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.
You knew nothing about few Vince a few short years ago and nothing has changed much except for a bunch of new lawsuits and announcements that never went anywhere.
Sometimes change is good but it seems like many are afraid of change.
The stock went to .14 based upon message board members getting others to whack the bid higher and people actually believing the library valuation was $130 + million. It was penny stock frenzy.
Smart guys bailed out and greedy guys held out for 30 cents.
When people start comparing a penny stock's assets to real companies, you know there going to be trouble. Valcom always made the connection bewtween it's library and Netflix's in terms of valuation. Also the sale of Fox Kids Network vs MyFamily TV.
Like trying to justify that they were talking apple to apples. It was more like was apples to apple seeeds.
TP
How many times has this been repeated over the past six months? The price has pretty much traded in the .03 - .04 range since last November.
With Vince you know exactly what you are getting..more fluff PR pieces with no meat to back them up. Plus unaudited financials that rely solely on Vince's opinion to come up with results. Don't believe me. Read the auditors opinions on previous 10-K's.
With the Mannings, et al...I don't know what you get. But at least it's a fresh start where the management team is allowed to hit the reset button and hopefully come clean to all the shareholders about what has been fact and what has been fiction at Valcom over the years.
<Buy them Cheap my Friends as this will NEVER see these prices again.>
This is the PR from 6/14/11 that probably fueled the BOD fight. VV left out some information that was just recently filled in Harrington. Tri-Partners had some projects it was financing that was utilizing some of the pieces of Valcom's library.
"ValCom, Inc. (VLCO.PK) announced today that subject to the Board of Directors' approval, it will enter into a financing agreement with TRI-PARTNERS, LLC, a New Jersey based company, which has committed to loaning ValCom $600,000.
In recent weeks, ValCom has announced that it will dramatically increase the amount of operating capital available to the company through lines of credit and royalties that are due to the company.
The TRI-PARTNERS, LLC funds will be used to:
•Assist in financing the process to transfer ValCom's Library to digital media which is already underway, but will now be expedited.
•Assist in funding the collection process of royalties due ValCom from ASCAP and BMI, which will now be greatly enhanced with dedicated funding for this specific expense.
Vince Vellardita, CEO of ValCom, stated, "We welcome the vote of confidence shown by the members of TRI-PARTNERS, LLC. This loan agreement will give ValCom a total of $3.6 million in new financing arrangements. Coupled with the potential collection of unpaid royalties due from ASCAP and BMI of up to an estimated $5 million the company will have sufficient capital available to satisfy both short and long-term goals. With ValCom already showing profits, contracts tied into the use of the ValCom library, and the continued implementation of the business plan, the company is in the right position to succeed and is poised to create further shareholder value. Next on our agenda is a share buy-back program which we now plan to implement, plus we're considering providing a dividend to ValCom shareholders once the company's debt is retired."
A spokesperson for TRI-PARTNERS, Tim Harrington, stated, "My partners, Silvana and Greg Manning, and I are committed to seeing ValCom succeed in its goal to monetize its important library of motion pictures, TV series, and music. To do this without delay the company needs to promptly digitize this Library, which requires significant capital. The library's appraiser has stated that up to $5 million in royalties may be available from ASCAP and BMI. The financing from TRI-PARTNERS will also be used to facilitate collection of these monies due ValCom."
IMO, you have to wonder if the buyback of shares was ever done. You know that there is no way the company can pay a special dividend. The MJ movie and DVD was all a smokescreen. The real estate foreclosure auctions mysteriously stopping and the lofty target of 50 iTunes releases in a year were more VV promises that produced no results. You haven't heard a word from VV about any collection of back royalties. If the appraiser's estimate of the library valuation is way too high, it's probably safe to assume that his estimate of $5 million in back royalties is way too high as well.
I think the only way they can get to Funky's $1 target is thru a reverse split.
Smite,
IMO nobody on this board is going anywhere. In a few months, VV will be forgotten and the board will be knee deep in questioning what the new BOD is up to.
New price targets will be issued by members and the same rosy predictions will start flowing based upon old press releases that new posters will dredge up.
VV should be happy and relieved. Now somebody else can do all the heavy lifting and he can sit back and enjoy his life. He's been through enough with cancer. Time to spend some quality time with the family. Let somebody else turn those millions of shares into possibly serious money.
