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.
That might be true???? but the run down will continue to the hearing date, IMO??? if this familiar pattern holds and continues
I placed 2000 of my 100000 original shares at .252 when ask was at .25..no takers...MM and shorters will march this down to .1 range before hearing, IMO. MM pattern shows slow run down. Selling below bid and buying into bid arent good signs either. Those that were burnt buying on the last run to .42 and landing where we're at now are either out or holding till the words leave the judges lips on the day of the hearing with buyers on hold till then, IMO.
Is there an OFFICIAL release for the hearing date in October? Where can I find it? I placed 2000 of my 100000 original shares at .252 when ask was at .25..no takers...MM and shorters will march this down to .1 range before hearing, IMO. MM pattern shows slow run down. Selling below bid and buying into bid arent good signs either. Those that were burnt buying on the last run to .42 and landing where we're at now are either out or holding till the words leave the judges lips on the day of the hearing with buyers on hold till then, IMO.
From the JPM 10Q
Re-Posted from a Wamuq Post on IHUB
The company is forced to report all of it's assets and liabilities to the stock holders. But liabilities that stem from litigations are hard to weigh, so they end up in the foot notes of the balance sheet and don't get reflected in the collumns of numbers people look at to get the "At a glance" evalutaion.
Early in the litigation process the company would simply report that it has become involved in a litigation and give enough information to let the stock holders know the important dates of when they found out about it. But as the litigation progresses, a company might be forced to admit the possibility that it might not fare well in the courts and there might be a judgment so significant it may affect the balance sheet.
They make this admission with a piece of boiler plate at the end of a bare bones statement about court actions and dates.
Below are the 10-Q statements from JPM about the WAMU litigations from last May and last August. In May the statement simply listed actions and dates. But in August the company felt compelled to ad the statement about the uncertainty of the outcome and potential for a negative impact on earnings for the period.
It's RELEVANT The company will design such statements very carefully to understate the risks and show itself firmly in control. But it's admitting here that it's not in control of the outcome. And the impact could be significant to the balance sheet.
In MAY JPM said:
Washington Mutual Litigations. On September 26, 2008, following JPMorgan Chase's acquisition from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") of substantially all of the assets and specified liabilities of Washington Mutual
Bank, Henderson Nevada ("Washington Mutual Bank"), Washington Mutual Bank's parent holding company, Washington Mutual, Inc. ("WMI") and its wholly-owned subsidiary, WMI Investment Corp. (together, the "Debtors") both commenced cases under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Bankruptcy Case"). In the Bankruptcy Case, the Debtors have asserted rights and interests in certain assets. The assets in dispute include principally the following:
(a) approximately $4 billion in Trust Securities contributed by WMI to Washington
Mutual Bank;
(b) the right to tax refunds arising from overpayments attributable to operations of Washington Mutual Bank and its subsidiaries;
(c) the right to goodwill judgments that arise from pending and prior litigation;
(d) ownership of assets of certain trusts supporting deferred compensation arrangements covering the former and current employees of Washington Mutual Bank and its subsidiaries; (e) ownership of and other rights in approximately $4 billion that WMI contends is a deposit account at a subsidiary of Washington Mutual Bank; and
(f) ownership of and rights in various other contracts and other assets (collectively, the "Disputed Assets"). On December 30, 2008, the Debtors also submitted claims in the FDIC Receivership for, among other things, ownership of the Disputed Assets. On January 23, 2009, the FDIC, as Receiver, disallowed the Debtors' claims. On March 20, 2009, the Debtors filed an action against the FDIC in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the "District Court Action"), challenging the FDIC's disallowance of the Debtors claims, claiming ownership of the Disputed Assets, and seeking money damages from the FDIC. JPMorgan Chase was not named as a party to the District Court Action. On March 24, 2009, JPMorgan Chase commenced an adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Case against the Debtors and (for interpleader purposes only) the FDIC seeking a declaratory judgment and other relief determining JPMorgan Chase's legal title to and beneficial interest in the Disputed Assets. The Debtors have until May 22, 2009 to answer, respond or otherwise move against JPMorgan Chase's complaint. In addition, on March 30, 2009, JPMorgan Chase filed a motion to intervene in the District Court action to protect its interests in that proceeding. On April 30, 2009, the FDIC filed papers in support of JPMorgan Chase's intervention and the Debtors opposed that motion. On April 27, 2009, the Debtors commenced a separate adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Case against JPMorgan Chase, seeking turnover of the same $4 billion in purported deposit funds and recovery for alleged unjust enrichment for
159
failure to turnover the funds. On April 29, the Official Creditors Committee of Unsecured Creditors of WMI moved to intervene in this adversary proceeding.
