OWC about 10 months earlier on March 15, 2016, he may have used this leadership position with OWC which included his own OWC Email (Jfriedland@owcpharma.com), to have OWC’s transfer agent remove the restricted legend on Global’s 5,134,375 shares.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know if the attorney who drafted and/or signed the opinion letter had a current license to practice law at that time or was disbarred prior to January 2017. The attorney may have been disbarred later, that information is not given by the SEC, but if the Attorney was disbarred as a result of the SEC’s investigation then it is most likely that he was disbarred in 2017 after having signed the 3rd opinion letter which Jeffery Freidland provided to the transfer agent.
According to the SEC, here is what fraudulent documents were provided to the transfer agent by Friedland (not OWC) in January 2017:
1. “46. Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552. The letter was signed by a disbarred attorney.”
2. “48. Friedland also indicated on forms signed by his wife that were provided to the transfer agent that Global purchased the stock from OWC in January 2016 at a cost of $51,343.75, but there is no evidence of such payment from Global to OWC. The terms of Global’s agreement with OWC indicate the stock was compensation for media and investor relations services and not in exchange for any payment."
3. “49. Friedland further represented to the transfer agent on these forms that the OWC stock was not being transferred from Global to Lane 6552 as a gift, inheritance, or wash sale, but were instead acquired by Lane 6552 on January 13, 2017 at a cost of $205,375. There is no evidence of any payment to Global from Lane 6552 in that amount or on that date.”
"51. On February 3, 2017, OWC’s transfer agent, relying on the information provided by Friedland, removed the restrictive legend from Lane 6552’s stock."
————————————————————————————————
There is no evidence that OWC colluded with Jeffery Friedland in 2014. Jeffery Friedland’s activities in Colorado were his activities, not those of OWC.
I-GLOW writes:
“Yes, most certainly there was collusion and OWCP was complicit in the share selling scheme from beginning stating in 2014. The scam started at the Friedland dinner party in 2014.”
This statement of yours is no where in the SEC complaint document: “there was collusion and OWCP was complicit in the share selling scheme from beginning stating in 2014”, and does not merit a preface such as “Yes, most certainly”. The SEC action did not state this. It is not fact. It is not “most certainly”. The SEC complaint against Jeffery Friedlant actually exonerates OWC in my opinion, and they are not a party in this SEC action; fact.
There was no representative of OWC at Jeffery Friedland’s dinner party in Colorado in 2014. This was Jefferey Friedland doing his own thing in Colorado and the OWC management in Israel was not party to it.
According to the SEC, concerning OWC’s interaction with Jeffery Friedland in 2014, the FACTS ARE:
"29. In August 2014, Friedland purchased 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock for $119,000 pursuant to a subscription agreement that he signed on behalf of Intiva, and the ownership of these securities was identified in OWC’s SEC filings (albeit with “Invita” rather than Intiva). On or around August 18, 2014, OWC provided an opinion letter to its transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with its issuance of stock to Intiva."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC issuing 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock to Intiva in August 2014. Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 is information not given by the SEC.
This current PPS is a strong support level after the price dropped as a result of initial fear from the SEC action against Jeffery Friedland. OWCP (OWC) was not named or implicated as a party to the pending SEC action against Friedland. Since the SEC Complaint was filed the case has gone before the judge and has several hearings on the docketed and nowhere is OWC or OWCP a party to these hearings. The assets of Jefferey Friedland and his wife have been frozen and the SEC will likely recovery several million dollars from the Friedlands.
Now that the case is moving forward and discovery will take place showing investors that OWCP was not a party to it, nor had any knowledge of it, this stock will move up sharply, you'll see.
WRONG! The Fact is: The SEC did NOT state anywhere that OWC was party to Jeffery Friedland’s fraudulent 144 Opinion Letter, nor any of Jeffery Friedland’s fraudulent activity.
Fact: The SEC stated that it was Friedland himself who provided the fraudulent 144 Opinion Letter in January 2017.
Just so the FACTS are KNOWN AND CLEAR as the SEC has presented them; NOWHERE in the SEC complaint against Jeffery Friedland does it state that the two opinion letters provided by OWC in 2014 and 2016 are fraudulent. On the other hand, the SEC complaint does clearly state that the opinion letter provided by Jeffery Friedland in 2017 was fraudulent with this clear language used by the SEC in the SEC complaint (paragraph 46, page 14).
"Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552."
The definition of purported is:
"appear or claim to be or do something, especially falsely; profess."
The SEC used very specific language as to why this opinion letter is fraudulent. This opinion letter was provided to the transfer agent in January 2017 by Jeffery Friedland (not OWC).
