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.
032798...share reorganizations, differing viewpoints......
"It appears we are coming from 2 differing viewpoints here. Maybe one of us are wrong. Maybe none of us. I don't think you understand the foundation of my belief for a possible reorg. It was the same basis for velocity and associated media."
I think I understand fairly well your viewpoint on CCKH specifically and share reorganizations in general. You are coming from a standpoint/viewpoint that many IHUB members believe deeply in: All reverse splits (reorganizations) are negative things.
My viewpoint differs from that because I learned a long time ago that you simply can't take a brush and paint every reverse split situation the same color. Just because a shell does a reverse split prior to a RM that doesn't automatically make it a bad shell/investment. And just because a shell doesn't do a reverse split prior to a RM that doesn't automatically make it a good shell/investment.
You cite the VOIG/GNZR reorganization as if it were a bad thing. I think it might be a bit premature to criticize that reverse split until you actually see what transpires. As of right now the GNZR shell I own is basically the same as the VOIG shell I owned prior to the split, just an adjusted share structure.
Generally what determines whether a shell investment turns out to be successful are two things: 1) the exact nature/extent of the dilution that accompanies the RM deal (accretive or negative dilution), and 2) whether the RM deal is structured as a fully-valued or an undervalued type of RM (fully-valued meaning that if the RM company is valued at X dollars you issue X dollars worth of the shell shares to the RM company).
032798....ACTN/CCKH comparison.....
"Here is another Belmont Parnters comparison stock to CCKH to look at: ACTN, like CCKH, is a trading stock b4 agreement. They originally were planing on a 1 for 35 r/s in a pre14 over a year ago. Then it looks like it was dropped. Now they are planning on a 1 for 125 r/s. Looks like they are doing a deal with a chinese company just like CCKH might be. I feel there may be comparison to CCKH. Some my not think so. Time will be the revealer with this CCKH. But my gut still says the outcome will not be as good as hoped for current long term CCKH shareholders. I hope I am way off base here."
I am assuming that you probably took just a somewhat cursory glance at the ACTN shell/situation, saw the 1:125 reverse split, and thought that would be sufficient to help assist in reinforcing your viewpoint on CCKH.
Two points: 1) An analysis of the two shells, IMO, shows that once again CCKH compares quite favorably on a fundamental basis. 2) I realize that people have a tendency to competely freak out when they see the words "reverse split", but not all reverse splits are automatically bad.
Shell comparison: From an overall perspective, it appears to me that CCKH is/was a much cleaner shell. ACTN had some convertible debt on its books, and the share count increased by 7M just in the last three months (currently at 18.75M). Belmont/Meuse did not purchase any shares of the ACTN shell, and only took a financial interest in the stock around 3/25 when he acquired some convertible preferred stock.
Rough market cap of the shells when Meuse took a financial interest:
ACTN: $1.3M
CCKH: $700k
Regarding the ACTN reverse split: On the negative side, the retail shareholders will retain about 1.5% of the China RM (which is probably lower than I would like to see). On the positive side, this is probably a China RM that will be trading on a major exchange at some point.
Although there hasn't been any revenue/income/asset numbers released in the ACTN filings yet, it appears to me that this reverse merger is with a potentially massive company. The RM company is a steel wire producer which was formerly a subsidiary of a huge steel company. According to the SC 14F1, 2008 was the last year that the RM company purchased raw material from its former parent ($488M worth of raw material). Also, interesting to note that the RM company had made a $42 million loan to the parent, and it was repaid in the last 3 months. The CEO of the RM company (and the Chairman of the former parent) is extremely wealthy. His net worth just from his steel holdings around 2008-2009 was $430M.
032798...CCKH/RCYT comparison......
"You could look at this stock for a comparison: RCYT. BP acquired over 97% of the stock a few months ago. Leaving approx 1.1M in the float. What is similar is the trading aspect b4 BP showed up on the scene. This is one of the worst non-r/s one's I've seen. Hopefully not the case here."
I think it may be a little difficult to use RCYT as a comparison stock. As I mentioned in a previous post Belmont Partners doesn't appear to use a strict "cookie cutter" kind of approach on the structuring of its deals, so the ultimate structure of the RM deals can vary quite a bit. Also, if I am correct in assuming a profitable China biotech/pharma is being vended into the CCKH shell, RCYT (housing design/manufacture) and CCKH (China biotech/pharma) will obviously have starkly different operating businesses which might influence general market/investor appeal. My hunch is that CCKH's RM business is probably going to be significantly more attractive on both a financial/fundamental and overall appeal basis.
However, if you do attempt to make a general comparison of the two stocks/situations I think it somewhat highlights how the CCKH shell is relatively attractive on a fundamental basis......
1) Rough market cap of the shells prior to Belmont purchasing control:
RCYT: $2.4M
CCKH: $700k
2) Rough market cap of the shells after Belmont purchased control, and prior to any additional transactions:
RCYT: $5-7M
CCKH: $700k
OT: temp luvs amy...IYSA/CNYD....
"I was a holder of IYSA which eventually became CYND after a few chinese acquistions. They made the R/S into childs play, and got the stock over 10$. I held shares at a penny and a half.
Each step was dilutive, but the business models of the acquistions appear to be sound."
I am very familiar with IYSA/CNYD, as I had accumulated a position following the announcement of the merger and prior to the first reverse split. I had made a number of posts about it over on Raging Bull and Investor Village. I think I was averaged in around 2.5 cents. There were a total of three reverse splits on that stock (1:10, 1:10, and 1:4).
IYSA/CNYD would have been an incredibly attractive investment for the shell/early investors had it not been for that completely unexpected (and massive) share issuance to the owners following the first reverse split, if I recall correctly.
Prior to investing in the stock I had gone through the merger documentation/agreement sentence by sentence to make sure there wasn't anything negative lurking in the RM, and it came up looking perfectly clean and absolutely beautiful. So when that massive dilution showed up and the company/consultant claimed that it was part of the merger agreement, I couldn't believe what I was seeing. Nowhere in that documentation was there even one single hint or indication of an impending dilution to the owners. To this date I don't know whether the absence of that dilution in the merger agreement was done intentionally or just a boneheaded mistake by whoever wrote/assembled the filings and agreement.