JPMorgan Chase has until May 27, 2009 to answer, respond to or otherwise move against the Debtor's complaint. On May 1, 2009, the Debtors moved to take discovery from JPMorgan Chase purportedly related to a litigation filed in the 122nd State District Court of Galveston County, Texas (the "Texas Action"). JPMorgan Chase has until May 13, 2009 to oppose WMI's request for discovery. Plaintiffs in the Texas Action are certain holders of WMI common stock and the debt of WMI and Washington Mutual Bank who have sued JPMorgan Chase for unspecified damages arising primarily from JPMorgan Chase's acquisition of substantially all of the assets of Washington Mutual Bank from the FDIC at an allegedly too low price. The FDIC intervened in the Texas Action and had it removed to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
On April 1, 2009, the FDIC moved to have the Texas Action dismissed or transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
On April 21, 2009, plaintiffs opposed the FDIC's motion and moved to have the Texas Action remanded to state court.
In the August 10-Q they added the boiler plate admitting the possibility of a significant loss Washington Mutual Litigations.
On June 11, 2009, in the action commenced by Washington Mutual, Inc. ("WMI") against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the "District Court Action"), the FDIC moved to dismiss all but one of the claims asserted by WMI. In addition, on July 13, 2009, the FDIC filed an amended answer and counterclaims, including counterclaims naming JPMorgan Chase as a defendant. On July 27, 2009, WMI moved to dismiss the counterclaims and to stay the District Court Action. In JPMorgan Chase's adversary proceeding in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Bankruptcy Case"), on May 29, 2009, WMI and its wholly-owned subsidiary, WMI Investment Corp. (together, the "Debtors") answered that complaint and asserted counterclaims that largely track the claims asserted by WMI against the FDIC in the District Court Action, as well as raise certain intellectual property claims. On June 18, 2009, JPMorgan Chase moved to dismiss the counterclaims. On May 19, 2009, in the Debtors' separate adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Case against JPMorgan Chase seeking turnover of $4 billion in purported deposit funds, Debtors moved for summary judgment. On July 6, 2009, JPMorgan Chase answered the turnover complaint and asserted counterclaims against Debtors and crossclaims against the FDIC. Debtors have moved to dismiss the counterclaims. On July 27, 2009, the Debtors were granted in the Bankruptcy Case leave to take discovery from JPMorgan Chase purportedly related to a litigation filed in the 122nd State District Court of Galveston County, Texas (the "Texas Action"). The FDIC and JPMorgan Chase have both moved to have the Texas Action dismissed or transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. In addition to the various cases, proceedings and investigations discussed above, JPMorgan Chase and its subsidiaries are named as defendants or otherwise involved in a number of other legal actions and governmental proceedings arising in connection with their businesses. Additional actions, investigations or proceedings may be initiated from time to time in the future. In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of legal matters, particularly where the claimants seek very large or indeterminate damages, or where the cases present novel legal theories, involve a large number of parties or are in early stages of discovery, the Firm cannot state with confidence what the eventual outcome of these pending matters will be, what the timing of the ultimate resolution of these matters will be or what the eventual loss, fines, penalties or impact related to each pending matter may be. JPMorgan Chase believes, based upon its current knowledge, after consultation with counsel and after taking into account its current litigation reserves, that the outcome of the legal actions, proceedings and investigations currently pending against it should not have a material adverse effect on the Firm's consolidated financial condition.
However, in light of the uncertainties involved in such proceedings, actions and investigations, there is no assurance that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not significantly exceed the reserves currently accrued by the Firm; as a result, the outcome of a particular matter may be material to JPMorgan Chase's operating results for a particular period, depending on, among other factors, the size of the loss or liability imposed and the level of JPMorgan Chase's income for that period.