Since the SEC used the word purported, the opinion letter including the attorney's signature may have been forged. Either way, OWC is not implicated in any way regarding the 2017 opinion letter provided by Jeffery Friedland.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014 and 2016. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 or February 5, 2016, is information not given by the SEC.
If Friedland's Attorney was disbarred as a result of the SEC’s investigation then it is most likely that he was disbarred in 2017 after having drafted and/or signed the third [fraudulent] opinion letter which Jeffery Freidland (not OWC) provided to the transfer agent. However, this information is not given by the SEC.
The FACTS have been presented by the SEC in their complaint against Jeffery Friedland, his wife, and their companies in Colorado. Those are the defendants in this case. OWC or OWCP are not implicated in the Friedland's fraudulent activity which started in January 2017.
The SEC complaint document does not state anywhere that Jeffery Friedland used the same attorney as OWC. Anytime I have worked with a lawyer, I have hired a lawyer somewhere near me. Friedland lives in Colorado and had 2 or more companies in Colorado between 2014 and 2017. It goes to reason that the lawyer(s) Friedland used in his affairs with his two Colorado companies is not the same lawyer used by OWC, a company located in Israel. Jeffery Friedland would have no problem finding lawyers in Colorado.
FACT: There are over 1.3 million attorneys in the United States.
As of 2016, there are 1,315,561 Licensed Lawyers in the United States of America.
http://www.denniswpottslaw.com/united-states-attorneys-map/
THE FACTS ABOUT THE 3 DIFFERENT OPINION LETTERS TO THE OWC TRANSFER AGENT (years 2014, 2016, 2017), according to the SEC.
——————————————— 2014 ———————————————
"29. In August 2014, Friedland purchased 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock for $119,000 pursuant to a subscription agreement that he signed on behalf of Intiva, and the ownership of these securities was identified in OWC’s SEC filings (albeit with “Invita” rather than Intiva). On or around August 18, 2014, OWC provided an opinion letter to its transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with its issuance of stock to Intiva."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC issuing 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock to Intiva in August 2014. Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent. According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 is information not given by the SEC.
——————————————— 2016 ———————————————
"31. On January 21, 2016, Friedland and his company Global entered into a two-year “Media, Public Relations and Investor Relations Services Agreement” with OWC (hereinafter, the “Global PR/IR Agreement”), which Friedland signed as Managing Director of Global.?Under the terms of the Global PR/IR Agreement, Friedland agreed to develop a media, public relations, and investor relations program to create interest in OWC on the part of financial journalists, institutional investors, and the general investment community. In this role, Friedland agreed to “create a higher level awareness of [OWC], as well as the anticipated impact with the investors[;] [Global] will provide both an introduction of the company to the overall American population, as well as specifically target investors.” The agreement also states that Global would assist OWC in reaching investors by writing news releases, shareholder letters, corporate summaries, profiles, and website copy, and would establish OWC’s Facebook and Twitter accounts. The Global PR/IR Agreement stated that it could only be amended if executed by the parties in writing.
32. Pursuant to the compensation terms of the Global PR/IR Agreement, OWC transferred 5,134,375 OWC shares to Global on February 5, 2016. OWC provided an attorney opinion letter to OWC’s transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with the issuance of OWC’s stock to Global. OWC disclosed in reports it filed with the SEC in February 2016 that Global owned these shares of stock – 6.3% of OWC’s common stock at that time – and that Friedland controlled them as Global’s President and CEO, but neither OWC, Friedland, nor Global made any disclosure as to how the shares were acquired by Global."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC entering into a 2-year “Media, Public Relations and Investor Relations Services Agreement” with Friedland and his company Global and they paid him according to the agreement a reasonable amount of 5,134,375 OWC shares to Global. On January 21, 2016 the PPS of OWCP stock was .04 to .08 and therefore 5,134,375 shares would have been worth $205,375 at .04. It’s fair to say that if someone had done a PP with OWCP during that same time period, they could have gotten a PPS of .04 or less.
Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent. According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2016. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after February 5, 2016 is information not given by the SEC.
"36. On March 15, 2016, OWC issued a press release via PR Newswire announcing that Friedland had joined OWC’s Advisory Board to advise on business development efforts, and that Friedland would serve as the Company’s U.S. representative."
——————————————— 2017 ———————————————
"39. On or about January 3, 2017, Kathy Friedland organized Lane 6552 LLC, a company with no apparent business purpose or operations, with herself listed as the company’s sole member and principal.