After going through some later filings involving the financing by Pope Investments, it became very obvious to me that both the company and the institutional investors knew right from the beginning that dilution was going to occur. But thanks to their failure to disclose it in the filings at the time of the merger, the retail investors in the stock ended up getting completely blindsided by it. The China company itself is very solid and attractive, but that dilution fiasco certainly left a sour taste in the mouths of a lot of the earlier investors.
temp luvs amy....structure of the deal.....
"What motivation would the owner of the prospective merger target have to just give his company to CCKH? Or was this just a glamorized name change? (I have seen those before) CCKH did not have any cash to purchase a company with. They could have issued convertible debt, and that would not show any immediate change in the O/S, and would carry an interest rate and a conversion clause."
I haven't seen any indication nor have any reason to believe that a prospective RM candidate is just giving its company to CCKH without any compensation. When the CEO is referring to no change in the share structure, I interpret that as primarily a reference to the majority ownership control transaction with the consulting firm.
If I am correct in assuming that the consulting firm is not the actual RM candidate but instead just an intermediary party, this RM deal consists of two parts. First, the consulting firm purchases majority ownership of CCKH. Second, the actual RM will occur when the firm resells some or all of those shares to its RM client and/or additional new shares are issued as compensation to the client. And it is reasonable to assume now (based on the name change, website picture, possible Belmont Partners involvement) that the reverse merger client here is most likely a China-based or China-focused company.
The information from the CEO regarding no change in the share structure is very encouraging to me because it basically tells me how the first step of this RM deal will be structured. There are three ways the consultant could purchase control of the shell: 1) buy preferred shares, 2) buy newly-issued shares, which would increase CCKH's pre-merger share count to around 4.6+M, or 3) purchase existing shares, which would maintain CCKH's current share structure prior to any merger.
Since CCKH does not have any authorized preferred shares, that means the consulting firm will purchase existing shares (most likely from the block of shares the CEO owns) to give it 50+% control of the CCKH shell.
What then determines the success/failure of CCKH as a shell investment will be the quality of the RM company/business and the exact structure of the RM part of the deal.
db7...source of the shares.....
"not sure who has these shares to sell.. if Potse hasn't sold and based on the amount i have... there shouldn't be much left of the float.... yet i filled easily for 100k shares at .30 (over 2 days of buying)"
I own 114k, just under the 5% level. I would have to go back through the filings and double check, but if I recall correctly 2 years or so ago CCKH sold about 1M shares at ten cents/shr to around 35-40 people. That private placement is basically where the float comes from.
Considering the length of time those people have held their shares, CCKH's original business plan proving to be unsuccessful, and the previous years of low interest/liquidity in the stock, it probably would not be surprising if some of those early investors decided to trim their positions and take the triple on their money.
It can be extremely difficult to accumulate a large position in a shell with this kind of share structure, without causing a significant increase in the share price. If the quality/structure of the RM is reasonably attractive, this past week or so could very well turn out to have been an extremely nice buying opportunity.
CCKH website image....Beijing.....
When Michael Klinicki posted the 3/7/2010 shareholder letter on the website, I think he also put up a new picture. If you do a right-click "properties" check on that particular image, it could provide a possible clue as to what general type of RM may be coming here.
I suppose it could be nothing more than a complete coincidence, but I think it is rather interesting that of all the city images out there to choose from he picked one of Beijing, China.......
http://www.cienegacreek.net/images/beijing-1.png
DesertRat1...Belmont.....
"Other than this stock do you have any knowledge or opinon on Belmont and their track record?"
I've never owned a shell that was sold to Belmont, and don't really have much of a knowledge base on how the pre-merger retail shareholders on Belmont shells have generally fared.
Belmont is somewhat well-known to China stock investors for having brought public over the last few years a number of pretty high-quality China companies that have made the jump to the major exchanges. But because of the volume of shell/RM business it does, Belmont also has its share of what I would consider "lower-quality" types of merger companies.
It does appear that once Belmont acquires majority ownership of a shell, there doesn't seem to be a set pattern as to how any subsequent RM will be structured or if Belmont will even have any significant influence/interest in the new deal. Sometimes Belmont just sells the shell to a person/company and doesn't appear to have any additional input with what happens next. Sometimes it retains a small ownership percentage of the new RM company and/or enters into some type of consulting deal. Sometimes there are reverse splits, sometimes forward splits.
Whether I make some decent money on this shell or eventually walk away disappointed largely comes down to the quality/structure (and sometimes market promotion) of any deal that CCKH enters into, regardless of the identity or track record of the consulting firm.
DesertRat1...finished accumulating position.....
"Bid is up to .20 from .05 just last week. Strong buys late day too."
43.6k of yesterday's volume was just me finishing accumulating a position. All of my buy orders were entered at 29 or 30 cents, but I actually managed to get a few shares at 17 cents. Currently own about 5% of the shell at an average price slightly over 25 cents/shr.
I am guessing that Belmont Partners (Joseph Meuse) is the consultant firm that will purchase majority control of the shell, based on the two main (albeit limited) pieces of information disclosed in the last two letters the CEO posted on the website.....
1) A consulting firm will purchase majority control of the shell.
2) CCKH's transfer agent has been changed to Pacific Stock Transfer.
Assuming that Belmont is the shell buyer, and the delay in signing the deal has provided sufficient time for Belmont's client to get everything in order, I would guess that we might find out who the RM candidate is perhaps as early as next week. Then it becomes a matter of the quality/structure of the reverse merger deal. Just about anything (good or bad) could happen at that point, so it should start to get a little interesting soon.
DesertRat1...looks very encouraging.....
"New letter is showing on CCKH's website. Sounding positive."
I picked up another 10k chunk of shares last week at 20 cents. I have high expectations for this shell (as evident by the position I have taken), and if the results eventually meet my expectations it will be a nice example of how patience in the world of shell investing can pay off pretty nicely.
StocksXpert...Generation Zero name...reverse split.....
"I wonder who came up with the name Generation Zero? LOL. But at least they predicted where this stock is heading after the split. I cant get up. LOL!"