From the JPM 10Q
Re-Posted from a Wamuq Post on IHUB
The company is forced to report all of it's assets and liabilities to the stock holders. But liabilities that stem from litigations are hard to weigh, so they end up in the foot notes of the balance sheet and don't get reflected in the collumns of numbers people look at to get the "At a glance" evalutaion.
Early in the litigation process the company would simply report that it has become involved in a litigation and give enough information to let the stock holders know the important dates of when they found out about it. But as the litigation progresses, a company might be forced to admit the possibility that it might not fare well in the courts and there might be a judgment so significant it may affect the balance sheet.
They make this admission with a piece of boiler plate at the end of a bare bones statement about court actions and dates.
Below are the 10-Q statements from JPM about the WAMU litigations from last May and last August. In May the statement simply listed actions and dates. But in August the company felt compelled to ad the statement about the uncertainty of the outcome and potential for a negative impact on earnings for the period.
It's RELEVANT The company will design such statements very carefully to understate the risks and show itself firmly in control. But it's admitting here that it's not in control of the outcome. And the impact could be significant to the balance sheet.
In MAY JPM said:
Washington Mutual Litigations. On September 26, 2008, following JPMorgan Chase's acquisition from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") of substantially all of the assets and specified liabilities of Washington Mutual
Bank, Henderson Nevada ("Washington Mutual Bank"), Washington Mutual Bank's parent holding company, Washington Mutual, Inc. ("WMI") and its wholly-owned subsidiary, WMI Investment Corp. (together, the "Debtors") both commenced cases under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Bankruptcy Case"). In the Bankruptcy Case, the Debtors have asserted rights and interests in certain assets. The assets in dispute include principally the following:
(a) approximately $4 billion in Trust Securities contributed by WMI to Washington
Mutual Bank;
(b) the right to tax refunds arising from overpayments attributable to operations of Washington Mutual Bank and its subsidiaries;
(c) the right to goodwill judgments that arise from pending and prior litigation;
(d) ownership of assets of certain trusts supporting deferred compensation arrangements covering the former and current employees of Washington Mutual Bank and its subsidiaries; (e) ownership of and other rights in approximately $4 billion that WMI contends is a deposit account at a subsidiary of Washington Mutual Bank; and
(f) ownership of and rights in various other contracts and other assets (collectively, the "Disputed Assets"). On December 30, 2008, the Debtors also submitted claims in the FDIC Receivership for, among other things, ownership of the Disputed Assets. On January 23, 2009, the FDIC, as Receiver, disallowed the Debtors' claims. On March 20, 2009, the Debtors filed an action against the FDIC in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the "District Court Action"), challenging the FDIC's disallowance of the Debtors claims, claiming ownership of the Disputed Assets, and seeking money damages from the FDIC. JPMorgan Chase was not named as a party to the District Court Action. On March 24, 2009, JPMorgan Chase commenced an adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Case against the Debtors and (for interpleader purposes only) the FDIC seeking a declaratory judgment and other relief determining JPMorgan Chase's legal title to and beneficial interest in the Disputed Assets. The Debtors have until May 22, 2009 to answer, respond or otherwise move against JPMorgan Chase's complaint. In addition, on March 30, 2009, JPMorgan Chase filed a motion to intervene in the District Court action to protect its interests in that proceeding. On April 30, 2009, the FDIC filed papers in support of JPMorgan Chase's intervention and the Debtors opposed that motion. On April 27, 2009, the Debtors commenced a separate adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Case against JPMorgan Chase, seeking turnover of the same $4 billion in purported deposit funds and recovery for alleged unjust enrichment for
159
failure to turnover the funds. On April 29, the Official Creditors Committee of Unsecured Creditors of WMI moved to intervene in this adversary proceeding.