43. On or about January 14, 2017, Friedland submitted a request to OWC’s transfer agent to reissue Global’s 5,134,375 shares of OWC stock to Lane 6552 LLC and remove the restricted legend from the securities.
45. In order to sell his restricted shares in the public marketplace, Friedland needed to have OWC’s transfer agent remove the restricted legend on Global’s 5,134,375 shares.
46. Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552. The letter was signed by a disbarred attorney. "
According to the SEC, it was this 3rd opinion letter provided in January 2017 to OWC’s transfer agent that was fraudulent with “misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552”. The SEC complaint is very clear that it was Jeffery Friedland who provided this 3rd fraudulent opinion letter (not OWC).
Since Jeffery Friedland was on OWC’s Advisory Board as announced in a PR by OWC about 10 months earlier on March 15, 2016, he may have used this leadership position with OWC which included his own OWC Email (Jfriedland@owcpharma.com), to have OWC’s transfer agent remove the restricted legend on Global’s 5,134,375 shares.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know if the attorney who drafted and/or signed the opinion letter had a current license to practice law at that time or was disbarred prior to January 2017. The attorney may have been disbarred later, that information is not given by the SEC, but if the Attorney was disbarred as a result of the SEC’s investigation then it is most likely that he was disbarred in 2017 after having signed the 3rd opinion letter which Jeffery Freidland provided to the transfer agent.
According to the SEC, here is what fraudulent documents were provided to the transfer agent by Friedland (not OWC) in January 2017:
1. “46. Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552. The letter was signed by a disbarred attorney.”
2. “48. Friedland also indicated on forms signed by his wife that were provided to the transfer agent that Global purchased the stock from OWC in January 2016 at a cost of $51,343.75, but there is no evidence of such payment from Global to OWC. The terms of Global’s agreement with OWC indicate the stock was compensation for media and investor relations services and not in exchange for any payment."
3. “49. Friedland further represented to the transfer agent on these forms that the OWC stock was not being transferred from Global to Lane 6552 as a gift, inheritance, or wash sale, but were instead acquired by Lane 6552 on January 13, 2017 at a cost of $205,375. There is no evidence of any payment to Global from Lane 6552 in that amount or on that date.”
"51. On February 3, 2017, OWC’s transfer agent, relying on the information provided by Friedland, removed the restrictive legend from Lane 6552’s stock."
————————————————————————————————
There is no evidence that OWC colluded with Jeffery Friedland in 2014. Jeffery Friedland’s activities in Colorado were his activities, not those of OWC.
This statement of yours is no where in the SEC complaint document: “there was collusion and OWCP was complicit in the share selling scheme from beginning stating in 2014”, and does not merit a preface such as “Yes, most certainly”. The SEC action did not state this. It is not fact. It is not “most certainly”. The SEC complaint against Jeffery Friedlant actually exonerates OWC in my opinion, and they are not a party in this SEC action; fact.
I-GLOW writes:
“Yes, most certainly there was collusion and OWCP was complicit in the share selling scheme from beginning stating in 2014. The scam started at the Friedland dinner party in 2014.”
There was no representative of OWC at Jeffery Friedland’s dinner party in Colorado in 2014. This was Jefferey Friedland doing his own thing in Colorado and the OWC management in Israel was not party to it.
According to the SEC, concerning OWC’s interaction with Jeffery Friedland in 2014, the FACTS ARE:
"29. In August 2014, Friedland purchased 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock for $119,000 pursuant to a subscription agreement that he signed on behalf of Intiva, and the ownership of these securities was identified in OWC’s SEC filings (albeit with “Invita” rather than Intiva). On or around August 18, 2014, OWC provided an opinion letter to its transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with its issuance of stock to Intiva."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC issuing 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock to Intiva in August 2014. Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 is information not given by the SEC.
————————————————————————————————
I-GLOW writes:
"What part about OWCP providing a Fraudulent Opinion Letter to expedite the removal of the restrictive legend are you ignoring."
Where does it say this in the SEC document? Paragraph and page please.
Moderators please sticky this.
Nevermind, I just figured it out. I never short stocks so wasn't thinking of it right. Now I realize why it's a higher price to trigger a squeeze.
Thanks again Jack for the reply and taking the time to share your knowledge. I understood most of your message, and about the shorting. Except the one thing I don't understand, is if the squeeze trigger price of PRHL right now is .11 then how does that allow them to keep shorting since the price has been below that since 2015, you mentioned down to .06, and is currently at .0245, 8 cents lower than the .11 squeeze trigger price?
Is there a website I can lookup what you mentioned as "Regulation SHO The squeeze trigger price" for a stock? Or is it only websites that require a subscription?
