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.
The Company did not file their quarterly report with the SEC today on time. I just checked. Deadline is 5:30 p.m., New York time.
If a quarterly report on Form 10-Q is not filed within the required time period (which was today, August 14th) the issuer must file with the SEC within one business day of the due date for the report a Form 12b-25 (“NT 10-Q”) in the EDGAR filing system disclosing its inability to file the report timely and the reason for the delay. The company then has 5 calendar days the report, which would be by the end of the day on the 19th.
Looks like the receptionist and engineering V.P. could not get it done in time, again.
But, you and Vet already know that.
It is apparent that it is not "obvious" to many on this board that this is not a "quick legal play", despite the continual mis-information from so many.
Looks like Discovery set for 10/8/2013
Discovery - the pre-trial phase in a lawsuit in which each party, through the law of civil procedure, can obtain evidence from the opposing party by means of discovery devices including requests for answers to interrogatories, requests for production of documents, requests for admissions and depositions. Discovery can be obtained from non-parties using subpoenas. When discovery requests are objected to, the requesting party may seek the assistance of the court by filing a motion to compel discovery.
Stay of execution - an order whereby a judgment is precluded from being executed for a specific period of time.
An Illinois federal judge denied Playboy Enterprises International Inc.'s bid for a preliminary injunction against Playbev which has been alleged to have infringed Playboy's famous "bunny" mark, and stayed the case pending the resolution of a parallel state-court lawsuit. The ruling puts the federal complaint on ice until the state court litigation is resolved.
Continuance - The adjournment or postponement of an action pending in a court to a later date of the same or another session of the court, granted by a court in response to a motion made by a party to a lawsuit. The entry into the trial record of the adjournment of a case for the purpose of formally evidencing it.
Strike from call – hearing was dismissed. It essentially means that one party has obtained an adjournment, and the case has been struck from that day’s docket call.
Numbers technically are due by end of day today, but Cirtran regularly files an extension, which will give them until the 19th, so do not expect numbers until Monday.
The reality is they are simply trying to keep the price low so that when YA Global is paid in shares, they get more shares. The conversion rate for YA Global is 85% of the lowest closing bid price on Cirtran’s stock during the 10 days prior to the payment date.
“We continue to have the right, subject to the consent of YA Global, to pay all or any portion of the payments listed above in common stock, with the conversion price to be used to determine the number of shares being equal to 85% of the lowest closing bid price of our common stock during the 10 trading days prior to the payment date. The amount applied as a payment on the note and accrued interest will be adjusted to the value of the actual proceeds from the sale of the stock.”
Be careful what you wish for.
2009 Operating loss: ($4,342,761)
2009 cash on hand: $8,588
So far PM has been correct.
Since there is no cash, Cirtran has had to issue shares to pay both YAG and other expenses (probably legal and accounting). That does dilute shares already outstanding.
Profit is having more revenue than expenses, which Cirtran has not done in years.
Who added what new VP? Cirtran?
That is my point - one can win simply by having more money - because you win does not mean you are a criminal.
In capitalism those with the most money usually win.
Last I looked it is still possible to make money short or long.
BTW, look at the history of this company - nothing but losses and mismanagement. Very little potential with the same management that has driven this company into the ground. If you want to make money on this company .....
Because the 10k for 2013 is not issued until April of 2014!
Tthe quarter filings (10Q) do not require such information since investors are supposed to refer to the prior years 10K for such information. As a result, the 2013 10Q does not include the information so investors are supposed to refer to the 2012 10K.
Pretty basic stuff.
Cirtran 2012 10k! Pretty simple due diligence - straight from the horses mouth.
SPECIAL NOTE ABOUT FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
4th bullet point
"All of our assets are encumbered to secure the payment of an aggregate of $5.7 million in indebtedness that requires substantial monthly payments, and our default could result in the loss of all of our assets."
Item 1.A Risk Factors
All of our assets are encumbered to secure the payment of an aggregate of $5.7 million in indebtedness that requires substantial monthly payments, and our default could result in the loss of all of our assets.
We have encumbered all of our assets to secure the payment of approximately $3.9 million in indebtedness due YA Global Investments, L.P., or YA Global, which requires payments of $100,000 per month through the balance of 2013. We also have to meet certain financial and operating covenants in order to avoid default under our obligation to YA Global.
We have placed a second encumbrance on all of our assets, subject to the priority encumbrance of YA Global, to secure the payment of approximately $1.8 million in indebtedness due to Advanced Beauty Solutions, LLC, or ABS, which requires monthly payments of $7,500 through 2013, with the balance due in January 2016.