JPMorgan Chase has until May 27, 2009 to answer, respond to or otherwise move against the Debtor's complaint. On May 1, 2009, the Debtors moved to take discovery from JPMorgan Chase purportedly related to a litigation filed in the 122nd State District Court of Galveston County, Texas (the "Texas Action"). JPMorgan Chase has until May 13, 2009 to oppose WMI's request for discovery. Plaintiffs in the Texas Action are certain holders of WMI common stock and the debt of WMI and Washington Mutual Bank who have sued JPMorgan Chase for
unspecified damages arising primarily from JPMorgan Chase's acquisition of substantially all of the assets of Washington Mutual Bank from the FDIC at an allegedly too low price. The FDIC intervened in the Texas Action and had it removed to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
On April 1, 2009, the FDIC moved to have the Texas Action dismissed or transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
On April 21, 2009, plaintiffs opposed the FDIC's motion and moved to have the Texas Action remanded to state court. In the August 10-Q they added the boiler plate admitting the possibility of a significant loss Washington Mutual Litigations. On June 11, 2009, in the action commenced by Washington Mutual, Inc. ("WMI") against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the "District Court Action"), the FDIC moved to dismiss all but one of the claims asserted by WMI. In addition, on July 13, 2009, the FDIC filed an amended answer and counterclaims, including counterclaims naming JPMorgan Chase as a defendant. On July 27, 2009, WMI moved to dismiss the counterclaims and to stay the District Court Action. In JPMorgan Chase's adversary proceeding in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Bankruptcy Case"), on May 29, 2009, WMI and its wholly-owned subsidiary, WMI Investment Corp. (together, the "Debtors") answered that complaint and asserted counterclaims that largely track the claims asserted by WMI against the FDIC in the District Court Action, as well as raise certain intellectual property claims. On June 18, 2009, JPMorgan Chase moved to dismiss the counterclaims. On May 19, 2009, in the Debtors' separate adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Case against JPMorgan Chase seeking turnover of $4
billion in purported deposit funds, Debtors moved for summary judgment. On July 6, 2009, JPMorgan Chase answered the turnover complaint and asserted counterclaims against Debtors and crossclaims against the FDIC. Debtors have moved to dismiss the counterclaims. On July 27, 2009, the Debtors were granted in the Bankruptcy Case leave to take discovery from JPMorgan Chase purportedly related to a litigation filed in the 122nd State District Court of Galveston County, Texas (the "Texas Action"). The FDIC and JPMorgan Chase have both moved to have the Texas Action dismissed or transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. In addition to the various cases, proceedings and investigations discussed above, JPMorgan Chase and its subsidiaries are named as defendants or otherwise involved in a number of other legal actions and governmental proceedings arising in connection with their businesses. Additional actions, investigations or proceedings may be initiated from time to time in the future. In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of legal matters, particularly where the claimants seek very large or indeterminate damages, or where the cases present novel legal theories, involve a large number of parties or are in early stages of discovery, the Firm cannot state with confidence what the eventual outcome of these pending matters will be, what the timing of the ultimate resolution of these matters will be or what the eventual loss, fines, penalties or impact related to each pending matter may be. JPMorgan Chase believes, based upon its current knowledge, after consultation with counsel and after taking into account its current litigation reserves, that the outcome of the legal actions, proceedings and investigations currently pending against it should not have a material adverse effect on the Firm's consolidated financial condition.
However, in light of the uncertainties involved in such proceedings, actions and investigations, there is no assurance that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not significantly exceed the reserves currently accrued by the Firm; as a result, the outcome of a particular matter may be material to JPMorgan Chase's operating results for a particular period, depending on, among other factors, the size of the loss or liability imposed and the level of JPMorgan Chase's income for that period.
A world first: Vaccine helps prevent HIV infection
BANGKOK – For the first time, an experimental vaccine has prevented infection with the AIDS virus, a watershed event in the deadly epidemic and a surprising result. Recent failures led many scientists to think such a vaccine might never be possible.
The World Health Organization and the U.N. agency UNAIDS said the results "instilled new hope" in the field of HIV vaccine research, although researchers say it likely is many years before a vaccine might be available.
The vaccine — a combination of two previously unsuccessful vaccines — cut the risk of becoming infected with HIV by more than 31 percent in the world's largest AIDS vaccine trial of more than 16,000 volunteers in Thailand, researchers announced Thursday in Bangkok.
Even though the benefit is modest, "it's the first evidence that we could have a safe and effective preventive vaccine," Col. Jerome Kim told The Associated Press. He helped lead the study for the U.S. Army, which sponsored it with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
The institute's director, Dr. Anthony Fauci, warned that this is "not the end of the road," but he said he was surprised and very pleased by the outcome.
"It gives me cautious optimism about the possibility of improving this result" and developing a more effective AIDS vaccine, Fauci said. "This is something that we can do."
The Thailand Ministry of Public Health conducted the study. The U.S. Army has long worked with that government and others to develop and test vaccines and medicines to protect troops and the general public.
