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.
Carter reinstated UnifiedOnline, Inc.in Delaware.
But... UOIP doesn't exist. How can he be a shareholder if the company doesn't exist?
The agreement between IPNav and Chanbond that was rescinded was for 22%. Leane alleges Carter is giving his company, UO!IP, 22%. Remember, in addition to Carter's 22%, he also owns over 900 million of the 1.6 billion outstanding shares at the time the stock was delisted, if he hasn't decided to issue himself more shares.
Their percentages of 22% of gross. My bad, I misspoke.
Did you look at the Waterfall analyses posted on Facebook?
Hmmmm. May require multiple trips to Delaware - for filing and appearance. Can you draft a brief requesting a court appointed custodian for UOIP?
https://delawarechancery.foxrothschild.com/shareholder-disputes/demand-for-appointment-of-a-custodian-or-receiver-of-a-corporation/
You're right. It would be about $25 million, which would be much more acceptable. They will get up to 25% of NET, though, which is far more than 5x.
I didn't find a copy of the agreement in UOIP's filings, just the agreement with Chanbond. But then it wouldn't be required by the SEC. I can't believe Rob Howe would sign off on the agreement knowing there was no cap. I don't know if Carter renegotiated with Bentham and removed any cap previously set when he borrowed additional funds, and I haven't asked. But I'm sure if I did ask, Carter wouldn't just send send me a copy of the agreement. This is where we're stuck. They (Carter, Leane, Old Monmouth) can't ignore a lawyer or a state or federal regulator or investigator, but they can and will just ignore shareholders. Problem is, there are too many Carters out there, and too few investigators.
I think Dierdre is using the cap on the award. At a $1 billion settlement, Bentham would net 5x the amount of the loan, at a $2 billion settlement, 10x the amount loaned.
According to Carter's "waterfall" it doesn't have a cap. I think had many of us seen the agreement, we may not have held. I can't believe Dierdre thinks she's a great negotiator, good enough to warrant a 22.5% "consulting fee," with that type of negotiation. She gave them 20% for a $1.2 million loan. I would have to say that Carter's agreement of an additional 2% to 5% for a $5 or $6 million loan is a much better deal.
Dierdre's contention in the TRO is that Carter has given himself, his company UO!IP, 22.5%. I consider this to be hearsay at this point, since we have no proof. I'm also concerned about Bentham's percentage. If there is a $1 billion settlement, Bentham will receive $250 million for a $5 or $6 million loan? If the settlement is $2 billion total, that's $500 million. There is no cap on Bentham's payout. It's concerning, particularly if the funds borrowed were not used for the litigation. Since the lawyers are working on contingency, I would have to believe the funds were not used for litigation. The funds were not likely used to pay off UOIP debt, as that is what the dilution was for (those are the shares most of us own). And they certainly weren't used to keep UOIP a going concern. So is UOIP paying Bentham $250 million to $500 million for personal loans to Carter and Leane?
Lawyers are reluctant to take the case currently because, technically, the patents have no value unless or until there is a win or settlement and it is to risky for them.
Rstar, have you seen Carter's "waterfall?" With Carter's new plans (22.5% to his company UO!IP, cutting Dierdre back in for 22.5% after she canceled her "consulting agreement" and his new loan commitment to Bentham - all of which are illegal, btw), there will be nothing for shareholders or the patent creators if he accepts settlements at 50% of value from each of the 13, even if they settle all at once. There will be nothing for shareholders if they all settle separately at full value. Bentham is being given up to 25% of net settlement for personal loans to Dierdre and Carter. After the attorney fees of 28% of net, Bentham's 25% of net, and Dierdre and Carter's 22.5% of net, each, the remainder will be split 50% to CBV (1% of net) and 50% (1% of net) to UOIP.
No. He's trying to shafting the inventors as well. That's why Dierdre filed the request for TRO.
I'm not sure I would be giving out tax advice. I've been on the IRS audit list for 25 years (a former employer had a friend at the IRS and when he was canned, he reported every one of his subordinates to his friend out of vengeance; my first audit was from his friend in New Jersey; I live in California). They've never found anything, because there's nothing to find. But, believe me, it's a pain in the arse. You don't want to be on that list. Year after year after year.
Stop telling people to take a loss. We haven't lost.
I wouldn't declare it worthless just yet... This fugger is not getting away with this sh*t if I can help it. Thank you.
Why would he respond to you? Dierdre had to hire an attorney and file a request for a TRO for a response from Carter.
Ignorance is not a defense in most states.
