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.
Looks like Iffthekar doesn't like me anymore
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VLVT&read=20925
And I'm not even one of you sleek posters. Oh well, the gong show continues at ragingbull and at diamond bar.
Robert
As of today, no old chips are remaining. There are still gaming techniques that you can use, but no more guaranteed wins.
I have hundreds of thousands of pages of data on the current generation chip, but it appears bulletproof at this time.
If you are going to beat the game you best have a friend with a key.
Robert
I just heard that Sungold changed the authorized share cap to be UNLIMITED. If that isn't the scariest thing you've ever heard for a penny stock. At least it cancels all possibility of the stock ever doing a reverse split in the future.
I also heard that Kim Hart stepped out of the spotlight so he could start to liquidate his shares without having to file disclosure statements. Sounds like a repeat of past events to me. Too bad, the stock had potential at one time. Now it is just another pumped and dumped penny. I would expect that they will give a million or two shares to the newsletter spammers to pump the stock so that the insider selling doesn't collapse it completely.
If anyone new chances across this board, they best do a history check before making a donation to this charity.
Robert
Try the pinksheets,
currently .31/.35
Robert
Once again I remind those of you who have not been terminated, please keep your discussion civil. ZERO TOLERANCE is in effect!
Robert
This board is getting half informative and half entertaining. While it is tough to tell the two apart it is good to see active conversation regardless.
Robert
OT: JR, check out Hayley's new website:
www.hayleywickenheiser.com
now I just have to deal with Jeremy Jackson's site,lol.
Robert
Juice was right in predicting
:the increase in the authorized shares
:Kim Hart stepping aside as president
:lawsuits
:the shutting down of the horsepower game!!!!!!
He also predicted that Kim Hart was dumping his shares into the market and that the share price would reach sub-penny levels. I think he said sometime in September or October it would reach 2.3 cents. I tried to find the post but could not. I hate RB, what a cesspool.
Robert
good posts on this board today. Nice to see.
Robert
This board can be very informative and entertaining if everyone can remain civil. Posters who get out of line will not last regardless of your opinion of this stock. Keep it clean kids.
Robert
Zero tolerance is in effect. Enjoy your stay, it may be brief.
Robert
While I agree that he has disrupted and destroyed that board, he has every right to post here if he remains within the TOS agreement. Simply having a negative opinion of a stock or its CEO is not sufficient justification for termination. That being said, the slightest violation of the TOS, disruption of the board, or off topic posting and action will be swift.
You will find that this site is not like RB. Action against idiots will be quick and this board will be left clean for the discussion of this stock. POSITIVE and NEGATIVE.
Robert
Do not worry sky-king. This board will NOT become ragingBS. The same rules of posting and conduct will be applied to everyone and those who cannot behave will be removed.
bigbrother is watching.
I just got a call regarding that. He was an interesing character, I'll give him that, even though we didn't see eye to eye on many issues.
Unfortunately your opinion on the subject is worthless.
Have a nice day.
Robert
I agree with the others. Your repetitive posts are annoying. Contact the IR whomever that may be but do not disrupt the board with idiotic posts. This is the only time I will ask nicely.
Robert
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/Jdb-txt/SC/03/08/2003BCSC0826.htm
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Citation:
Reeves v. Hart et al,
2003 BCSC 826
Date: 20030527
Docket: L031073
Registry: Vancouver
Between:
Melvin R. Reeves
Petitioner
And
Kim Noble Hart, Sungold Entertainment Corp., Horsepower Broadcasting Network Inc., Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia and the Registrar of Companies of British Columbia
Respondents
Before: The Honourable Madam Justice Humphries
(In Chambers)
Reasons for Judgment
Counsel for the Petitioner
Robert A. Millar
K. Hendricksen
Counsel for the Respondent Kim Noble Hart
Rupert Shore
Counsel for the Respondents Sungold and Horsepower
Edward E. Bowes
Date and Place of Hearing:
April 28, 2003
Vancouver, B.C.
[1] The Petitioner, Melvin Reeves ("Reeves"), applies under s. 114 of the Company Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 62, to have the Respondent Kim Noble Hart ("Hart") declared disqualified to act as a director and officer of the Respondent companies Sungold Entertainment Corp. ("Sungold") and Horsepower Broadcasting Network Inc. ("Horsepower"). Counsel for the companies made submissions in support of Hart.
[2] Section 114 of the Company Act reads:
(1) No person is qualified to become or to act as a director of a company who is
….
(e) unless the court orders otherwise, convicted in or out of British Columbia of an offence
….