I would assume that Matt Krieg and/or the team of people at Kostya probably had a role in the new name. Personally, I happen to like the choice. Based on Krieg's past work experience and the "Generation Zero" name, I think it is logical to assume that the new business direction probably revolves around two potential areas.....
1) Something in the travel and/or search engine technology industries.
2) Some type of business that targets or appeals to people 25 years and younger.
"There are too major reasons for an RS, one is bad and one is good for the shareholders. The good one is when the co reverse splits to up list to higher exchange, the bad one for the shareholders is when the co needs to raise funds by issuing new shares, aka diluting. Obviously the co is not up listing so therefore there is only one logical reason for this reverse split."
Again, you can't take a brush and paint all dilution the same color. If a shell/stock does a reverse split and issues shares to either complete a financing or an acquisition, that doesn't automatically make the dilution a bad thing. Taking the "all dilution is bad" approach to stock investing is something I don't adhere to because it would basically prevent me from investing in most shells/stocks, and in the process stop me from investing in situations that eventually turn out be fantastic investments.
My primary concern at the moment regarding GNZR is that promissary note and any remaining debt that wasn't covered by the money Krieg used to purchase control of the shell (since one of the conditions of the control change was that all of VOIG's debt other than the promissary note be eliminated, I am assuming that money was used to pay off the debt). As long as there hasn't been some unexpectedly ugly pre-split dilution, or some kind of ugly change to the note terms that would result in an ugly post-split dilution situation, I generally like my chances of walking away from this investment with a profit.
As I have kind of hinted at in previous posts, my hunch is that you will see William Goldstein involved in this company. I don't know whether it will be in the form of management, a director position, advisory or financing, but I will be mildly surprised if you don't see his name pop up in connection with this company at some point.
I could be completely wrong here, but my hunch is that the reason for the GNZR reverse split can probably be best described by a statement that William Goldstein made back in 2005 when his Amex company secured a $31M private placement......
"This reverse split will better position us to attract additional institutional investors to our stock, which is critical to the success of a public company."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_April_19/ai_n13631471/
Happycoins...reverse splits, pre/post merger dilution.....
"Anyone think after this split they will dilute the shares making all of us bag holders seen it too many times before."
In almost every shell situation there is going to be some form of dilution (either pre or post merger), and that dilution will occur regardless of whether there is a reverse split. Unless a person/business purchases a large block of existing shares and moves a business/asset into the shell with no additional compensation or there is a voluntary share cancellation, there is no way of avoiding dilution in a shell.
What is important in determining the success/failure of a shell investment is the nature and extent of the dilution. There are two pathways of dilution that a company can follow: negative and accretive. Negative dilution basically increases the share count without really adding significant "value" to the shell/company. Accretive dilution increases the share count but in exchange for something of "value" (for example, shares in exchange for the assets of a business or a technology).
I have often stated in the past that an investor can't take a brush and simply paint every reverse split the same color. There is huge difference between reverse splits that are done so a company can sell some more shares in order to pay the light bill for another month, and reverse splits that are done to facilitate a RM acquisition or to uplist to a major stock exchange. Any one who doubts that probably hasn't been paying much attention to the world of China stocks where investors are actively looking for reverse splits. So VOIG's future from this point forward will be determined by whether the dilution will be largely accretive or negative.
As I mentioned in a previous post, I have been using a much more conservative share number for my own personal analysis of VOIG as a shell (probably at least 25-30M, if the promissary note was converted). There is always the chance that pre-split dilution could be higher than that, or the terms of the note/debt might have changed, but as long as that number is reasonably accurate, the average price I paid for VOIG (around .017) means I purchased a shell with a market cap around 500k.
Following the reverse split, I will own a shell with about a 300k float (again, using my conservative number). Low-float situations like that can have extremely explosive moves. So, I will hang onto my position and see what develops.
2010 guidance...Rodman & Renshaw presentation.....
RHGP's 2010 guidance is very encouraging. The numbers suggest a couple of possibilities (all of them positive).....
1) The tax exemption may have been extended for at least another year.
2) If the tax exemption has not been extended, the guidance numbers suggest that RHGP is going to have a pretty nice improvement in its gross margins (probably at least 10 percentage points or more) and nice control of its operational costs.
RHGP's March 7 presentation at the Rodman & Renshaw investment conference should bring some additional attention to the company.....
http://knobias.10kwizard.com/filing.php?param=&ipage=6807617&DSEQ=4&SEQ=&SQDESC=SECTION_EXHIBIT&exp=
veteran98...TGFN press release......
I picked up a few shares the past two days in the .02-.0215 range. Given the relatively low share structure at the present moment, my hunch is that I will be able to get at least a 5-bagger on those shares at some point this year.
I don't expect that TGFN's business will generate much interest anytime soon from fundamental investors, but certainly the "iPhone app incubator" nature of the business is something with enough "sex appeal" that could eventually attract some interest from various traders. It also doesn't hurt that the current CEO (Samuel Gaer) has a rather interesting background.
I'm not entirely sure but it doesn't appear that the 2/25 press release (included in the 8k filing) went out over the major newswires, so it is possible that many investors/traders may not have seen it. The part I placed in bold in the main body text of the press release suggests that the company has been attracting/seeing good interest from application developers.......
iDev3 Launches to Become the First Publicly Traded iPhone App Incubator Company
SC Baseball and SC Basketball Now Available on Apple’s AppStore
Gaer Appointed CEO of iDev3
TGFN Changes Status to Operating Company
NEW YORK, [February 25, 2010] -- TFGIN Holdings, Inc. (OTCBB:TGFN.OB), founded by entrepreneur Samuel Gaer, former Chief Information Officer and Executive Vice President of The New York Mercantile Exchange, today announced it has launched iDev3, a mobile application services and incubator created to reward small, independent software developers.
iDev3 also announced the launch of its first suite of iPhone apps. The apps are approved by Apple and now available for sale on the Apple Inc. iTunes AppStore. SC Baseball(SM) and SC Basketball(SM) allow users to broadcast baseball and basketball games to groups of contacts via SMS text messaging from their iPhones. Recipients receive game updates on any mobile phone that can deliver SMS text messages, giving the apps excellent and broad utility. The Company intends for the “SC”, or SportsCast(SM) line of apps become a necessity for all sports Moms and Dads who want to make sure all friends and family are updated in real-time. iDev3 intends to launch SC versions for soccer, football, hockey, and lacrosse as well.