Thanks,
ETZ
Thanks for the reply. When a share is sold as a short how long is the period given until it must be covered? or does it vary?
So do you think this will keep being shorted down and at what point is it too risky to short? Trips?
Isn't there a squeeze coming if there are so many outstanding shorts? Or do they just keep driving the price down and are able to do this because of lack of support?
When do you think they will release the Annual by?
How did you come up with a PPS of $10? Today R/S is still being converted but a few shares have been trading at 2.60-2.90, but the R/S is not complete therefore most people are not able to buy or sell shares today.
I'm curious, do you think it might be possible that they will dilute more once this R/S settles ?
I've read many post on this page and would love to hear your opinions for the big drop today. Is it the accounting situation, are they late on the 10K, what exactly?
What cause it to drop from .047 to .0221 on Dec 5, 2017?
I'm checking it out. Thanks for the info.
By the way, is there a reason people don't just say the ticker but instead leave out a vowel or something? i.e. AX!M
What's the ticker please?
Excellent info about what Dr. Oron Yacoby Zeevi brings to the OWC research team.
OWCP has such an awesome management and research team now. As all this JF stuff passes and is in the rear view mirror, OWC keeps moving along with their research. This kind of work does take time, but with this A-Team, long investors will be greatly rewarded in my opinion. No doubt in my mind. This company is a once in a lifetime opportunity. At the current PPS it's a STRONG BUY. Today we saw the double bottom with and will probably close green today. Full reversal is imminent. Time to buy is now. Good Luck To All.
Thanks for posting the link moxa1.
Does anyone know anything about what's going on with this company?
Thanks, and post TRUTH when you can. People can see through the BS.
$OWCP Long and Strong
$OWCP Long and Strong -tick-tock -tick-tock
OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp. Issues Chairman's Statement to Shareholders
Mar 08, 2018, 10:31 ET
PETACH TIKVA, Israel, March 8, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp. (OTCQB: OWCP), a developer of cannabinoid-based therapies targeting a variety of different medical conditions and disorders, today issued a chairman's statement to shareholders.
In the light of recent events, and the numerous communications we have received from shareholders, I would like to address this statement to the Shareholders of OWCP (the "Company").
The Company is committed to building a leadership position in the medical cannabis market and to our mission of improving patients' lives through the development of new solutions, products and devices derived from and delivery mechanisms for the use of medical cannabis.
We have recruited a highly skilled management team with multi-year experience in medical cannabis, pharmaceutical development, corporate management and capital markets.
As we have stated in our 8-K filing of today, we are neither a party to the pending SEC action against a former adviser to the Company, nor is the Company alleged to have been a party to nor had any knowledge of the purported scheme by the former adviser, who is the subject of the SEC action.
The Company's management is committed to and focused on our development programs which are continuing as per plan. These include inter alia, our current safety trial for our cannabis cream; the approval processes to initiate a safety trial for our oral disintegrating tablet and additional pipeline projects.
As a management team, we are committed to building value for our shareholders though professional, ethical and strategic management of a technology platform that we believe will bring improved health and quality of life to millions of patients around the world. We have recently announced the addition of our new Chief Scientific Officer and we continue to develop the resources we believe will bolster our endeavors in creating a great company.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Stanley Hirsch
Chairman of the Board
Once again you don't seem to know what the FACTS are.
Here's a FACT:
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014 and 2016. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 or February 5, 2016, is information not given by the SEC.
Statements you made in your reply to me are not supported by FACTS.
————————————————————————————————
There is no evidence that OWC colluded with Jeffery Friedland in 2014. Jeffery Friedland’s activities in Colorado were his activities, not those of OWC.
You have made similar statements that are not supported by FACTS in your previous posts as well.
I totally agree too! Some investors tend to forget that this is a bio-tech research company paving new roads, which takes time. Investors who are Impatient should not invest in a bio-tech research company.
So much progress was made in 2017, yet some investors overlook it because the cream is not on the shelves yet. It will be and they're doing it right so that we will have a sustainable competitive advantage and become a leader in this sector.
Looking forward to a strong rebound now and as the catalyst come in 2018 this stock will go north.
Just so the FACTS are KNOWN AND CLEAR as the SEC has presented them; NOWHERE in the SEC complaint against Jeffery Friedland does it state that the two opinion letters provided by OWC in 2014 and 2016 are fraudulent. On the other hand, the SEC complaint does clearly state that the opinion letter provided by Jeffery Friedland in 2017 was fraudulent with this clear language used by the SEC in the SEC complaint (paragraph 46, page 14).
"Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552."