(ii) involving fraud
unless 5 years have elapsed since the [imposition of sentence or the term of imprisonment is concluded, whichever is later].
[3] Both Sungold and Horsepower are incorporated pursuant to the laws of British Columbia and are regulated by the Company Act. Horsepower is a wholly owned subsidiary of Sungold, a public company which trades through an American entity called "Bulletin Board". The business of both companies is to sell software for virtual horseracing games.
[4] The Petitioner Reeves and the Respondent Hart are directors of Sungold. The bulk of the affidavit material before me describes Hart as the driving force in Sungold and, in fact, he was instrumental in hiring Reeves. Reeves is a consultant to a numbered company which provides management services to Sungold's wholly owned subsidiary in Quebec, "Horsepower Quebec". Reeves became a director of Sungold in February of 2003.
[5] Reeves says he became aware on March 25, 2003 that Hart had pleaded guilty to an offence under s. 239(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.1 (5th Supp). After trying various non-litigious methods of removing Hart as director, Reeves brought this petition.
[6] Hart says the Board of Directors and Reeves knew about the conviction all along, and Reeves has been motivated to bring this petition because his lucrative consulting contract has been cancelled by a vote of the directors of the company, from which Hart abstained.
[7] In any event, there is no doubt that on 28 November 2002, Hart pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion contrary to s. 239(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act. Section 239(1) reads:
Every person who has
….
(d) wilfully, in any manner, evaded or attempted to evade compliance with this Act or payment of taxes imposed by this Act...
is guilty of an offence.
[8] When the plea of guilty was entered, a joint statement of facts was filed for the purposes of sentencing. In 1996 and 1997, Hart's tax return was prepared by an accountant who relied on information provided by Hart and his bookkeeper. This information included share summaries of the purchase and sale of Hart's Sungold shares for those years. The adjusted cost base of the Sungold shares sold by Hart was overstated, correspondingly reducing the amount of profit indicated as having been earned. This meant that Hart understated his taxable income by $105,710 in 1996, and by $105,870 in 1997, resulting in the evasion of $28,528 and $29,761 in federal income taxes for those years respectively.
[9] Hart also claimed some business expenses for which he had already been reimbursed.
[10] The relevant paragraphs setting out the particulars of the offence to which Hart pleaded guilty are:
13. In November 1998, the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency audited Hart for 1996 and 1997. Hart provided the auditor with the same share summaries that had been provided to the accountant. The auditor then requested documentation from Hart to verify the figure shown as the adjusted cost base of the shares in the summaries. In response, Hart provided the auditor with copies of cancelled cheques and two receipts that had been falsified as follows:
a. Some of the cheques that Hart provided to the auditor purportedly in support of his purchase of the Sungold shares had been altered after they had cleared the bank, so that the amounts written on them were higher than what had actually been negotiated.
b. One of the cheques that had originally been made out to "CASH" was altered after it had been negotiated at the bank to be payable to "WALLY CASHMAN".
c. Another one of the cheques purportedly for the purchase of Sungold shares had never been negotiated.
d. The two receipts provided to the auditor were also fraudulent. The people who purportedly issued the receipts did not actually make them. A search warrant executed on Hart's residence uncovered a receipt book with practice signatures matching the signature on one of the fraudulent receipts.
[11] Hart, supported by the companies, says there is no indication in the facts to which he pleaded as to who actually did the fraudulent transactions, and indeed, without an examination into the mind of the person who did the transactions, fraud cannot be established. Hart used a personal friend as an accountant at the relevant time, and this friend has passed away since the returns were filed. If this friend, or some other person altered the cheques and wrote the receipts, Hart says we cannot know their purpose in doing so. This offence is therefore merely one of wilfully evading taxes and does not involve fraud.
[12] It is Reeves' position that this conviction clearly involves fraud. If the offence of "tax evasion" itself does not include fraud as an essential element, then the facts underlying this particular conviction clearly demonstrate fraudulent conduct. The fraudulent conduct for which Hart was convicted was in providing falsified documents and fraudulent receipts to Revenue Canada. That is clearly spelled out in the Statement of Facts to which Hart pleaded guilty.
[13] I agree with the Petitioner. The documents were agreed to be falsified and fraudulent. They were used by Hart to change the adjusted cost base of the shares and reduce the tax payable. An element of the offence of tax evasion is that it is done wilfully. Whether he actually prepared the documents himself is irrelevant. The offence to which he pleaded guilty involved fraud.
"UNLESS THE COURT ORDERS OTHERWISE"
[14] I must therefore decide whether it is open to me to consider the Respondents' alternate position that I exercise my discretion to allow Hart to continue as a director. Reeves says that such an application must be brought by separate petition.