JMO,
TP
Wow Funky...surprising YOU said this. For you to suggest that I'm remotely involved with the Mannings, et al., is laughable and you know it.
After everything that has happened in the past year or two , with VV making all these promises, and the stock going nowhere, you claim that he is going to pull a rabbit out of the hat at and get you to $1 pps. Blinded optimism.
At least the other side knows that all of VV claims are worthless and they might be able to use their contacts to do something. 18 cents per share? Again, wild optimism, but at least more in the ballpark.
I still feel the restated financials are going to surprise investors with just how much Vince's rose colored glasses glowed. IMO it's not going to be pretty.
Please allow me this 15 minutes of gloating because most everything I wrote about Vince PR's were pretty much confirmed by the 8-K. Very little of it was true. The emperor had no clothes.
If VV regains power via shareholder vote then this company is in for more misery as results will never, ever match promises.
He must have been reading my posts..lol.
It's nice to be validated about my conclusions that most of VV's PR's were just words that contained no real substance. To think that many members of this board were so SURE that there was meat behind Vince's PR's and that they did proper due diligence on Vince.
It brings into question if anything that Vince PR'd was true. Especially those PR's with specific dollar amounts mentioned (FilmOn and these recent six figure deals he claimed coming out of the Miami conference).
Pacal...I'm sure you are a nice guy. But Vince looked your right in the eye and lied to you. Just as Smite claimed he would.
The good news is that the shareholders have a back up BOD in place and ready to try and right the wrongs of Vince and the Rathods. Probably easier said than done since I figure the current financials situation at Valcom is probably far worse than anyone imagines. The 10-K is probably going to wake up a lot of people on this board. Most companies that pull this kind of crap usually die a bad death. Valcom has another chance. Hopefully VV will be a footnote on this board in a few months. I guess that Ingrid is on the way out as well (by association).
<Mr. Willemsen, Chairman of ValCom, stated “Far too many empty promises and deals have been announced in the past, but never brought to fruition. We intend to dispense with this hyperbole and focus on our existing platform to turn this company into a profitable business using the assets at hand.”
Mr. Willemsen continued, "One of our priorities as we begin to undertake the rebuilding of ValCom will be to annul the purported loan transaction with Solomed, a toxic transaction that was never authorized by ValCom’s board, and which immensely diluted ValCom’s shareholders.” Mr. Willemsen continued, "A recent letter from Mr. Vellardita was sent to certain shareholders. This letter was riddled with false accusations and misstatements, and included a proposed amendment to increase ValCom’s authorized common stock by tens of millions of shares, thus potentially diluting all shareholders substantially. However, our new management does not plan on such a recapitalization, rather, our aim is continue developing value, and in fact, to seek and nullify any shares issued unlawfully or in bad faith without the board’s knowledge or consent. The current Board members have a significant investment in ValCom and will work diligently to create value for all bona fide shareholders.">
Under the Apple/Liquidmetal agreement is that Apple owns and can enforce the Liquidmetal patents in regards to consumer electronic products.
Liquidmetal receives no benefit in the future from anything coming out of Apple.
Wrong again ...the Apple deal was mentioned in the 10-Q dated 11/5/10 (see pg. 10). Why is all this information being recycled by this poster and presented as new?
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=45088264
<To our knowledge, this is the first time a public document emerges, acknowledging the much-rumored licensing deal between the iPhone makers and the company specializing in amorphous alloys known as liquid-metals>
Apple bought the rights in perpetuity from Liquidmetal in 2010.
Liquidmetal will not benefit in any way (except for the already booked one time payment) with anything that Apple does. Apple did not invest any money IN the company.
<“The company has been broke for years. This shows how dramatic a deal this is, that Apple would invest in a company that’s quite flaky,” he relates>
The Roys TV show......click on the video CRS 2012.
Around the 7 minute mark, The Roys go into detail about the status of the show. It's coming but the signing of the contract has been delayed.
http://www.theroysonline.com/
Keep recycling that same agreement from two years ago. Doesn't change the fact that the company no longer does any work.
All trades of stock were results of a small group of message board traders playing games trying to suck other penny stock players in so they could unload at higher prices. It was a pretty successful pump and dump given the fact they are long gone and a few holdouts are still convinced this company deals with IBM.
Vince was worshipped as a god on this board and sometimes when you place all your faith in one man it's hard to grasp what went wrong when his actions don't match what he was preaching.
The reality is that the settlement of this dispute (whenever it happens)will begin to remove the cloud of uncertainty over Valcom. Whether the new BOD will be any more forthcoming with detailed information is yet to be determined.
<all I care about is share price>
Thanks for the update Funky.
The whole matter has stunk for a year. When backed into a corner VV spills all the beans about the case in a last ditch effort to win support. A little too late. He made his bed, now he has to lay in it.
I expect the original plan will be put in place and have VV run My Family TV.
Assuming everything you posted to be true, I wonder how long it will take some on this message to turn their backs on VV, tell us what a deceptive liar he was, and get way behind the Mannings, et al.
TP
Go back and read the board.
I have gotten my hands on VV's shareholder letter. One of the things that has always bugged me was WHY Vince added Silvana Manning, Tim Harrington, and Michael Vredegoor to the Board of Directors. Apparently it was related to project that was going to use some of Valcom's music content and they were going to provide the financing.
If the Rathods have been involved with Valcom since 2000 and are their financial backers, what on earth was Vince thinking giving three BOD seats to individuals whose backgrounds were quite well known in exchange for essentially a couple of hundred thousand dollars?
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=47691281
I find it amusing how much new information has been disclosed by Vince when he desparately needs the shareholders votes. If he could somehow provide this level of detail in his PR's then it would go a long way to establishing some sort of credibility for Valcom.
If Vince is the company's largest creditor then one may likely assume that future payments to Vince will be in the form of stock which will cause additional dilution.
If you continue to believe that IBM is working with Ants, then you have tons of false hope.
Ants had their window of opportunity in late 2010, early 2011 when IBM asked Ants to fix all the bugs in the program. IBM was told that it would be done. Guess what? It never happened. And IBM was left hanging in the wind........That's why the stock price went below a penny.
It over Johnny...it's over.
Even if Zdarsky can find programmers to fix the code, no one is interested in using the product.
Misleading conduct is the act of concealing a fact or knowingly making a misleading and false statement calculating it to be misunderstood.
Theorectically shareholders could sue Valcom for misleading conduct regarding the handling of the library valuation. Sames goes for several other press releases (MJ movie, and iTunes releases comes to mind).
The problem is that there is nothing liquid to receive if shareholders win. Why spend millions in attorney fees to win nothing? It's different from the existing BOD's who could still issue themselves millions of shares at their discretion.
But those 10's of thousand would still be there regardless of whether Valcom existed or not...
<I would say 10's of thousands are being a part of what VALCOM does>
In what business do you expect this to be normal?
The lawyer business? It should be less than 1%.
< Expect to write off 15% of your sales any year, anywhere. Wish I could show you my 360+ A/R>
Aren't there less than 10 employees at Valcom?
<Many People are employed and work for an honest living through VALCOMS Product>
So Zdarsky makes a 3/31/12 filing for an event that occured on 8/3/11 because he was legally required to do so. Nothing like waiting until the last minute.
This exact statement can be applied to Vince as well.....
"but when some shareholders call for some credibility from him, he's allowed a pass?"
In the end, both gentleman will have to prove to shareholders (and maybe message board holders) the facts of their case.
Neither one is choosing at this time to prove it on a message board (and rightly so).
TP
But why WOULD CnS post his legal filings here? He would get no benefit from it except to get ripped apart by you guys. Vince has acknowledged that Valcom owes him money but the Status Quo order won't let Valcom pay invoices over $10K without both sides (of directors) agreeing. I've always found it strange why Bruce wouldn't re-invoice for separate invoices under $10K but I don't think that would have loosened up a payment from Valcom.
If CnS isn't getting paid, then I'd imagine the producer that Bruce worked with didn't get paid. Then i'd have wonder who else in the company hasn't been paid. But we won't know until after the 10-K is released. Then a 10-Q for the period ending 12/31/11 is due. A lot of filings are backing up here.
Next week is the meeting of the parties before the judge I believe, then the following week is the shareholders meeting.
Hopefully a compromise can be worked out between all parties involved. If not, it's going to be a long summer IMO.
It's Valcom's responsibility to make the legal filings public, not the other party (Cups N Strings).
Valcom could simply use the boiler plate language and say that it in the course of business it is party to numerous lawsuits and claims and not have to individually name them. Or the could choose to specify each case.
It's really up to Vince at this point.
TP
Buf,
This is a message board. What do you think happens on all message boards? Most of the discussion on these boards are about making a mockery of things.
What does proffesinal mean?
<SO tigerpac your alright with smiteman making a mockery and telling lies on I-hub..real proffesinal.>
Wouldn't the SEC asking questions about a material library appraisal qualify as an EVENT?
<Anytime a Public Company is involved in a Lawsuit it must release that information to the shareholders as an Event.>
I agree the lawsuit is fluff as well. Others have stronger words for it.
http://torrentfreak.com/copyright-vultures-sue-megaupload-for-millions-120323/
I agree that the MegaUpload news item is more fluff.
Valcom probably joined a class action suit on copyright infringement trying to get any share of the pie. Hopefully Valcom is not counting on recovering royalties from their Public Domain titles.
In other words, you can share if you don't sue. Some lawyer expenses less a cut of the settlement if this case ever gets settled.
I assume this is the Tim Harrington of the "ousted" Board of Directors.
<Caruso said that fellow Talero marketing executive Tim Harrington lives near Newton in Roxbury.>
And where did all that money disappear to?
<At ANTs, Mr. Kozak succeeded in raising $40 million in equity funds>
Be careful what you ask for.
<Go to the meeting and ask >
There's that bloody typo again....1,000,000 shares or is it supposed to be 1,000,000,000 shares.....makes you want to question exactly what you're voting on BEFORE you actually cast your vote.
Ingrid's response to David last month was:
It's 500,000,000 and always has been. It's just to ratify the existing board
and the authorized which is same 5M that it has been. Nothing more has been
added and nothing has been removed.
==================
The big question is what does "the total number of shares ValCom, Inc. shall have authority to issue is 1,000,000" mean in context with the words thst follow " of which 500,000,000 shares are Common Stock, etc? I don't think anybody can really give a rational explanation of what that means.
If anyone is going to believe what some blogger wrote, at least know his background:
Alexastock.webs.com is owned by: Sanford Hall (a Private individual) of Grand Turk, Turks and Caicos, Islands
I'd be a little uncomfortable basing your decision on a blogger from out of the country.
Here's a link to the Fletcher article about the lawsuit:
http://www.finalternatives.com/node/19635
Pensions Seek Liquidation Of Fletcher Hedge Fund
Feb 16 2012 | 2:49am ET
Three Louisiana pension funds have apparently had their fill of Fletcher Asset Management.
The public pension plans have filed a winding-up petition against the New York-based hedge fund's Cayman Islands-domiciled vehicle, calling for its liquidation. In the Caymans filing, the pensions wrote that the Fletcher fund "is unable to pay its debts" and "should be wound up." The lawsuit further alleges that Fletcher has filed no audited financial statements in three years and that the fund appeared to have no directors between Nov. 21, 2011 and Jan. 24.
The Louisiana pensions, which invested $100 million with Fletcher almost four years ago with a guaranteed return of 12%, also noted that Fletcher was facing a regulatory investigation in the U.S.
The winding-up petition follows almost a year of negotiations over the pensions' redemption requests. The pensions sought to redeem $32 million in July, only to receive promissory notes. The three then filed redemptions for the full $140 million their account statements say they have.
Fletcher has denied any wrongdoing.
A spokesman for the Louisiana Firefighters' Retirement System, Louisiana Municipal Employees' Retirement System and the New Orleans Firefighters' Pension and Relief Fund, Steven Stockstill, said that the three plans would continue to pursue "all other feasible options" alongside the winding-up petition.
Now that's keeping your eye on the ball!
Good catch!
<The Roys Off to Clearwater Beach for the day>
I wish the PR was a little more specific. Like what are the length of the agreements? If it's a one year deal, then it's great. If it's a five year deal, then maybe it's not so great...just ok..that's why the devil is in the details.
<Great, mid six-figure range revenues added.?
They see the trades before they execute them so they can tell what money wants to flow in and out.That's advance notice....
As far as real news...I guess it depends on who you know.
<Do MMs get advance notice when news is about to be released?>
Whatever...this stock needs speculators like yourself to make someone else money.
<Does a 10Q actually say, "In the event of a buyout, all investors will receive NOTHING."
If it does NOT say that... Then your post is irrelevant to my concerns>
For you optimists...someone just bought 1.5 million shares...looks like the whack the ask game is starting again....expect to see old names showing up again.