The obligations due these creditors would have to be paid in order to avoid default, notwithstanding the claims of our trade and other unsecured creditors or the results of our operations. Because of our limited revenues and access to alternative sources of capital, we cannot assure that we will be able to meet these monthly obligations timely. If we were to default in any payment, YA Global and ABS could exercise their remedies, including the execution on all of our assets, which would result in the termination of our activities. We cannot assure that either YA Global or ABS would consider or agree to any forbearance from aggressive collection efforts. The existence of these secured obligations will likely significantly impair our ability to obtain capital from external sources.
What is outrageous? Companies re-purchase "treasury stock" all of the time, but only when Management determines that it can get a better return by using its excess cash to buy back stock in place of some other investment.
The problem is there is no excess cash. Current liabilities exceed cash by more than $20 million.
How is Cirtran going to buy back shares and retire them? As of March 31, 2013, the Company reported that they had $10,721 in cash.
In an efficient market, a company buying back its stock should have no effect on its price per share valuation; the net effect should be that the underlying value of each share is unchanged.
If the market is not efficient, the company's shares may be underpriced. In that case a company can benefit its other shareholders by buying back shares.
The company can either retire (cancel) the shares or hold the shares for later resale. Buying back stock reduces the number of outstanding shares. Accompanying the decrease in the number of shares outstanding is a reduction in company assets, in particular, cash assets, which are used to buy back shares.
Where is the cash going to come from? Playboy? Not by the 21st of August.
Good point. Need to add the shares issued to YAG in May.
3/31/201 3,156,415,910 Balance as of March 2013 10Q
May-13 362,876,000 Issued to YAG in May
3,519,291,910
Cirtran never filed for bankruptcy so you obviously do not understand the recent circumstances.
Playbev filed for bankruptcy, not Cirtan.
Distributors sign up and / or pay to be distributors. They only earn based on what they then sell. That is why so many distributors fall by the way side after only a few months.
The point is that there are 4.5 billion authorized shares. That means that the share dilution can go up to 4.5 billion outstanding from the roughly 3.2 billion already outstanding.
Who are the major energy carriers that Cirtran is going to take away from Red Bull and Monster?
Cirtran does not have the marketing funds to buy into the major beverage distribution channels.
$200 - $300 million in two years? Not a chance.
No chance.
2012 Revenue numbers:
Red Bull $2,950 Billion
Monster $2,600 Billion
Rockstar $ 780 Million
AMP $ 300 Million
NOS $ 250 Million
Full Throttle $ 140 Million
PBED $ 4 Million
PBED in 71 countries? That is an average of $61,000 a country in 2012.
No way PPED will outsell Red Bull.
YAG will continue to be paid in shares and they can wait until there is some sort of finality to the lawsuit.
Drive it up so YAG can slam it back down this week.
My point is that looking at recent history the company does not file on time but always using the extra extension days so don't expect the filing until the 8-19.
As to why ......
Actually, the financials are due August 14. Late filing is due by August 19.
Expect the financials on August 19.
You will get an update on August 14th if the Company files on time.
Unfortunately no one is investing in your company.
Cirtran, mismanaged by Mr. Iehab over the past 10 years, has not made money and has only used cash, never generated cash from operations, hence the history of losses and downward spiraling stock price.
Your company sparkled - Cirtran farkled.
Last I checked it's possible to make money short or long.
Given the history of this company and stock price (just look at the 5 year chart) seems like the trend is clear.
Just read the amended, restated and consolidated secured convertible debenture details
AMENDED, RESTATED, AND CONSOLIDATED
SECURED CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURE
Original Issuance Date: December 31, 2007 Principal Amount: $3,007,317.97
No. YAG-1 Interest Amount: $1,085,471.33
This Amended, Restated, and Consolidated Secured Convertible Debenture (this “Debenture”) is issued by CirTran Corporation, a Nevada corporation also known as CirTran Corp. (the “Company”), to YA Global Investments, L.P. (f/k/a/ Cornell Capital Partners, LP) (the “Holder”) in connection with the Ratification Agreement (as defined below) and amends, restates and consolidates in their entirety (and is given in substitution for but not in satisfaction of) the following debentures (as each may have been amended and is currently in effect, collectively, the “Prior Debentures”): (a) that certain Secured Convertible Debenture dated May 26, 2005 (the “May 2005 Debenture”) originally issued by the Company to Highgate House Funds, Ltd., and thereafter assigned to the Holder, in the original principal amount of Three Million Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($3,750,000.00); (b) that certain Secured Convertible Debenture dated December 30, 2005 issued by the Company to the Holder in the original principal amount of One Million Five Hundred Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,500,000.00); and (c) that certain Secured Convertible Debenture dated August 23, 2006 issued by the Company to the Holder in the original principal amount of One Million Five Hundred Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,500,000.00). The Prior Debentures are all merged into and superseded by this Debenture. This Debenture does not effect a refinancing of all or any portion of the obligations under the Prior Debentures, it being the intention of the Company and the Holder to avoid effectuating a novation of any such obligations. All amounts due under the Prior Debentures, including the principal amount of Three Million Seven Thousand Three Hundred Seventeen and 97/100 Dollars ($ 3,007,317.97) set forth above (the “Original Principal Amount”) and all accrued and unpaid interest through February 22, 2013 in the amount of One Million Eighty Five Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Three and 33/100 Dollars ($1,085,471.33) set forth above (the “Prior Interest”) shall henceforth be evidenced by and paid, redeemed, and/or converted in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Debenture.