The definition of purported is:
"appear or claim to be or do something, especially falsely; profess."
The SEC used very specific language as to why this opinion letter is fraudulent. This opinion letter was provided to the transfer agent in January 2017 by Jeffery Friedland (not OWC).
Since the SEC used the word purported, the opinion letter including the attorney's signature may have been forged. Either way, OWC is not implicated in any way regarding the 2017 opinion letter provided by Jeffery Friedland.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014 and 2016. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 or February 5, 2016, is information not given by the SEC.
If Friedland's Attorney was disbarred as a result of the SEC’s investigation then it is most likely that he was disbarred in 2017 after having drafted and/or signed the third [fraudulent] opinion letter which Jeffery Freidland (not OWC) provided to the transfer agent. However, this information is not given by the SEC.
The FACTS have been presented by the SEC in their complaint against Jeffery Friedland, his wife, and their companies in Colorado. Those are the defendants in this case. OWC or OWCP are not implicated in the Friedland's fraudulent activity which started in January 2017.
The SEC complaint document does not state anywhere that Jeffery Friedland used the same attorney as OWC. Anytime I have worked with a lawyer, I have hired a lawyer somewhere near me. Friedland lives in Colorado and had 2 or more companies in Colorado between 2014 and 2017. It goes to reason that the lawyer(s) Friedland used in his affairs with his two Colorado companies is not the same lawyer used by OWC, a company located in Israel. Jeffery Friedland would have no problem finding lawyers in Colorado.
FACT: There are over 1.3 million attorneys in the United States.
As of 2016, there are 1,315,561 Licensed Lawyers in the United States of America.
http://www.denniswpottslaw.com/united-states-attorneys-map/
THE FACTS ABOUT THE 3 DIFFERENT OPINION LETTERS TO THE OWC TRANSFER AGENT (years 2014, 2016, 2017), according to the SEC.
——————————————— 2014 ———————————————
"29. In August 2014, Friedland purchased 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock for $119,000 pursuant to a subscription agreement that he signed on behalf of Intiva, and the ownership of these securities was identified in OWC’s SEC filings (albeit with “Invita” rather than Intiva). On or around August 18, 2014, OWC provided an opinion letter to its transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with its issuance of stock to Intiva."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC issuing 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock to Intiva in August 2014. Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent. According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 is information not given by the SEC.
——————————————— 2016 ———————————————
"31. On January 21, 2016, Friedland and his company Global entered into a two-year “Media, Public Relations and Investor Relations Services Agreement” with OWC (hereinafter, the “Global PR/IR Agreement”), which Friedland signed as Managing Director of Global.?Under the terms of the Global PR/IR Agreement, Friedland agreed to develop a media, public relations, and investor relations program to create interest in OWC on the part of financial journalists, institutional investors, and the general investment community. In this role, Friedland agreed to “create a higher level awareness of [OWC], as well as the anticipated impact with the investors[;] [Global] will provide both an introduction of the company to the overall American population, as well as specifically target investors.” The agreement also states that Global would assist OWC in reaching investors by writing news releases, shareholder letters, corporate summaries, profiles, and website copy, and would establish OWC’s Facebook and Twitter accounts. The Global PR/IR Agreement stated that it could only be amended if executed by the parties in writing.
32. Pursuant to the compensation terms of the Global PR/IR Agreement, OWC transferred 5,134,375 OWC shares to Global on February 5, 2016. OWC provided an attorney opinion letter to OWC’s transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with the issuance of OWC’s stock to Global. OWC disclosed in reports it filed with the SEC in February 2016 that Global owned these shares of stock – 6.3% of OWC’s common stock at that time – and that Friedland controlled them as Global’s President and CEO, but neither OWC, Friedland, nor Global made any disclosure as to how the shares were acquired by Global."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC entering into a 2-year “Media, Public Relations and Investor Relations Services Agreement” with Friedland and his company Global and they paid him according to the agreement a reasonable amount of 5,134,375 OWC shares to Global. On January 21, 2016 the PPS of OWCP stock was .04 to .08 and therefore 5,134,375 shares would have been worth $205,375 at .04. It’s fair to say that if someone had done a PP with OWCP during that same time period, they could have gotten a PPS of .04 or less.
Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent. According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2016. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after February 5, 2016 is information not given by the SEC.
"36. On March 15, 2016, OWC issued a press release via PR Newswire announcing that Friedland had joined OWC’s Advisory Board to advise on business development efforts, and that Friedland would serve as the Company’s U.S. representative."