[15] I conclude that it is open to me to consider the application. Section 114 contains the words "unless the court otherwise orders" within the relevant phrase. It would not make sense to disqualify Hart and disregard those words, thus requiring another petition to be brought.
[16] Reeves' general proposition is that the sanctity of the limited company, especially one trading publicly, must be preserved and that Hart is not to be entrusted with it. For the protection of the public and for the sake of the companies, he must be removed. The offence involved sale of shares in Sungold, the company of which he is a director; it was a serious offence and not merely a regulatory breach; and the gaming business in which Sungold and Horsepower are involved is highly regulated and requires a high degree of honesty and trustworthiness.
[17] Hart and the companies say Hart is the driving force behind the companies and their viability depends on his maintaining his position as director. They submit that the Petitioner has in fact taken advantage of Hart's innovative ideas in promoting the company by buying significant stock in Sungold. They contend that Reeves has ulterior motives for bringing this petition and has acted with inappropriate aggressiveness in bringing the matter before the court.
[18] Counsel for the company argues that since Sungold is a public company, no one director can sign cheques and the company must file reports to satisfy securities regulations in both Canada and the U.S.; therefore, there is adequate protection available for the public. Neither the Registrar of Companies nor the Securities Commission have taken any position on this conviction, which received publicity and was hidden from no one. Counsel submits that these bodies, not Mr. Reeves with his private agenda, are the watchdogs for the public, and if they have not indicated a concern, then my discretion should be exercised in favour of allowing Hart to continue as director.
[19] These are not sufficient reasons to exercise my discretion in Hart's favour. In view of the circumstances of the offence to which Mr. Hart pleaded guilty and his role as director in a publicly traded company, there should be a compelling reason to allow him to continue to act as a director of a company once he has been convicted of an offence involving fraud, particularly where the offence concerns shares in that very company. It is not sufficient simply to point to a present lack of action by the Securities Commission and the Registrar of Companies. What their respective functions would be in these circumstances is not clear, nor is whether they would use resources to investigate a director whose company is not listed on a Canadian exchange. As for the viability of the company being dependent on Mr. Hart, his involvement in the company need not end - only his tenure as director. It is apparent from the position of counsel for the companies that the rest of the Directors support Mr. Hart. I am not satisfied that the viability of Sungold would be diminished to a significant degree if Hart were removed as director.
[20] In the result, Mr. Hart is prohibited from acting as director of Sungold pursuant to s. 114 of the Company Act.
[21] Mr. Reeves seeks full indemnity for costs from the company pursuant to s. 128 of the Company Act and Part 20.1 of the Articles of Sungold.
[22] S. 128 reads:
(1) A company, with the approval of the court, may indemnify a person who is a director...of the company...against all costs...actually and reasonably incurred by the person...in a civil...proceeding to which the person is made a party because of being or having been a director, including an action brought by the company or corporation, if
(a) the person acted honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interests of the corporation of which the person is or was a director.
[23] Part 20.1 reads:
20.1. Subject to the provisions of the Company Act, the directors shall cause the company to indemnify a director...of the company...against all costs...actually and reasonably incurred by him...in a civil...action or proceeding to which he is...made a party by reason of his having been a director of the company, including any action brought by the company or any such corporation. Each director of the company on being elected or appointed shall be deemed to have contracted with the companion the terms of the foregoing indemnity.
[24] Reeves says an order indemnifying him for the costs of bringing this petition would serve to protect the public interest by encouraging other directors to come forward in similar situations.
[25] No authority was cited to me in respect of such an award of costs in a situation where one director has initiated a petition and sought an order against another director whom the rest of the directors support. Counsel for Reeves referred to Consolidated Enfield Corp. v Blair, (1995),128 D.L.R. (4th) 73 (S.C.C.), where an application was brought against a director. Although unsuccessful, the director obtained indemnity for his costs because he had been made a party to the litigation by reason of being a director, the costs were reasonably incurred, and he had acted honestly and in good faith with a view to promoting the best interests of the appellant.
[26] Reeves initiated this petition; he was not made a party to litigation by reason of his position as director. Although he has been successful, I am not prepared to require the company to fully indemnify him for his costs in the circumstances of this case.
[27] Reeves will have his costs at Scale 3.
"M.A. Humphries, J."