The study used strains of HIV common in Thailand. Whether such a vaccine would work against other strains in the U.S., Africa or elsewhere in the world is unknown, scientists stressed.
Even a marginally helpful vaccine could have a big impact. Every day, 7,500 people worldwide are newly infected with HIV; 2 million died of AIDS in 2007, UNAIDS estimates.
"Today marks a historic milestone," said Mitchell Warren, executive director of the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, an international group that has worked toward developing a vaccine. Warren was not involved in the study.
"It will take time and resources to fully analyze and understand the data, but there is little doubt that this finding will energize and redirect the AIDS vaccine field," he said in a statement.
The study tested the two-vaccine combination in a "prime-boost" approach, in which the first one primes the immune system to attack HIV and the second one strengthens the response.
They are ALVAC, from Sanofi Pasteur, the vaccine division of French drugmaker Sanofi-Aventis; and AIDSVAX, originally developed by VaxGen Inc. and now held by Global Solutions for Infectious Diseases, a nonprofit founded by some former VaxGen employees.
ALVAC uses canarypox, a bird virus altered so it can't cause human disease, to ferry synthetic versions of three HIV genes into the body. AIDSVAX contains a genetically engineered version of a protein on HIV's surface. The vaccines are not made from whole virus — dead or alive — and cannot cause HIV.
Neither vaccine in the study prevented HIV infection when tested individually in earlier trials, and dozens of scientists had called the new one futile when it began in 2003.
"I really didn't have high hopes at all that we would see a positive result," Fauci confessed.
The results proved the skeptics wrong.
"The combination is stronger than each of the individual members," said the Army's Kim, a physician who manages the Army's HIV vaccine program.
The study tested the combo in HIV-negative Thai men and women aged 18 to 30 at average risk of becoming infected. Half received four "priming" doses of ALVAC and two "boost" doses of AIDSVAX over six months. The others received dummy shots. No one knew who got what until the study ended.
Thanad Yomha, a 33-year-old electrician from southeastern Thailand, said he didn't expect anything in return for volunteering for the project.
"I did this for others," Thanad said. "It's for the next generation."
Participants volunteered for the study and were told about the potential risks associated with receiving the experimental vaccine before agreeing to participate.
All were given condoms, counseling and treatment for any sexually transmitted infections, and were tested every six months for HIV. Any who became infected were given free treatment with antiviral medicines. All participants continued to receive an HIV test every six months for three years after vaccinations ended.
The results: New infections occurred in 51 of the 8,197 given vaccine and in 74 of the 8,198 who received dummy shots. That worked out to a 31 percent lower risk of infection for the vaccine group. Two of the infected participants who received the placebo died.
The vaccine had no effect on levels of HIV in the blood for those who did become infected. That had been another goal of the study — seeing whether the vaccine could limit damage to the immune system and help keep infected people from developing full-blown AIDS.
That result is "one of the most important and intriguing findings of this trial," Fauci said. It suggests that the signs scientists have been using to gauge whether a vaccine was actually giving protection may not be valid.
"It is conceivable that we haven't even identified yet" what really shows immunity, which is both "important and humbling" after decades of vaccine research, Fauci said.
Details of the $105 million study will be given at a vaccine conference in Paris in October.
This is the third big vaccine trial since 1983, when HIV was identified as the cause of AIDS. In 2007, Merck & Co. stopped a study of its experimental vaccine after seeing it did not prevent HIV infection. Later analysis suggested the vaccine might even raise the risk of infection in certain men. The vaccine itself did not cause infection.
In 2003, AIDSVAX flunked two large trials — the first late-stage tests of any AIDS vaccine at the time.
It is unclear whether vaccine makers will seek to license the two-vaccine combo in Thailand. Before the trial began, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said other studies would be needed before the vaccine could be considered for U.S. licensing.
"This is a world first which proves that vaccine development is possible," Supachai said. "But this is not to the level where we can license or manufacture the vaccine yet."
Mass-producing the vaccine, plus how to proceed with future studies, will be discussed among the governments, study sponsors and companies involved in the trial, Kim said. Scientists want to know how long protection will last, whether booster shots will be needed, and whether the vaccine helps prevent infection in gay men and injection drug users, since it was tested mostly in heterosexuals in the Thai trial.