As of the February 22, 2013, Cirtran owed $3,007,317.97 in principle and $1,085,471.33 in interest. That is what the Company has publicly disclosed.
In the recent 10Q the Company stated that “during the three months ended March 31, 2013, we issued common stock valued at $387,836 towards the required payments.”
The Company also disclosed that "between May 23 and May 29, 2013, YA Global Investments, L.P., and its assigns converted an aggregate of $362,876"
This is what the Company has publicly disclosed so what you are saying can't be correct unless the Company is public issuing incorrect information.
Obviously your math and information in not correct.
Your math appears to be incorrect. No way does Cirtran only owe $750k.
As of Dec 31, 2012 the balance on the convertible notes totaled $3,132,855, with accrued interest owing on the notes as of Dec 31, 2012 totaling $1,076,574. That totals $4,209,429 owing as of Dec 31, 2012. (Per the 10K)
In the recent 10Q the Company stated that “during the three months ended March 31, 2013, we issued common stock valued at $387,836 towards the required payments.”
That would leave $3,821,593 left to pay YAG as of March 31, 2013 and that does not include the additional interest accruing on the notes since Dec 31st.
Also, under the 2013 Ratification Agreement payment schedule, the company “is required to make monthly payments, to be applied first to accrued interest and then to principle … “
Looks like the former COO determined it was time to get out of Cirtran.
Playbev filed for Chapter 11 due to Playbev’s creditors.
“On April 26, 2011, three alleged creditors, LIB-MP Beverage, LLC, George Denney, and Warner K. Depuy, filed an involuntary Chapter 7 petition against PlayBev, seeking its liquidation and related matters. In re Play Beverages, LLC, United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Utah, Case No. 11-26046. Thereafter, the case was converted to a voluntary Chapter 11 reorganization case. PlayBev worked subsequently as debtor-in-possession to propose and confirm a plan of reorganization based on a new license agreement with Playboy that was to become effective as part of a court- and creditor-approved plan of reorganization, subject to obtaining requisite financing. In addition, CBC entered into agreements with PlayBev to resolve intercompany advances, settle claims, and transfer CBC’s beverage distribution assets to PlayBev. CBC was to receive equity and an ongoing share of revenues from the reorganized debtor. Since the required court and creditor approvals and financing were not obtained, none of the foregoing agreements became effective.”
When the beverage company went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August 2011, it agreed with Playboy to extend the existing license agreement while negotiations for a new one were still pending, the complaint said. But Play Bev failed to meet the conditions for the new license agreement after it didn't obtain investment funds to capitalize the reorganized business and confirm its Chapter 11 reorganization plan.
Additional Due Diligence from LAW360
www.law360.com/articles/442570/playboy-denied-injunction-in-bunny-mark-row
"Playboy looks forward to pursuing and demonstrating that PlayBev, CirTran and their principals are unauthorized in conducting the Playboy energy drink business and in unlawfully making money from the Playboy brand," the company said in an email.
Law360, New York (May 17, 2013, 3:16 PM ET) -- An Illinois federal judge Wednesday denied Playboy Enterprises International Inc.'s bid for a preliminary injunction against a beverage company alleged to have infringed Playboy's famous "bunny" mark, and stayed the case pending the resolution of a parallel state-court lawsuit.
U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman said the complaint between Playboy and Play Beverages LLC was similar to a lawsuit involving the same parties filed last year in Cook County, Illinois. Both lawsuits revolve around the same disputed terms of a licensing agreement that Play Bev said allowed it to use the "bunny" mark, the court said.