The Honourable Madam Justice M.A. Humphries
I received a lengthly email from Mr. Brunetti today, apparantly it was sent to multiple recipients whom had enquired as to his departure from VLVT. I've never met the man, but he is having some health problems right now and I'd like to wish him well and hope that he is able to get some rest and enjoy a full recovery. I'd also like to thank him for taking the time to respond to those of us who were curious.
Robert
Bottled Water - what's in a label?
Sales of bottled water are booming around the globe. According to the World Wildlife Fund, it's the fastest-growing beverage sector in the world, worth about $33 billion CDN.
It's so big, both Coke and Pepsi have waded into the market with their own brands.
So far, there are no scientific studies that indicate bottled water is healthier for you than tap water. Bottled water, however, does not contain chlorine or fluoride.
What makes one brand different than the other? You may notice a number of terms listed on the label.
Bottled water can come from any source.
Here's a quick reference guide to what it all means.
Mineral and Spring Water - must come from an underground source (not a public water supply) and can't be changed in any way by chemicals. Mineral water has a higher amount of dissolved mineral salts.
Bottled Water - water from any source that can be distilled or carbonated or treated in any other way.
The water in "Dasani" (owned by Coca-Cola) comes from municipal supplies in Brampton, Ont. and Calgary - straight out of the tap. (Pepsi owns "Aquafina.")
Artesian Water/Artesian Well Water - bottled water from a well that taps a confined aquifer (a water-bearing underground layer of rock or sand) in which the water level stands at some height above the top of the aquifer.
Sparkling Water - water that has been carbonated. Soda water, seltzer water and tonic water are not considered bottled waters.
Glacial Water - water from a source directly from a glacier.
Natural Water - water (such as spring, mineral, artesian or well water) obtained from an approved underground source and not from a municipal or public water supply system. This water has undergone no treatment other than physical filtration and iron removal.
Purified Water - water produced by distillation, de-ionization or reverse osmosis, which contains not more than 10 mg/L of total dissolved solids.
What's in the water?
MINERAL WATER:
Naturally-carbonated natural mineral water is water which, after treatment, replacement of gas and packaging, has the same content of gas from the source.
Non-carbonated natural mineral water is water which, after treatment and packaging, prevents hydrogen carbonate salts from dissolving.
De-carbonated natural mineral water is water which after treatment, does not have the same carbon dioxide content as when it first came out of the ground.
Carbonated natural mineral water is water which, after treatment and packaging, has been made bubbly by adding carbon dioxide.
Demineralized - the dissolved solids (minerals) have been removed.
Re-mineralized - after filtration that removes all the solids, some are put back in.
Ozonized - ozone is added to kill bacteria.
Super-oxygenated - oxygen is added, most of which escapes when you twist the cap.
That has been in fact the 10 year story here. Unfortunate situation for many good people over the years. I did well with the stock but only because I was never one to hold on for too long a period of time.
In retrospect, I wonder how much of the lack of success was directly due to poor management and how much was a sincere lack of trying. I'm sure we will never know and those on opposite sides of the opinion will be quick to rush to judgement either way, but the truth is the lack of quality communication from Tom and from the various IR's, especially Madeline Franco, has kept everyone completely in the dark.
Robert
And remarkably still has the same number of quality posts as RB,lol. I don't frequent that site often but what a gongshow it has turned into. I don't miss it.
While I am not happy with the loss I took in this stock, I am pleased to see this board continues to remain civil and those with opposing views and interpretations of the facts can coexist without resorting to name calling or other such drivel.
My appreciation to all of you.
Another interesting story to watch right now is a stock called AQVB which was just halted by the SEC for misleading PR's. It is still unfolding, but could be setting a precedent for future actions against small companies.
Robert
FYI: I did receive an email confirming rbrunetti's identity. I know several of you were concerned about raging imposters showing up on this board. Thankyou rbrunetti for your response, I'm sure many here are interested in any light you can shed or insights you can provide on VLVT.
Robert
Please refer to the email message I sent to you.
Robert
Caz,
I don't know if you still read this board or check in but.....
Who will apologise? Isn't that a question you were so keen on having answered.
You were pretty quick to jump on others but sure ran away with your tail between your legs when it was discovered who should be doing the apologising.
"So I then asked, if you claim yourself to be someone responsable, don't you think it makes sense to have that kind of verification?
He then went on to say that he jumped to the wrong conclusion.
I asked him "Who will apologize?"
The companys' reputation, Johns' and investors' sentiment
along witht the share price end up paying the price of the "misinformation."
I then asked "Who would benefit from spreading a rumour like this?"
The answer is clear."
Just had to get that off my chest cause I can't stand these 'holyier than thou' posters who alway try to come off as being anything but full of BS. Kaz was wrong about many things. I guess his faith was either blind or misplaced. Either way, rereading his last posts to me is entertaining.