The study was done in Thailand because U.S. Army scientists did pivotal research in that country when the AIDS epidemic emerged there, isolating virus strains and providing genetic information on them to vaccine makers. The Thai government also strongly supported the idea of doing the study
I see your posts over at that bank stock..I'm holding 6 digit shares since .03 and original shares at 2.00...I don't feel gfgu bottom has been hit here....I love tech but IMHO there will be heavy competition and challenge along the way eventually in USPTO categories regarding both Trademark and Patent arguments. Competition will try to copy tech first before possibly settling for making an offer to buy out or license..The big boys and their ego's have priority over being beat to market by GetFuGu technology....while GFGU still has along way to go convincing industry markets this is the future of advertising...Did I get this right , that GFGU has given exclusive rights to Health Matrix to receive an exclusive license for GetFugu’s mobile software for doctors, medical groups, health care providers, pharmaceutical companies, biotech companies, health insurers, medical device companies, nutritionists and herbologists worldwide. Health Matrix has the option to renew the license for two additional five-year periods....Sounds like an intent for Health Matrix to sub-license out because that covers an incredible market gfgu is giving up
Details of Health Matrix Agreement
United States
Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 8-K
Current
Report Pursuant to
Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Date of
Report (Date of Earliest Event Reported): September 10,
2009
GetFugu, Inc.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Nevada(State of incorporation) 333-143845(Commission File Number) 20-8658254(IRS Employer Number)
600 Townsend Street, Suite 129ESan Francisco, California (Address of principal executive offices)94104 Zip Code
(415) 848-8800 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) (Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)
heck the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:
o Written communications
pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
o Soliciting material
pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR
240.14a-12)
o Pre-commencement
communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR
240.14d-2(b))
o Pre-commencement
communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR
240.13e-4(c))
Item 1.01 Entry
into a Material Definitive Agreement.
On
September 10, 2009, GetFugu, Inc. (the “Registrant”) entered into a Master License Agreement with Health Matrix LLC, a company owned by independent health care professionals with broad and extensive experience in the health care
field. Health Matrix will utilize interactive technologies provided by GetFugu to link health care providers, insurance and pharmaceutical companies, employers and consumers. The material terms of the license agreement are as follows:
GetFugu
and Health Matrix entered into a five-year license agreement under which GetFugu will receive from Health Matrix the greater of (i) 25% of the net income from license of ARL/VRL/Keywords, or (ii) $99 per ARL/VRL/Keyword. In exchange, Health Matrix will receive an exclusive license for GetFugu’s mobile software for doctors, medical groups, health care providers, pharmaceutical companies, biotech companies, health insurers,medical device companies, nutritionists and herbologists worldwide. Health Matrix has the option to renew the license for two additional five-year
periods.
GetFuGu will also receive a $5 million non-refundable license fee which will be paid by Health Matrix over the first 12 months of the contract. Earnings due to GetFugu under the contract will first be applied to this upfront license
fee. GetFugu will also receive 5% of pre-tax profits associated with Hotspotting transactions initiated by Health Matrix utilizing the GetFugu licensed technology.
Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure.
On September 10, 2009, the Registrant issued a press release announcing a technology license with Health Matrix. A copy of the press release is attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1.
Item 9.01. Financial Statements
and Exhibits.
9.01(d) Exhibits. 99.1 Press Release issued September 10, 2009, announcing the Registrant’s technology license with Health Matrix.
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto
duly authorized.
Date: September 16, 2009
GETFUGU, INC.
/s/ Bernard Stolar
Bernard Stolar
President and Chief Executive Officer
Fox business news...Apple and google still in discussions to utilize google voice recognition on Iphones. This comes from apple after Google pre-maturely announces it had reached a deal with apple for Google voice recognition. Guess it can happen to anyone regarding mistaken PR's...11:01 PST Fox Business News
It usually means one thing...I bought too high..LOL
or I am extremely lucky today
Picked up mucho shares at the bid...that was easy
Tried buying back in through scottrade. Scottrade has this stock restricted both online and through the broker and will not trade this stock.Anyone else have this problem
Some of my first posts were concerned with the market cap for this stock. The low for the year was 12 cents and I bought at .47 on its run up to the announced release where it peaked at 1.42...based on excitement for its potential...from their the MM started marching it down. I still have concerns with a marketcap in the hundreds of millions for a company that seems to have an uphill battle. It appears more and more that the value of the company might depend on the strength of its technology and the patents they hold in the future if the companies they are courting to support or partner with their technology decide to challenge the patents and try to create similar or superior all in one technology. I have not truly researched the patents held or its basis, but since being awarded patents, it must be meaningful. At this point I dont feel comfortable jumping back in although there might be some mini runs with each new significant meaningful press release.