The concept of iDev3 is to enable small, independent developers to “equitize” their investment in their own products. In today's marketplace, there seems to be a monetary disconnect between developers and the value of their work product. The concept behind iDev3 is that small, independent developers (and their products) create value, and that by grouping together many small developers' products and ideas who share in revenue and equity of a publicly traded company, we will grow the overall value of each developer's application more so than they could individually. The Company will become an aggregator of intellectual property, and developers will diversify risk by trading their intellectual property for equity and sharing in a revenue stream from their apps.
"We believe this is a solution to an unmet need – that of the independent or hobbyist developer – to monetize their development," says Sam Gaer, founder of iDev3. "We have seen demand from a wide range of developers who would love to be able to extract longer term value out of their development."
To be one of the first to download these new apps, please visit the AppStore on iTunes and search for “SC Baseball or SC Basketball.”
If you are interested in submitting an app and finding out more about how to equitize your intellectual property, please visit us at www.iDev3.com.
The Company also announced today that it has appointed Samuel Gaer as interim CEO of iDev3 while a permanent CEO is being sought. Gaer will run the Company on a day-to-day basis and look to hire a permanent CEO.
Coincident with the launch of iDev3, its wholly owned operating subsidiary, TGFIN Holdings (OTCBB:TGFN) has changed its status to an Operating Company, the details of which can be found in our SEC form 8K, filed today.
About iDev3
iDev3 is a developer's co-operative of sorts. By exchanging shares in our publicly traded parent company, TGFIN Holdings (OTCBB:TGFN) for your application and a portion of future revenues from that application, we aim to build a library of applications created by motivated and bright developers. By "equitizing" your application, you participate in any appreciation of the shares you received in exchange for your app.
Contact: info@idev3.com
Sam Gear: sam@idev3.com; (718) 395-9690
http://knobias.10kwizard.com/filing.php?param=&ipage=6788033&DSEQ=3&SEQ=&SQDESC=SECTION_EXHIBIT&exp=
opas60...speculation on share price after RM.....
"Any idea what'll happen with PPS afer the deal is closed ?"
I picked up another block of shares yesterday at 30 cents. Currently averaged in at a price under 24 cents/shr.
Trying to determine/guess what the share price might look like following a reverse merger is pretty difficult because of all the variables inherent in shell investing. Share structure of the deal, pre/post merger dilution, quality of merger company, promotion, old-fashioned luck, etc all play a role.
Just about anything and everything can happen in the world of shell investing: good shells can get lack-luster mergers or suffer unattractive pre/post merger dilution, ugly shells can suddenly become attractive thanks to voluntary share cancellations or debt forgiveness, etc., etc.
Outside of a RM deal involving some type of prominent/eye-catching domestic company, my "ideal" scenario with CCKH would involve a reverse merger with a quality Chinese company.
I mentioned previously that there have been some shells followed by IHUB members that have achieved pre-merger valuations of $9+ million (CCKH equivalent is $4). Just in the last week or so there have been two quality China reverse mergers in which the post-merger valuations of the shell shares is $7+ million. For example, following a pre-merger share cancellation the shell outstanding share number for APBS (China cemetary company, $4-5) is very close to CCKH's.
So while the success/failure of other shells/situations doesn't guarantee success/failure for CCKH, it is indeed fun and sometimes productive to speculate. You just never really know for certain which shell is going to be that one that turns into a huge winner. If CCKH does produce a 5-10+ bagger, it will be pretty nice to have a good position built before the move begins.
TODT...same structural problem as LHSI/CPDU.....
TODT, the recent China RM, has the same extremely serious structural problem that the LHSI/CPDU RM has. In both reverse mergers, the shell common shares were supposed to have undergone reverse splits prior to the issuance of shares to the merger candidates. In both cases the shell common shares never underwent a split, but the companies proceeded forward as if the split occurred.
It is puzzling to me that the consultants/companies on these deals are making this kind of mistake. And equally puzzling that there seems to be little interest on their part to get the mistake corrected. CPDU went ahead and filed an application for a Nasdaq uplisting, even though there is (or should be) a problem with the share structure. It will be somewhat disturbing if the SEC/Nasdaq just sweeps this issue under the rug during the uplisiting review process and pretends as if nothing is wrong.
The CPDU problem was a little bit harder to notice at first because the filings were somewhat more complicated. But the TODT problem is quite easy to see.
Kostya's travel writer job listing...Jan 21.....
The timing of that travel writers job listing that appears on the Kostya website is rather interesting as well. The date on the listing is January 21, which is the same date that Matt Krieg registered the Ground Zero Group websites. Again, it may have no connection of any kind to VOIG, but obviously the timing is interesting.
They are seeking writers for a travel portal website that will have an initial focus on Las Vegas.....
We are seeking freelance writers to create engaging and informative content for a travel portal website. Much of the work will focus on Las Vegas; other leisure travel destinations will be added in the future. Assignments may include: a weekly email newsletter to a subscriber audience highlighting the latest deals and the hottest tips on travel to Las Vegas; shorter quantities of text for the website describing last minute travel deals, weekly specials or upcoming events; longer articles on topics of general interest on aspects of Vegas travel.
http://www.kostya.net/jobs/usa/57-travel-writer-freelance
RonnieD...10K filing, Will Goldstein twitter......
"the 10q due by end of month will file as Gen Zero not Velocity Oil & Gas."
The next required SEC filing is actually the 10K 2009, due around the end of March to mid-April. Depending on whether there are any 8-ks or press releases issued in the interim, that filing could provide the first indication/glimpse of what the new business direction might involve.
I figure I will throw the following piece of highly-speculative information out there. I don't know whether there is any connection of any kind to VOIG, but I find it a little bit interesting......
As you are aware Matt Krieg (current CEO of VOIG) and William Goldstein (an Atlanta-based investor and businessman) have worked together in the past. For example, Matt was the CEO and Goldstein was the Chairman at Nporta.