This is what we're hoping the SEC can drum up for us -- the number of shares outstanding at the time of delisting. FINRA should have that info. This is why I don't understand why we should have to pay someone $50k to get that info. Why is it that the transfer agent is not compelled to respond to shareholders? They don't even need to have individual share counts, just the total, to see that there is fraud here.
Special Needs lives across the street from an investigator with the SEC. I just did a timeline of material events. He's going to talk to his neighbor.
I've thought about that, that he may try to low-ball us. Legally, he has to give us fair market value. All shares were common when the stock was delisted. An investigation will put him on notice.
Yes, I recognize that. We can still go after Carter and Bentham, and perhaps Leane for that 22.5% backdated "consulting" deal she made (unilaterally?) on the side, but the litigation will just be that much more "extensive."
We need to hope Carter doesn't take a low-ball settlement. Or Cox insists on going to trial and appealing (hopefully, they're watching the board and decide to hold out so they can watch the fireworks while they're awaiting appeal). We don't need a payout, we just need a value. Once we get a jury award, it's game on.
Actually, all of the attorneys I've spoken with have said exactly that -- "none of what he (Carter) is doing is legal." However, they have also said our case will require "extensive litigation" but it's just too risky at this point, since UOIP is a shell and the patents have not been monetized. So we need to wait.
You're correct -- all of the lawyers I have spoken with insist that none of what Carter is doing is "legal;" therefore, we do have a civil case. However, there isn't enough money in it for them at this point, and after reviewing the case they have all come to the conclusion that there will be more money in it for them if we wait until Carter has cashed out, then try to claw it back. It's frustrating.
I tried to file a complaint on the SEC Website, but it just kept randomly circling back to the home page. I have a timeline I put together from filings I can send to everyone via email. I know Special Needs has a neighbor with the SEC he will be speaking with, but I agree if the SEC receives even several complaints it might peak their curiosity. But I think we need to lay as much of the groundwork for them as possible.
Cox would owe about $97m with the current subs at .28 per box per month for 7 years. Comcast about 3x that much with current subs, without treble damages. The top 7, based on current subs at Teece's lowest estimate, .28 per box per month for 7 years (which I've posted on here several times) would be about $1 billion. The remaining 6 are either privately held and numbers are not available, or the amounts are insignificant.
I think that figure was for one of the 13. I think it may be safe to assume it was Cox since they are the bellwether and the $100m is closest to what they would owe. I have a spreadsheet with current subscriptions for the top 7 cable providers in the U.S. based on Dr. Teece's bottom valuation at .28 per share. Cox would be right around $90m at .28 per box per month for 7 years based on current subscribers.
Thank you!
Hi Dilly. Do you still have Pacer access. I'd like to see the attachment to the latest filing in Chanbond v. Atlantic Broadband.
Do you have access to Pacer for the latest filing, 541? I would be interested in see the attachment.
Who has access to Pacer? I'd like to see the attachment.
I don't know when the arbitration has been scheduled, or even if it has been scheduled. But that is effectively her argument -- Carter convinced her to sign the rescission because the agreement couldn't be found and gave himself 22.5% instead. Now she has miraculously found her copy in the 11th hour wants the contract between UOIP and Chanbond rescinded so she can just split the spoils with the patent creators.
Isn't a notice of subsequent authority a transfer of ownership?
Dierdre has 44.7m shares. But apparently she signed a "side agreement" as a "consultant" to Chanbond at 22.5% of gross proceeds, which Mishcon and Carter evidently convinced her to rescind. She wants that 22.5% in addition to her $5m and 44.7m shares, or she wants it all - Carters, yours, mine...
I reached out to her. She's not responding. She's not "teaming up" with anyone apparently.
She stuck that agreement up her sleeve like an ace and saved it for 4 years so she could rescind the contract after the work was done.
We have someone reviewing the case now.
It's not a conflict of interest. If you have a parent, sibling, aunt, uncle, cousin who is an attorney, you can hire them to represent you, given that they specialize in the area of need for which you need representation. Pillskill's relative seems to specialize in personal injury, which would probably not be beneficial for us and he probably wouldn't take the case.
The TA has that information.
He's saying if the share structures is 993 million (it was initially a billion), then we hold over 50%. If it's 1.6+ billion, then we have roughly 35% (probably closer to 38%).
Leane signed an agreement rescinding her consulting contract. And, no, Carter can't just let the company be delisted and embezzle whatever he wants.
We're working on that. We were all under the same impression you were under. These latest developments (rumors?) are new to all of us, and we are hoping to do some serious fact finding over the next several weeks. Unfortunately, we have to hire legal counsel assist us, since none of the powers that be (or those who have assumed power) feel they have any responsibility to keep shareholders informed.
How is that possible if there were just over 1.6 billion shares outstanding at the time UOIP was delisted?