——————————————— 2017 ———————————————
"39. On or about January 3, 2017, Kathy Friedland organized Lane 6552 LLC, a company with no apparent business purpose or operations, with herself listed as the company’s sole member and principal.
43. On or about January 14, 2017, Friedland submitted a request to OWC’s transfer agent to reissue Global’s 5,134,375 shares of OWC stock to Lane 6552 LLC and remove the restricted legend from the securities.
45. In order to sell his restricted shares in the public marketplace, Friedland needed to have OWC’s transfer agent remove the restricted legend on Global’s 5,134,375 shares.
46. Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552. The letter was signed by a disbarred attorney. "
According to the SEC, it was this 3rd opinion letter provided in January 2017 to OWC’s transfer agent that was fraudulent with “misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552”. The SEC complaint is very clear that it was Jeffery Friedland who provided this 3rd fraudulent opinion letter (not OWC).
Since Jeffery Friedland was on OWC’s Advisory Board as announced in a PR by OWC about 10 months earlier on March 15, 2016, he may have used this leadership position with OWC which included his own OWC Email (Jfriedland@owcpharma.com), to have OWC’s transfer agent remove the restricted legend on Global’s 5,134,375 shares.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know if the attorney who drafted and/or signed the opinion letter had a current license to practice law at that time or was disbarred prior to January 2017. The attorney may have been disbarred later, that information is not given by the SEC, but if the Attorney was disbarred as a result of the SEC’s investigation then it is most likely that he was disbarred in 2017 after having signed the 3rd opinion letter which Jeffery Freidland provided to the transfer agent.
According to the SEC, here is what fraudulent documents were provided to the transfer agent by Friedland (not OWC) in January 2017:
1. “46. Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552. The letter was signed by a disbarred attorney.”
2. “48. Friedland also indicated on forms signed by his wife that were provided to the transfer agent that Global purchased the stock from OWC in January 2016 at a cost of $51,343.75, but there is no evidence of such payment from Global to OWC. The terms of Global’s agreement with OWC indicate the stock was compensation for media and investor relations services and not in exchange for any payment."
3. “49. Friedland further represented to the transfer agent on these forms that the OWC stock was not being transferred from Global to Lane 6552 as a gift, inheritance, or wash sale, but were instead acquired by Lane 6552 on January 13, 2017 at a cost of $205,375. There is no evidence of any payment to Global from Lane 6552 in that amount or on that date.”
"51. On February 3, 2017, OWC’s transfer agent, relying on the information provided by Friedland, removed the restrictive legend from Lane 6552’s stock."
————————————————————————————————
There is no evidence that OWC colluded with Jeffery Friedland in 2014. Jeffery Friedland’s activities in Colorado were his activities, not those of OWC.
This statement of yours is no where in the SEC complaint document: “there was collusion and OWCP was complicit in the share selling scheme from beginning stating in 2014”, and does not merit a preface such as “Yes, most certainly”. The SEC action did not state this. It is not fact. It is not “most certainly”. The SEC complaint against Jeffery Friedlant actually exonerates OWC in my opinion, and they are not a party in this SEC action; fact.
I-GLOW writes:
“Yes, most certainly there was collusion and OWCP was complicit in the share selling scheme from beginning stating in 2014. The scam started at the Friedland dinner party in 2014.”
There was no representative of OWC at Jeffery Friedland’s dinner party in Colorado in 2014. This was Jefferey Friedland doing his own thing in Colorado and the OWC management in Israel was not party to it.
According to the SEC, concerning OWC’s interaction with Jeffery Friedland in 2014, the FACTS ARE:
"29. In August 2014, Friedland purchased 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock for $119,000 pursuant to a subscription agreement that he signed on behalf of Intiva, and the ownership of these securities was identified in OWC’s SEC filings (albeit with “Invita” rather than Intiva). On or around August 18, 2014, OWC provided an opinion letter to its transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with its issuance of stock to Intiva."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC issuing 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock to Intiva in August 2014. Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 is information not given by the SEC.
I agree with you and moxa1. This is a blip and will soon pass, and then this stock will take off again.
The FACTS have been presented by the SEC in their complaint against Jeffery Friedland, his wife, and their companies in Colorado. Those are the defendants in this case. OWC or OWCP are not implicated in the Friedland's fraudulent activity which started in January 2017.
The SEC complaint document does not state anywhere that Jeffery Friedland used the same attorney as OWC. Anytime I have worked with a lawyer, I have hired a lawyer somewhere near me. Friedland lives in Colorado and had 2 or more companies in Colorado between 2014 and 2017. It goes to reason that the lawyer(s) Friedland used in his affairs with his two Colorado companies is not the same lawyer used by OWC, a company located in Israel. Jeffery Friedland would have no problem finding lawyers in Colorado.