P.S. One point of note is that the trademark application has had an initial refusal to register due to another trademark with the same or similar name. You have 6 months to respond and overcome the examining attorneys 1st refusal. Three refusals are the max. If you are not able to overcome the examining attorneys refusal at the USPTO 3 times you can apppeal to the TTAB...This might not be too significant because good attorneys usually get passed a refusal to the publication process wherre those that have a belief that the proposed mark would do damage to their mark have a chance to oppose the registration of the mark. There appears to be another Trademark that might object on the basis of first use. But whats in a name? They can change a name..."its the technology Stu...." and that reference is not intended to mean you but a reference to the anology concerning economy! It also appears there has not be a transfer of trademark ownership from the previous company although this can sometimes take some time to catch up...something the company exhibits in all their legal filings. This could be all explained away IMO with the feeling that there seems to have been a huge rush to market with this technology [being that it is highly competitive] overlooking on the way the little details of legal document management
Some of my first posts were concerned with the market cap for this stock. The low for the year was 12 cents and I bought at .47 on its run up to the announced release where it peaked at 1.42...based on excitement for its potential...from their the MM started marching it down. I still have concerns with a marketcap in the hundreds of millions for a company that seems to have an uphill battle. It appears more and more that the value of the company might depend on the strength of its technology and the patents they hold in the future if the companies they are courting to support or partner with their technology decide to challenge the patents and try to create similar or superior all in one technology. I have not truly researched the patents held or its basis, but since being awarded patents, it must be meaningful. At this point I dont feel comfortable jumping back in although their might be some mini runs with each new significant meaningful press release
bottom line is everybody makes their own decisions. Anyone following the technological developments like I have and is an amateur science buff like i am will lean toward the risk...everyone else....probably were chasing girls or boys when they should have been watching the moon landing
Research Market Makers. They are the pps governance and have their own agenga regarding pps
I wont disagree the market needs a complete physical, the most immediate being the brokerages and the MM, but there are an infinite number of ailments and no human will ever be able to correct the issues entirely. I feel your pain if you've lost money for I have been there, but on the same token the same has made me a tremendous amount of money. Still, will a perfect system ever exist?
With gaps like .76 - 1.02 no wonder this pps is shaky.I've given a call to an insider at the SEC and information concerning the actions of this MM for the last two weeks.I thought it was about time
I exect to be back soon along with the Chinese Fireworks.
Hot News
China Unicom announced a deal with Apple that will see the iPhone released in China during the last quarter of this year. With some 50,000 individual characters, using a mobile phone for search in Chinese can be a cumbersome time consuming process, Get Fugu’s simplistic search model and image recognition tech is bound to be a hit over there, the largest mobile market in the world.