When Krieg purchased control of VOIG I started monitoring Goldstein's Twitter page. What perked my interest a little was the timing of some of Goldstein's comments and how they seem to generally/vaguely coincide with certain corporate actions at VOIG......
1) In October 2009 Goldstein makes comments that "2010 is going to be big", and that he is looking to purchase a company that he sold 9 years ago.
About a month after those statements (11/10/09), Matt Krieg entered into the purchase agreement for control of the VOIG shell.
2) Goldstein's last twitter message (January 16) states "Stay tuned for some exciting news!"
Five days later, Matt Krieg registers the Generation Zero Group websites.
Again, there could be absolutely no connection of any kind here. But because of the past business relationships between these two people, I find the general timing to be somewhat interesting.
http://twitter.com/wgoldstein
ollinbg...the Generation Zero Group websites......
Picked up a 40k block at .017 today for trading purposes. Personally, I like the chances of seeing at least a double/triple on those shares over the next 1-2 months.
On that list of websites registered on 1/21/2010 you can find the other three Generation Zero Group variation websites that Matt Krieg registered. All of these variations except the last one currently lead back to what will apparently be the main site (www.generationzerogroup.com).....
http://www.gen0group.com/
http://www.generation0group.com/
http://www.genzerogroup.com/
VODG (.19)...picked up some shares for trading.....
Purchased shares today at .19 for trading purposes. These sub 20-cent levels on VODG look attractive to me for a possible 75+% tradeable move at some point here in Feb/March.
With two earnings reports expected to be filed in the next 4-5 weeks (10K and Q1), and the Keystone stem cell conference being held next week, I like the possibility of something in the SEC filings or a press release triggering some interest in VODG.
There has been a fairly noticeable positive shift in the confidence level of VODG's management. The continued/repeated references by managment regarding achieving profitability in 2010 are quite interesting, since by my rough back-of-the-envelope calculations it implies that 2010 revenues will probably exceed 4-500k. Which would be quite a financial change from VODG's previous years.
Some of the statements/language used in press releases over the last few months could suggest that VODG's stem cell media product is being (or will be) used in clinical trial situations.
Nice 2009 results...future looks encouraging.....
I think it has become fairly obvious at this point that RHGP intends to seek an uplisting out of the pink sheets, and most likely you will eventually see RHGP trading on the AMEX or Nasdaq at some point in the future. This was probably the most detailed/extensive annual report that RHGP has filed, and they appear to be quite serious about remaining compliant with their SEC filings and getting all of their financial matters in order......
Since the third quarter of our 2009 fiscal year, we have begun the implementation of some of the remedial measures described above, including hiring of a new chief financial officer, additional staff, engaging consultants, training our staff, implementing more rigorous policies and procedures relating to period-end financial reporting, journal-entry approval, supporting documentation, and account reconciliations. We expect to continue to implement additional financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures.
One interesting thing I noted in the 10K was that there was absolutely no mention of any kind regarding two research and development projects that were prominently featured in past filings (the diagnostic kits and lysozyme). My best guess is that during the above mentioned review process the company may have determined that those projects are actually owned/controlled by one of the CEO's other companies and may not be technically owned by RHGP. So at this point I am assuming the diagnostic kits that I have previously referred to are no longer part of the RHGP immediate picture.
Financial results for 2009 looked pretty good, IMO. The EPS number I use below is based on a fully-diluted share count (38.3M, includes 1.07M warrants) and fully-taxed (25%)....
43.4M rev
14.8M net income
.29 EPS
This item from the "Current R&D Projects" section of the annual report looks very encouraging.....
Siberian Ginseng (Acanthopanax) Development Project. We have been successful in separating effective components of Siberian Ginseng (Acanthopanax), namely total glucosides, total flavonoids and syringin, in particular, syringin has significant effects in the treatment of depression and nerve regulation. We have created a sample of syringin freeze-dried Acanthopanax powder spasmolytic that is currently undergoing pilot test. If successful, this achievement represents great pioneering work in the field of Chinese medicine, and will enhance our competitive edge in this area.
bradford86...reply to your private message......
I only have a free member status on IHUB, so can only reply through this public post.
MCI worldcom scam: I gather from the tone/language in your message that you are definitely leaning toward the "RHGP is a scam" side of the fence. I've followed RHGP since it first went public and nothing in its past/current filings leads me to reach a similiar view.
The growing accounts receivable is obviously an area that any investor should be aware of and monitor. But I think it may be too early to declare RHGP as being a "scam". Sometimes these types of financial issues have a way of working themselves out or a point is reached where it just no longer becomes a determining factor to investors. Unless I'm mistaken accounts receivable is something that has "plagued" other China stocks that have gone on to perform well.
As somewhat of an aside: Over the last year or so it has been kind of interesting to note how many China stocks with "problems" or "issues" have actually turned out to become fantastic performers, at least from a share price standpoint. For example, I distinctly remember earlier in 2009 when many investors had a decidely negative opinion on CKGT because the company auditor had a history that made many people very "uncomfortable". Less than a year (and multi-bags) later CKGT is a stock that a lot of people think highly of. Interesting how things/views can change.
Vincent Rinehart: You mentioned that RHGP should be looked at with serious caution because Vincent Rinehart at one time owned the shell that RHGP reverse merged into. While you may have had bad experiences in the past with your Rinehart investments, I guess I just don't really see any significant reason to be concerned about whether this potentially makes RHGP a scam. There are no relationships of any kind between Viking Investments (who purchased the shell from Vincent, and then RM Renhuang into the shell), RHGP and Vincent. And as far as I am aware, following the reverse split prior to the reverse merger Vincent's only remaining financial tie to RHGP was a total of around 5,000 shares of common stock.
Renhuang has been around for awhile and has done nothing: I'm not exactly sure if you are referring to RHGP's business operations or the stock. Granted, from a business operational standpoint RHGP hasn't been posting triple digit quarterly or annual jumps in revenue/earnings like has been seen in other China stocks, but I don't think that should necessarily disqualify RHGP from being a potentially good investment.