FACT: There are over 1.3 million attorneys in the United States.
As of 2016, there are 1,315,561 Licensed Lawyers in the United States of America.
http://www.denniswpottslaw.com/united-states-attorneys-map/
According to the SEC, here are THE FACTS ABOUT THE 3 DIFFERENT OPINION LETTERS TO THE OWC TRANSFER AGENT (years 2014, 2016, 2017)
——————————————— 2014 ———————————————
"29. In August 2014, Friedland purchased 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock for $119,000 pursuant to a subscription agreement that he signed on behalf of Intiva, and the ownership of these securities was identified in OWC’s SEC filings (albeit with “Invita” rather than Intiva). On or around August 18, 2014, OWC provided an opinion letter to its transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with its issuance of stock to Intiva."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC issuing 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock to Intiva in August 2014. Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent. According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 is information not given by the SEC.
——————————————— 2016 ———————————————
"31. On January 21, 2016, Friedland and his company Global entered into a two-year “Media, Public Relations and Investor Relations Services Agreement” with OWC (hereinafter, the “Global PR/IR Agreement”), which Friedland signed as Managing Director of Global.?Under the terms of the Global PR/IR Agreement, Friedland agreed to develop a media, public relations, and investor relations program to create interest in OWC on the part of financial journalists, institutional investors, and the general investment community. In this role, Friedland agreed to “create a higher level awareness of [OWC], as well as the anticipated impact with the investors[;] [Global] will provide both an introduction of the company to the overall American population, as well as specifically target investors.” The agreement also states that Global would assist OWC in reaching investors by writing news releases, shareholder letters, corporate summaries, profiles, and website copy, and would establish OWC’s Facebook and Twitter accounts. The Global PR/IR Agreement stated that it could only be amended if executed by the parties in writing.
32. Pursuant to the compensation terms of the Global PR/IR Agreement, OWC transferred 5,134,375 OWC shares to Global on February 5, 2016. OWC provided an attorney opinion letter to OWC’s transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with the issuance of OWC’s stock to Global. OWC disclosed in reports it filed with the SEC in February 2016 that Global owned these shares of stock – 6.3% of OWC’s common stock at that time – and that Friedland controlled them as Global’s President and CEO, but neither OWC, Friedland, nor Global made any disclosure as to how the shares were acquired by Global."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC entering into a 2-year “Media, Public Relations and Investor Relations Services Agreement” with Friedland and his company Global and they paid him according to the agreement a reasonable amount of 5,134,375 OWC shares to Global. On January 21, 2016 the PPS of OWCP stock was .04 to .08 and therefore 5,134,375 shares would have been worth $205,375 at .04. It’s fair to say that if someone had done a PP with OWCP during that same time period, they could have gotten a PPS of .04 or less.
Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent. According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2016. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after February 5, 2016 is information not given by the SEC.
"36. On March 15, 2016, OWC issued a press release via PR Newswire announcing that Friedland had joined OWC’s Advisory Board to advise on business development efforts, and that Friedland would serve as the Company’s U.S. representative."
——————————————— 2017 ———————————————
"39. On or about January 3, 2017, Kathy Friedland organized Lane 6552 LLC, a company with no apparent business purpose or operations, with herself listed as the company’s sole member and principal.
43. On or about January 14, 2017, Friedland submitted a request to OWC’s transfer agent to reissue Global’s 5,134,375 shares of OWC stock to Lane 6552 LLC and remove the restricted legend from the securities.
45. In order to sell his restricted shares in the public marketplace, Friedland needed to have OWC’s transfer agent remove the restricted legend on Global’s 5,134,375 shares.
46. Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552. The letter was signed by a disbarred attorney. "
According to the SEC, it was this 3rd opinion letter provided in January 2017 to OWC’s transfer agent that was fraudulent with “misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552”. The SEC complaint is very clear that it was Jeffery Friedland who provided this 3rd fraudulent opinion letter (not OWC).
Since Jeffery Friedland was on OWC’s Advisory Board as announced in a PR by OWC about 10 months earlier on March 15, 2016, he may have used this leadership position with OWC which included his own OWC Email (Jfriedland@owcpharma.com), to have OWC’s transfer agent remove the restricted legend on Global’s 5,134,375 shares.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know if the attorney who drafted and/or signed the opinion letter had a current license to practice law at that time or was disbarred prior to January 2017. The attorney may have been disbarred later, that information is not given by the SEC, but if the Attorney was disbarred as a result of the SEC’s investigation then it is most likely that he was disbarred in 2017 after having signed the 3rd opinion letter which Jeffery Freidland provided to the transfer agent.