Since "substantial overlap" of facts exist in the federal lawsuit and the state court lawsuit, inconsistent rulings potentially could contradict each other, Judge Gettleman said. If both lawsuits proceed at the same time, the dueling courts adjudicating the actions would be pitted in a "destructive race" to see which forum could resolve litigation first," the ruling said.
Playboy sought a court order barring Play Bev from using the rabbit head design or any similar marks on its products, as well as an order halting it from using the domain name PlayboyEnergy.com.
"At the heart of both cases is the status of the license agreement," Judge Gettleman said in the order. "The determination of whether defendants are entitled to continue to use the marks is crucial to the outcome of both actions."
The ruling puts the federal complaint on ice until the state court litigation is resolved. Playboy in February filed the federal lawsuit and moved for injunctive relief against Play Bev. The dispute relates to an underlying licensing deal Playboy and Play Bev struck seven years ago.
The companies in 2006 signed a license agreement granting Play Bev a limited right to manufacture and sell Playboy-branded energy drinks. The agreement was set to expire March 31, 2012, and contained a renewal term of five years.
When the beverage company went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August 2011, it agreed with Playboy to extend the existing license agreement while negotiations for a new one were still pending, the complaint said. But Play Bev allegedly failed to meet the conditions for the new license agreement after it didn't obtain investment funds to capitalize the reorganized business and confirm its Chapter 11 reorganization plan.
Subsequently, Play Bev in October 2012 sued Playboy in Illinois state court — months before Playboy filed the parallel federal lawsuit. Play Bev claimed Playboy had refused to renew the license agreement despite its good-faith obligation to do so.
Playboy said Friday that, with the ruling, the company will still be able to pursue its claims against Play Bev and CirTran Beverages Corp., which markets and distributes Playboy Energy Drink.
"Playboy looks forward to pursuing and demonstrating that PlayBev, CirTran and their principals are unauthorized in conducting the Playboy energy drink business and in unlawfully making money from the Playboy brand," the company said in an email.
Representatives for Play Bev didn't immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
Playboy is represented by M. David Weisman and Mpoli Simwanza-Johnson of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP and Richard J. Frey, Tamany Vinson Bentz, Melissa C. McLaughlin and Marcella Ballard of Venable LLP.
Cirtran has not publicly (officially) commented either.
Will do.
Sorry for the distraction. The initial post was simply to clarify the status of the convertible debentures and the converted shares.
The convertible debentures, which recently were converted to common stock, had originally been issued as restricted securities. The recently issued shares are not restricted.
From a previous 10K Filing:
"The debenture holders are prohibited, except in certain circumstances, from converting amounts of the Convertible Debentures to the extent that the issuance of shares would cause either of them to beneficially own more than 4.99 percent of our then outstanding common stock.
These restrictions, however, do not prevent the debenture holders from selling shares of common stock received in connection with a conversion, and then receiving additional shares of common stock in connection with a subsequent conversion.
In this way, either of these investors could sell more than 4.99 percent of the outstanding common stock in a relatively short time frame while never holding more than 4.99 percent at one time. As a result, other shareholders could experience substantial dilution in the value of their shares of our common stock."
Maybe you should go back and look to double check your memory.
In the stock market it is still possible to make money both short and long, the last I checked.
History with this stock shows that the only thing certain are losses and no cash . How many years in a row now? This is short-term settlement play at best. Nothing more. So what are the odds?
short or long? Still the key decision.
That is correct.
From a previous 10K Filing:
"The debenture holders are prohibited, except in certain circumstances, from converting amounts of the Convertible Debentures to the extent that the issuance of shares would cause either of them to beneficially own more than 4.99 percent of our then outstanding common stock.
These restrictions, however, do not prevent the debenture holders from selling shares of common stock received in connection with a conversion, and then receiving additional shares of common stock in connection with a subsequent conversion.
In this way, either of these investors could sell more than 4.99 percent of the outstanding common stock in a relatively short time frame while never holding more than 4.99 percent at one time. As a result, other shareholders could experience substantial dilution in the value of their shares of our common stock."
Funny how I of all people have to teach English
"the convertible debentures exchanged for the common stock issued had been issued as restricted securities."
the object of the verb "had " is "the convertible debentures exchanged for the common stock"
the convertible debentures, which recently were converted to common stock, had originally been issued as restricted securities. Yest that is correct. The recently issued shares are not restricted.
That is not correct.
"... the convertible debentures exchanged ..... had been issued as restricted securities ..."
NOT the common stock issued!
the convertible debentures exchanged for the common stock issued had been issued as restricted securities.