If you are referring to the stock, the fact that the share price hasn't done a whole lot over the last year or so can probably be attributed to the fact that the company was deliquent on its filings and pretty much had fallen silent over that period.
As has been shown/proven by many other China stocks in the last year, perceptions can change.
Quite a bit of activity during December/January......
It is somewhat interesting to note the level of activity (much of it "behind-the-scenes") that appears to be going on at RHGP......
1) RHGP hired a new CFO two weeks ago to replace the interim CFO. It looks like she has pretty good qualifications and experience with western financial matters......
On January 13, 2010, Ms. Yanyi Chen was appointed the CFO of the Company. Ms. Chen brings over 8 years of experience in accounting, auditing, financial analysis and reporting for both public and private companies in China, New Zealand and the United States. From August 2008 to January 2010, Ms. Chen served as consultant to Resources Global Professionals, NASDAQ-listed, professional services company, where she played a leading role in the company’s financial projects and provided consultation on USGAAP, SEC reporting and compliance requirements. From October 2006 to May 2008, she also worked as the manager of the assurance division of Pricewaterhousecoopers Zhong Tian CPAs Limited Company, where she managed and led external assurance engagements in predominately IPO engagements assisting companies with their listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. From August 2002 to October 2006, Ms. Chen also served at Pricewaterhousecoopers New Zealand as an auditor. Ms. Chen holds, from the Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand, a Graduate Diploma of Professional Accounting, a Bachelor of Commerce and Administration and a Bachelor of Science.
2) Completed the update on all of its late SEC filings.
3) As I mentioned in previous posts, the possibility exists of some type of activity on the diagnostic kits front.
4) RHGP has been advertising for employees during December/January. It appears that they are looking to fill positions in basically every part of the business (legal department, graphic designers, finance, marketing, manufacturing, procurement, etc.). In a lot of the advertising, there is a reference to the "2010 business plan".
5) It is also somewhat interesting to note that during these last two months RHGP has been advertising for 35 interns (10 for the marketing department, and 25 for the manufacturing side).
Marketing interns.....
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://my.yingjiesheng.com/job_43011.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522renhuang.com%2522%26hl%3Den%26lr%3Dlang_zh-CN%26num%3D100&rurl=translate.google.com&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhjbWy35JE-UUQRJJBa3F10KT-xcpw
Manufacturing interns......
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://my.yingjiesheng.com/job_45238.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522renhuang.com%2522%26hl%3Den%26lr%3Dlang_zh-CN%26num%3D100&rurl=translate.google.com&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhgdewaPkAI7OLGehXwKyEDWAXjDLg
Zen...promissory note, position......
"I agree with your method of being conservative in your analysis, but I sure do hope the company can pre pay that promisory note and keep the share count down before any additional financing to fund the new operations. That's a very critical factor in determining this stocks potential, but I haven't been able to determine that from the filings. I've tried to contact Matthew Kriegg to ask about it, but no luck. I wouldn't mind if he was the owner of Caprista Capital and that's how he was going to get his ownership stake in the company; but for those shares to just go to some random capital company sure would be destructive to the capital structure of this company."
The two entities that acquired the promissory note from Capersia (Cascata Equity Management and Seven Palm Investments) will most likely play a significant role here. There is little doubt in my mind that at least a portion of that note will be converted into shares at some point. The change in control of the company to Matt Krieg and the sale of the note to the two entities all occurred at the same time. So, I am assuming that everyone is on the same page here and probably well aware of what each others plans/intentions are. Hopefully the retail investors will benefit from this.
Perhaps these note holders will play some role in financing and/or promotion of the company/stock.
"In any case, I'm glad to see you're hanging in here with us! I hope this works out like your old OTIX did (now PLX).....the one I kick myself for every time I look at my account balances :)"
Still holding my entire position (575k), and still anticipating a minimum of ten cents on that position. As with most shells just about anything and everything can happen so you never can get a truly firm grasp on what to expect. But that is what makes shell investing exciting/interesting, sometimes frustrating, and sometimes incredibly profitable.
I mentioned over on another board a month or two ago that a couple of shells receiving attention on the IHUB boards had achieved pre-merger shell valuations over $9M. There was another one here recently in the month of January. Just for comparison purposes, that would be the equivalent of VOIG trading around 30 cents (using my conservative share number). Shells can do some wild things.
Zen...capital and share structure.....
Capital structure: "Looks like some capital restructuring to, the share count is no higher thaqn before, but now there's two groups of par value shares, one group of 100M and another group of 10M:"
As far as I am aware, there hasn't been any capital restructuring yet by the new management. That 10M number has been present in every annual/quarterly report that I can recall looking at, and represents the 10M aggregrate preferred shares VOIG is allowed to issue. This is from the very first quarterly report that VOIG ever filed (5/15/2008).....
We were formed as a Nevada corporation on May 16, 2006. We have 110,000,000 shares of authorized stock, consisting of 100,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value and 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, $0.001 par value.
Share structure: When I evaluate/analyze VOIG as a shell, I prefer to use a share structure number that is higher than the outstanding share count (12.6M) disclosed in the last quarterly report. I try to calculate/guess what the fully-diluted share count might look like prior to a reverse merger or movement of assets into a shell, since I believe that gives me more of a conservative evaluation. If it turns out that I err on the high side with my share count, then I consider that a "pleasant surprise".
In VOIG's particular case, I like to include a full-conversion of the promissary note. Also, I noticed that one of the requirements of this deal with Travel Engine (Matt Krieg) was that all debt/liabilities be eliminated. Since the amount of cash that Krieg used to purchase control of the shell did not cover the entire debt amount on VOIG's books, it wouldn't be out of the question that some additional shares might have been issued, or some debt forgiveness is involved, or a combination of the two.
So, when I evaluate VOIG I prefer to use a minimum of 25-30M shares in the shell.
Generation Zero Group website......
"nothing showing for Generation Zero Group on google search, but good find."
Matt Krieg registered the Generation Zero Group website on Tuesday (January 19). Currently under construction.....
Registrant:
Generation Zero Group, inc.