According to the SEC, here is what fraudulent documents were provided to the transfer agent by Friedland (not OWC) in January 2017:
1. “46. Friedland provided the transfer agent with a purported attorney opinion letter that included inaccurate information about Global’s acquisition of OWC stock and misleading information about the connection between Friedland, Global, and Lane 6552. The letter was signed by a disbarred attorney.”
2. “48. Friedland also indicated on forms signed by his wife that were provided to the transfer agent that Global purchased the stock from OWC in January 2016 at a cost of $51,343.75, but there is no evidence of such payment from Global to OWC. The terms of Global’s agreement with OWC indicate the stock was compensation for media and investor relations services and not in exchange for any payment."
3. “49. Friedland further represented to the transfer agent on these forms that the OWC stock was not being transferred from Global to Lane 6552 as a gift, inheritance, or wash sale, but were instead acquired by Lane 6552 on January 13, 2017 at a cost of $205,375. There is no evidence of any payment to Global from Lane 6552 in that amount or on that date.”
"51. On February 3, 2017, OWC’s transfer agent, relying on the information provided by Friedland, removed the restrictive legend from Lane 6552’s stock."
————————————————————————————————
There is no evidence that OWC colluded with Jeffery Friedland in 2014. Jeffery Friedland’s activities in Colorado were his activities, not those of OWC.
This statement of yours is no where in the SEC complaint document: “there was collusion and OWCP was complicit in the share selling scheme from beginning stating in 2014”, and does not merit a preface such as “Yes, most certainly”. The SEC action did not state this. It is not fact. It is not “most certainly”. The SEC complaint against Jeffery Friedlant actually exonerates OWC in my opinion, and they are not a party in this SEC action; fact.
I-GLOW writes:
“Yes, most certainly there was collusion and OWCP was complicit in the share selling scheme from beginning stating in 2014. The scam started at the Friedland dinner party in 2014.”
There was no representative of OWC at Jeffery Friedland’s dinner party in Colorado in 2014. This was Jefferey Friedland doing his own thing in Colorado and the OWC management in Israel was not party to it.
According to the SEC, concerning OWC’s interaction with Jeffery Friedland in 2014, the FACTS ARE:
"29. In August 2014, Friedland purchased 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock for $119,000 pursuant to a subscription agreement that he signed on behalf of Intiva, and the ownership of these securities was identified in OWC’s SEC filings (albeit with “Invita” rather than Intiva). On or around August 18, 2014, OWC provided an opinion letter to its transfer agent from a disbarred attorney in connection with its issuance of stock to Intiva."
There was nothing fraudulent about OWC issuing 1,322,222 shares of restricted OWC stock to Intiva in August 2014. Since there was nothing wrong with the issuance of these shares, there was nothing indicated as being fraudulent about the opinion letter which OWC provided to its transfer agent.
According to the SEC complaint against Friedland it says “from a disbarred attorney”, but we don’t know any additional information about the attorney OWC used in 2014. He/she may have had a current license to practice law at that time. Wether the attorney was disbarred prior to or after August 2014 is information not given by the SEC.
The truth is OWC provided an attorney opinion letter to OWC’s transfer agent about the shares issued to Global in 2016, whereby they had an agreement with Global (which is the company that Jefferey Friedland owned). OWC did nothing wrong here.
The statement you made leaves off the date, even though that date is a very pertinent part of this text in the SEC document.
I-Glow wrote:
Hang in there brighter days are coming. My opinion of course, but according to the SEC Jeffery Friedland was selling 6.4 million shares during the few months that we suffered the decline. He didn't do his job well, we all saw that, and I would guess that word got out by his associates in Colorado which may have emboldened shorts and MM manipulation.
Anyway, the snake in the grass is outed and OWC has made real progress with their team during 2017 as well as the partnership with mediq and the patent that was awarded.
The fundamentals of the company are as strong as ever and they are making progress. Innovative medical research takes time. OWC has focused in on a two-pronged approach to developing products in over-the-counter markets and prescription markets.
I see a big improvement in the way OWCP communicates with us shareholders since Dr. Stanley Hirsch became Chairman of our Board of Directors in July 2017.
I'm $OWCP Long and Strong
WRONG AGAIN! Maybe other folks would fall your your fake made up bs, but sorry you're wrong, that will all be detailed on the evidence sheet during disclosure.
The documents are talked about in the SEC action but not numbered. hmmm...
I-GLOW wrote: