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.
Apparently, this is what happened:
On June 11, 2013, StrikeForce filed a "Notice of Dismissal of FiServ, Inc. Without Prejudice."2 On June 25, 2013, StrikeForce filed an amended complaint removing FiServ as a defendant and adding additional allegations with respect to First Midwest.3 On July 8, 2014, StrikeForce filed a second amended complaint adding allegations that PhoneFactor and First Midwest also infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 8,484,698 ("the '698 patent") and 8, 713, 701 ("the '701 patent").4 On December 4, 2014, StrikeForce and First Midwest filed a "Stipulation and Order of Dismissal" by which all claims between those two parties were dismissed with prejudice.
#msg-121798570
The 10Q is due on 5/15, not the 5th, and historically, the company has filed an NT on that date rather than the quarterly.
Yes, I saw that, but the company's 10Ks do not appear to support that number. In the eight period I cited, annual revenues never exceeded $661,580.
Total revenues for 2011 were $448,127. For the eight year period 2004-11, they totalled $2.5 million. How did they sell four million units and received only those meager amounts?
Is it specified somewhere that the payments are $1.8/year for five years? I only see this in the filings:
"....a purchase price of Nine Million Dollars ($9,000,000), which may be paid in the form of a promissory note due by and no later than September 30, 2020."
Very true. I must admit that the net settlement of $4.9 million was higher than I expected, but there were some wild numbers posted here.
Yes, you are reading it wrong.
Okay, thanks. It shouldn't be difficult to spot.
Does it have to be a separate line item or can it be packaged under the general heading of "revenue"?
The 8-K regarding the settlement states explicitly that "Company will receive a non-disclosable one-time lump sum payment." How do you anticipate that they will get around that?
"2011/12 Sfor sold....4 million units..for a 120m$" Can someone point me to the source for these numbers?
The 10-K for the period ending 12/31/12 states:
"Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2012 were $805,312 compared to $448,127 for the year ended December 31, 2011"
That totals $1.25 million, not $120. What am I not seeing?
Got it. Thanks.
"AMOUNT TO BE RELEASED ANY TIME THIS WEEK!!" Could someone clarify something for me?
The 1/20 8K states: "the Company will receive a non-disclosable one-time lump sum payment. I read that to mean the amount is non-disclosable. Am I misinterpreting it?
It's on the daily list today for the reverse split (1:100) tomorrow. http://otce.finra.org/DailyList
Plus, John Denver's availability might be limited by the fact he has been dead for 18 years.
One should be wary of any document that includes "Confessions of a Paid Basher" as evidence of market manipulation. "Confessions of a Paid Basher" is a 15-year-old hoax, one of the most celebrated ones in the history of the internet.
It was first posted on Raging Bull in November, 2000 and revealed to be a hoax almost immediately. (thestreet.com reveled in the gullibility of message board readers who fell for it in a 11/9/00 article, a week after the original RB post: http://www.thestreet.com/story/1165692/1/raging-bull-chat-room-devotees-get-dose-of-whopper.html)
The original fictional boiler room was named Franklin, Andrews, Kramer & Edelstein (FAKE). Later versions upped the degree of difficulty ever so slightly by changing the name to Global Calumny (look up "calumny"), and the aliases of the "paid bashers" have changed many times over the past 15 years.
Unlike many internet myths, "Confessions of a Paid Basher" has a clearly defined origin. That it is a hoax is undeniable. To give it any credence whatsoever is to willfully delude oneself.
From the NT-10Q: "Electronic Cigarettes International Group, Ltd. (the “Registrant”) was unable, without unreasonable effort or expense, to file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2015 (the “Quarterly Report”) by the May 11, 2015 filing date applicable to accelerated companies."
Did you forget it was the colossal, monumental and historic fifteenth anniversary of the launch of a website that became "an exciting and dynamic community of investors, passionate about sharing stock picks and trading strategies"?
RE: "a COMPANY, (sic) that has a 17 MILLION DOLLAR MARKET CAP..." What company might that be? It's not this one.
The 10-K/A filed on 4/30 states that there were "65,477,771 shares of Common Stock issued and outstanding as of April 28, 2015." Using Friday's close of .516, that made the market cap $33,786,529 or nearly double your $17 million figure.
(Incidentally, at Friday's high of .585, the market cap was over $38 million, less than one million shy of what it was immediately prior to the reverse split.)
Yes, it is a paid ad and the "article" was written by a non-NYT freelancer. That is also stated clearly.
Its a "Special Advertising Supplement to the New York Times." In the actual magazine, that is stated clearly.
RE: "ECIG performed both a R/S and increase in A/S contemporaneously." Actually, it didn't. The proposal to increase the outstanding shares to 350 million (330 million common and 20 million preferred) was not approved by shareholders. (The proposal received 55% of the votes cast but less than the necessary 50%+ of the voting shares eligible.)
The 8.5% ownership is NOT "as of Wednesday," the day of the SC 13G filing. It is the percentage as of 3/30/15, and we already knew the O/S on that date from the 10-K filing.
The SC 13G is quite specific:
(b) Percent of class:
Approximately 8.5% (collectively,* for all
Reporting Persons), based on 34,879,194 shares of Common
Stock of the Issuer issued and outstanding as of March 30, 2015.
It is still 300 million.
"BUY.buy. make it Green." You first.
Jawohl, the market is open on Monday.
Let's say you didn't know what the O/S was. All you knew was that the last time the company had been legally obligated to update you it had increased by 75 percent in one week. Now, one of the events you described occurs. Would you leap to purchase? I am not all that confident a new investor would.
Right now, what would propel a new investor, someone with no previous emotional attachment to the stock, to initiate a long position with ECIGD? Nothing leaps out at me, and I think that presents a large hurdle in the price rebounding to any substantial degree.
"Q4 had over 40mil revenues" You should inform the company. They think it was only 12.1 million. From yesterday's p.r.:
Yes, but under your scenario, you own an ever shrinking "share" of the company.
I assume he is referring to this (on page 38 of the 10-K): "Loss on impairment of goodwill and other identifiable intangible assets for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 was $144,357,493 and $0, respectively.
"Their revenues were no problem" They looked like a problem to me. Fourth quarter revenues were down from the third quarter.
The O/S was 19,931,334 shares when the reverse split became effective.
1,000,000 shares traded in first 12 minutes.
Sorry, I'm still going through it. Maybe someone else can give you a quick answer.
They just filed the 10-K as an accelerated filer.
Almost 15 million actually.
O/S -- "The registrant had 34,879,194 shares of its common stock outstanding as of March 30, 2015."
A company qualifies as an accelerated filer when it has a public float of $75 million or more and less than $700 million. At the end of the second quarter, ECIGD had almost 82 million shares outstanding and a share price of $8.82. How does that not qualify as an accelerated filer?
10-Q/A. One for the quarter ending 9/30/14 is likely out next.