1100 Hammond Dr
Suite 410-A303
Atlanta, Georgia 30328
United States
Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: GENERATIONZEROGROUP.COM
Created on: 19-Jan-10
Expires on: 19-Jan-11
Last Updated on: 21-Jan-10
Administrative Contact:
Krieg, Matt generationzerogroup@kostya.net
Generation Zero Group, inc.
1100 Hammond Dr
Suite 410-A303
Atlanta, Georgia 30328
United States
(770) 392-4898 Fax -- (770) 392-5269
Technical Contact:
Krieg, Matt generationzerogroup@kostya.net
Generation Zero Group, inc.
1100 Hammond Dr
Suite 410-A303
Atlanta, Georgia 30328
United States
(770) 392-4898 Fax -- (770) 392-5269
http://www.generationzerogroup.com/
RHGP(.99)...filings progress.....
RHGP has been quietly catching up on its late SEC filings. With the five quarterly reports filed this month, I believe RHGP is now fully caught up. I think it would be reasonable to expect to see an uplisting to the bulletin board sometime this year or early 2011.
RHGP has pretty much fallen off the radar screens of most investors. But I think there is a fairly decent chance that RHGP will at least double/triple in calendar 2010. Renewed investor relations activity, uplisting, equity investments by institutional investors, improving business prospects, etc. are all possibilities that could trigger interest.
The possibility of some type of significant activity occurring on the diagnostic kit side of the business could catch some investors by surprise (see below). I've also noticed that RHGP has placed advertising in the last few days for some employee positions in finance and marketing.
Over the next two months RHGP should be filing two earnings reports (2009 10-K and 1Q 2010). I would probably expect to see one of these filings mention whether RHGP will enjoy any extension of the tax holiday (which was scheduled to end December 2009 for RHGP). On a fully-taxed basis, I'm expecting/guessing that RHGP's current business operations should produce minimum EPS of 20 cents in 2010.
Diagnostic kit information....
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=45050184
Website redesign...additional comments on products.....
The VODG website was redesigned in the last week or two. I thought it was worth noting that right up front on the home page the company included some general statements regarding the superiority of its products. This is the first time I can recall management making these type of statements on the website itself (outside the confines of recent press releases). Quite interesting, IMO.
From the home page of the new website.....
Our products for use in stem cell and cancer research have unique features unlike other marketed products. For example, our stem cell lines exhibit longer continual expansion periods than competitors, up to 75% longer which yields better value to our customers. We may be the only commercial source of fluorescent-labeled stem cells. We provide three different formulations of cell culture media optimized to our human adult stem cells. These formulations afford researchers with more options in experimental design and the potential to extend basic research to clinical trials. Also, in direct comparison with other commercially available media, our low serum formulation was found to provide significantly more cell growth by several customers. The cells generated by growth in our media also exhibited less cellular stress resulting in higher quality cells to further advance our customer’s research. We also have unique methods for the shipment and customs clearance of our stem cells, which is especially important to offshore customers.
http://www.vitrobiopharma.com/index.html
RHGP(.98)...China/diagnostic kits.....
Potentially interesting situation regarding the diagnostic kits that China biotech/pharma RHGP has had under research and development. Cui Yuhai (RHGP's Chief R&D Officer) placed two ads in the last 2-3 weeks making it known that RHGP is actively looking to sell/transfer or enter into partnerships with regards to its diagnostic kits/technologies.
This could very well suggest that the R&D phase on at least some of the 30 diagnostic kits could be nearing completion. If I recall correctly, some of the promotional material a couple of years back mentioned that some of the kits were already in clinical trials. Perhaps this advertising could be an indication that things have been proceeding well in the China goverment approval process.
According to past SEC filings, during the R&D phase RHGP believed some of these kits were showing 50-60% improvements in both performance and cost versus the competition......
In order to explore possibilities in this field, a team of research scientists, who are graduates of top universities in the United States and therefore trained on the most advanced technology in this field, was hired in 2006 by us and our predecessor company. The Troponin T Diagnostic Kit and some other products from this group have proved to be 60% more effective at 50% less production cost when compared with other products.
http://knobias.10kwizard.com/filing.php?param=&ipage=5699859&DSEQ=1&SEQ=11&SQDESC=SECTION_PAGE&exp=
RHGP technology transfer advertisement.....
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://www.jszrw.com/public/info.php%3Fid%3D1243&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.hrbrh.com/%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26start%3D10&rurl=translate.google.com&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhiy1o3V4yWfDS1qJkzulwO-_nxjJA
davidam...financing at 17.5 cents.....
"Potse they did not receive 87k for 500k shares. Read it again 500k shares were sold at 0.05. You do the math, The pr and the 8k were creatively written that I will give him. Ohh well mabe he brings in some big sales this year and all is well..we will see...."
There is nothing "creative" about the way the press release and 8-k are written. The language in the 8-k is quite clear. The company did not sell 500k shares to the investors at 5 cents. The common shares were sold at 17.5 cents, and the warrants are priced at 17.5 cents.
Focus on the words I have bolded.....
On December 29, 2009, the Company agreed to issue, an aggregate of 500,000 shares of common stock, $.05 par value (the “Common Stock” or “Shares”) and an aggregate of 500,000 warrants exercisable for 12 months to purchase one additional share of Common Stock at a purchase price of $0.175 per share (the “Securities”) in consideration of an initial investment of $87,500, with an additional $87,500 should the warrants be exercised.
This is now the second time in the last year in which you have fixated on the .05 par value.....
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36409124
davidam...perfectly acceptable financing....
"Looks to me like all the first 87k is going to be done at 0.05 per share with 500k shares issued immediately for a net of 25K. 87k should hold the company up close to 4 months using the numbers(cash burn) from last Q . The warrants represent another 87k at .175 but may never happen cant consider that much at this point.
Absolutely ugly IMO when peeps are buying in upper twenties and above and profits are suppose to be around the corner???
If he delivers all is ok but a nickle now??"
I can see nothing wrong at all with this particular private placement. VODG received $87.5k in exchange for 500k shares. The common shares in the financing were sold at 17.5 cents, and the warrants are also priced at 17.5 cents.....
$87,500/500,000 shares = .175 per share
SBAT(.30)...new website.....