For those that are interested the launch held at GigaOm Mobilze 09, the biggest U.S. event of the year in the mobile market took place in front of companies like Microsoft, Google and all the big names in the mobile world. Expect huge deals that deliver to millions of subscribers to be done very quickly
IMO
It's obvious you dont know the diff between a deliberate lie and an honest mistake by the PR company that wrote the release. Although GFGU should have reviewed it sooner
http://www.otcstockreview.com/Files/GFGU/GFGU_Review.pdf
IMO this would have sky Highed if not for the SPNG bashing and MM deliberate take down. This had a big drop from 1.42 last week with buys outweighing sells or equaling sells. After buying in at .47 and giving it two chances to break a dollar on todays short runup I decided it was time to get out and wait for a true bottom again.All this after passing on the runup to 1.42 The MM just didnt want me in
Dont get me wrong, GFGU is the future but at the top of my list two things concerned me that have contributed heavily to the pps battle and my current belief to hold cash
1. MM at this time for whatever reason, following the MM tactical manual to quell investor confidence with huge gaps between bid and ask on any uptick of ask with IMO intent to drive this back down below 12cents. Probably because Market Cap is 156 mil for an untested company with 10mil invested
2. Huge bashing from #1 IHUB Discussion board SPNG with most disgruntled SPNG shareholders angrily spreading misinformation concerning technology failure and the Moskowitz R/S relationship
Yes I got out for now and with much regret. But at this point IMO the MM wants to take my/your money
The technology is great
The Future is great
The Company is great
But I dont like the current MM environment
I'm Pissed
Me too...Company is great MARKET MAKER SUCKS
This isnt fair...with the number of times GFGU is still being negatively mentioned on the SPNG discussion boards of IHUB and Yahoo, we should have had top ten discussion board status...One post stated Moskowitz of SPNG is now on the board of GFGU..Is this true? Its a shame that so many SPNG bashers are tying GFGU into the SPNG R/S boondoggle
Break a dollar...Get the word out..this is on a run
Read my lips THOMAS...I Vote GFGU stock of the day
Commercial industry and advertising...The theory is you make it a viable cheap advertising opportunity for mfg and retailers. By giving away millions of freeebies and getting it into the hands of millions of potential consumers you become a huge revenue builder while a cheap alternative to advertisers...Like I said before, GetFUGU can thank the groundwork laid down by companies like MySpace and YOUTUBE for creating the framework. Not long ago these companie were struggling with the "how do we make money" question and Advertisers were very slow to see the potential of putting their money into untested social networking sites. They have since seen the light. The only thing for FUGU to do is get this into every handset possible and make it as popular as possible. The more the better and with that, the Advertising dollars will come. I believe their future plans include becoming a user generated company offering music and video content and merchandise according to their Trademark applications
I was gonna post this
Well one good sign is the bid/ask and the MM have stopped having their epilectic seizures...The way it was you couldn't get any idea where it was going and this drove off a lot of investors. I had fears they wanted to drive this back to .12
I still believe the future is now and Get FUGU is part of that
but WTF!!!
Its things like a sell below the bid[.895] that drives me insane
had bought in at .47..almost sold at .9...whew!!!!!The news could not have come at a better time!!!GGGOooooooFUGU
Nite?
Thanks! Where did you find those numbers?
What are their bid and ask?
Does anyone know if NITE or ARCA is on this?
Everything is insignificant...I have all the faith the company exists with great future, but right now the MM has complete control over this stock nomatter how great and has deliberately opened the gap to slow down interest...that and the fact that this stock has a starter market cap of 156 mil!!!!with free software and what? 5 mil invested and 5,250,000 in customer contracts!!!??? and whatever value the patents and software have!!!???Its going to take/need an incredible PR/contract from a coke, starbucks,Microsoft or whatever and fantastic volume to save the pps and it has to be like tomorrow...That's what is important
Doesn't matter, the MM is in complete control at this point, of the pps, and it appears its agenda is down down down...I hope I'm wrong but if I were Stolar I would be writing letters and making calls to the right people to look into this
What good is any ask showing over 1.00 when you have MM 7-9pt gappers, selling below the bid and buying below the ask telling investors nomatter what the bashers say, pumpers do, or GetFUGU does to bring positive news to its shareholders or even if buys out number sells.... when the MM keeps yelling at the top of its lungs, "I'm gonna bring the price of this stock down" because I the MM need to cover my transactions
Tell me I'm wrong
8pt gap. We are totally at the mercy of this deranged MM.
Some ways MM's entice sellers; Run the stock up with a "tight spread" in a fast market,
then "open" up the spread to slow down the buying interest!!!!!!
After it has "cooled off" for a little while lower the offer below the last trade right after a small piece trades on the offer then tighten the spread so that the sellers feel they can take a "quick profit" by "hitting the bid" on the tight spread.
Once the selling starts the MM's will walk it down quickly by only making small prints on the way down with the tight spread.
IMHO...WE ARE BEING SHORTED!!!!
Will someone check the MM. I think he's on drugs
New PR just hit Scottrade..The purported scammers just landed a new deal with Health Matrix for $5 Million Licensing Deal. Throw in the fact that I sold SPNG 80000 @ .27 I cant complain about Moskowitz. At least at this point. In fact I thank him for the 1 mil from Vanity and 4mil from Spng
I like the #10 chart. She's taking off and there's no looking back!!!!!!