FYI: to all on this board
The poster who recently arrived here posting as "Roger Brunetti" failed to respond to me via email. Conclude whatever you would like from that, but he had ample opportunity to prove his identity and did not.
Also note that if the SEC investigates posters posing as directors of public companies posting on message boards, they may find that unlike RagingBS, Ihub will be much more cooperative. :)
Robert
Flyers are all working on their golf game. Sad but true.
Thankyou for your quick response. I will be in touch.
Robert
rbrunetti,
I'm not sure if you are the same Brunettit who is/was affiliated with this company, but your post implies that you are.
As a precautionary measure and to prevent the crap that goes on at RB, I am requesting that you verify your identity and authenticity. If you are the Brunetti who is/was affiliated with VLVT you should have no qualms about this and also understand why it is important. If you are simply someone attempting to use the name of an affiliate of a public company to draw attention to your posts, they will be removed as will you.
I will send you a private request for verification, please deal with it at your earliest convenience.
Robert
Free Advise
you would have more credibility if you were a little less passionate about conspiracy theories.
I started this board and I made those 2 posts. I also sold all my VLVT holdings for a loss over 2 months ago. I no longer hold a position here and do not anticipate taking one in the future. I believe that this company is either the poorest public circus I have ever seen or else the poorest scam I have ever seen. Either way, I took my loss, no big deal.
I remain as chairman of this board and still monitor it as I do a few boards here on Ihub. The fact that I hold no position has no effect upon my ability to police these board and keep them civil.
Robert
Your opinion of this board is misplaced and incorrect. I am the Chairman of this board, there are currently NO directors besides myself. Posters with any opinion are welcome to join and post it on this board, and I will police them based upon the TOU agreement, nothing more.
Robert
ps. There is a preview button that offers spell checking, but you are on your own for your grammar.
I wish I could count cards better. Years of studying advanced mathematics and I still can't do it well enough.
I did not say his/her post was offensive, but rather that it violated the TOU agreement, a copy of which was forwarded to him via PM. It is an administrative issue and none of your concern, I will not discuss it with you any more in this forum.
Suffice to say, keep your posts on the board topic and at a reasonably polite level and there won't be a problem. Get it?
I would have sent this to you in a PM, but I want everyone else to be aware and advised that this issue is CLOSED.
free advise,
these boards are for discussion of the stock and it's related factors. Name calling such as the last post I removed from Chichi will not be tolerated by anyone - get it? ANYONE.
Posters with negative opinions are not scrutinized or singled out in any manner, it is however the case that such behavior has recently originated from yourself and those of similar negative opinion. Could be merely a coincidence, could be a pattern of behavior emerging. Regardless, it has been and will be dealt with in an increasingly less tolerant manner as it occurs.
I believe that even those with negative opinions wish their opinion to be heard, however if these immature and possibly illegal posts (as was the case with one removed here this week) continue, individuals will find themselves silenced permanently. This, in my opinion, is not good for the board or the free discussion of any stock, but this board will not become like ragingBS no matter how hard some people try to cause trouble. I hope you and others here understand as my patience is gone and I will not issue any more warnings on this issue.
Posters-please govern yourselves accordingly. Trade well.
Robert
Just a quick note to this board. Please note that this is not ragingBS and that style of posting will not be tolerated. I welcome you to all review the TOU and govern yourselves accordingly. Personal attacks, racial slurs, spamming, or intentionally disrupting this board will result in swift termination of your posts and membership.
Positive and negative opinions and debate are welcome and encouraged and this board has been very good so far at keeping the arguements civil. I look forward to keeping it that way.
Robert
Hi Bernard,
I have been trying to avoid playing it lately as I have so many other things on the go. I still have the bug and it is tough not to be there everyday,lol. I still check your site but am not trading much these days. I am out of all stocks right now and will stay in cash until summer I think.
Robert
Just checking in on the old AQVB.
Big article on bottled water and water being the greatest investment of the future today on the MSN website.
Robert
I am back in civilization. I will reply to all outstanding emails in the next couple days, please stop ssending them to me for a few days so I can catch up.
I have never heard of him either. Perhaps he was involved in the Remax office in BC that the owners ran off with a million dollars of trust money and commission,LOL. That really did happen about a year ago or so, pretty scary stuff.
I was impressed by the number of outlets that picked up on the story. Hopefully as there becomes more good news to release it will continue to be spread in the same manner to the related industry but also to the investment community.
Another presentation like the one in California would be nice.