Decided to pick up some extra shares today at 30 cents. SBAT's new website went online Sunday/Monday. The new design includes a press release section, so I am assuming they plan on issuing some press releases at some point in the coming year.
There is something a little interesting/unusual on the website. I don't know whether it is simply some sort of programming mistake/error or if there is some sort of undisclosed significance to it......
When you look through the various sections of the website, you will notice that the heading/title/tab on your browser will say "The SinoCubate Group" on all but one of the sections. The "What We Do" section of the site is titled "The Blackstone Group", which of course is the huge financial advisory/investment company (NYSE: BX).
http://www.sinocubate.com/whatwedo.html
Guy...SBAT......
"Not exactly. After the issuance of the 19.7m shares, Viking owns 20.3m of the total 20.7m outstanding shares which is approx 98%, so the retail investors own 2%."
Sorry, I meant to say that the original shell owners (comprised of both Viking and retail investors) own about 4-5% of the new company.
"The mere fact that the CEO issued
to himself 4.7 million shares for 100k shares of
RHGP, should be enough reason to get out.
The RHGP shares are worth $65k now. 4.7 million shares
of SBAT for RHGP, assign a value of $0.014 per SBAT share.
I can go on about the other 15 million shares he gave
himself for nothing and the fact that they will need to
dilute further, but the first example is enough."
I agree that from a purely fundamental perspective I don't like the two transactions (particularly the RHGP deal). However, I am also willing to acknowledge there may be reasons for these moves that might not be entirely evident/understood at this point in time.
The RHGP transaction may or may not be indicative of what future deals will look like. Perhaps the future equity acquisitions by SBAT will be done on terms decidely favorable to SBAT. Perhaps the RHGP deal has something to do with Viking's intentions of providing financial support for SBAT during its development stage. Perhaps this is just some type of precursor move to an eventual acquisition of Viking. It is difficult to say at this point.
The transactions certainly raise some concern in my mind, but I'm also a bit intrigued by some of the things here......
1) Viking has been advertising for employees in China. CEO Tom Simeo was in China during November visiting a company/client that has been attracting interest from other Asian and United States investors......
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://hb.ce.cn/news/2009-11/23/143817.htm&ei=qhwpS6iiNpOKnQeIzcylDQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAgQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522tom%2Bsimeo%2522%26hl%3Den%26lr%3Dlang_zh-CN%26num%3D100
2) Appointment of two officers who have extensive experience with the financial aspects of Asian businesses and listing procedures.
3) Two independent directors will be appointed shortly.
4) While the 8-k filing describes SBAT's new business as being a "consultant", the language in the actual partnership agreement suggests that SBAT may be looking to forge a fairly in-depth relationship with some clients. And that makes the management appointments that SBAT has disclosed all the more interesting, IMO.....
SINOCUBATE desires to become a Chinese business incubator focused on businesses in the PRC
http://knobias.10kwizard.com/filing.php?param=&ipage=6660825&DSEQ=2&SEQ=&SQDESC=SECTION_EXHIBIT&exp=
4) SBAT currently has a float of less than 400k. Low-float situations like this can have some wild moves, regardless of whether they may have a fundamental basis. For example, if it turns out that SBAT in some way becomes involved in some very high profile reverse mergers or IPOs as a result of Philip Wan's employment at SBAT, things could get a little interesting.
Guy...SBAT.....
"SBAT - I just saw that they filed 8-K on Monday
and unfortunately, the CEO of VIKING decided to be
a POS greedy bastard and issue to himself 19.7 million shares.
This is unbelievable. 4.7 million shares of SBAT for 100k
of RHGP which last traded @.65 AND 15 million for "right to acquire Twenty-Five percent (25%) of all net equity received by Viking from its potential future Chinese Clients".
He issued himself shares for nothing. What a pathetic loser.
I am out."
I'm maintaining my full position in SBAT. Based on some information disclosed in the 8-k filing and some "behind the scenes" things I have noticed in the last 1-2 months or so, I have a hunch/belief there will be opportunities to sell some shares at higher prices in 2010 or beyond.
From an initial fundamental perspective these transactions and new business implementation do not look attractive. From a retail investor standpoint I would have preferred to see a RM transaction with a single operating Chinese client/company.
The success/failure of SBAT now as an investment will probably largely depend on its operational expenses going forward and exactly how many shares it will need to issue for future equity acquisitions from Viking. The two transactions described above have taken SBAT from shell status to an operating business status (consultant). The original retail investors now have a 4-5% position in the new business, which in line with the kind of percentages you usually see in reverse merger types of situations. Again, future dilution and accompanying assets/value will likely decide SBAT's fate from this point forward.
Regarding the reason why I am keeping my position.....
1) In the last month or so Viking Investments has been advertising for positions at its Shanghai office (a business development manager and three financial analysts)......
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://www.examda.net/Html/Company/28025.html&ei=lR4rS4uwOsjZnAeUzfX4CA&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAgQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522viking%2Binvestments%2522%26hl%3Den%26lr%3Dlang_zh-CN%26num%3D100
2) As I mentioned above there is a very interesting bit of information disclosed in the 8-k filing which has gone largely unnoticed, but which has potentially huge positive implications for SBAT. Philip Wan has been named a Vice President and Director of SBAT. Wan is extremely well-connected and well-respected (he was on the same panel with Crocker Coulson at this year's DealFlow Media PIPEs conference). The warrants Wan received are priced at 26 cents. For SBAT to attract someone of Wan's caliber into an officer position is a bit of an eyebrow-raiser and that coupled with the timing of the employee hiring undergoing at Viking Investments suggests there may be some things of significance occurring behind the scenes.......
Philip Wan. Prior to joining SinoCubate, Mr. Wan was with Linkasia Lawyers based in Shanghai China from 2001 where he became a partner in 2002. LinkAsia is a Chinese law firm with more than 120 lawyers and 30 partners in Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen. Over the last decade, Mr. Wan has been practicing law and providing consulting services to international clients and diverse investment projects. These projects have mostly involved cross board investments that pertained to telecommunications, power plants, civic infrastructure, energy and natural resource industries and green-tech projects. Through his professional career and successful representations, Mr. Wan assisted many of his clients to complete their investment and business transactions, and protected their best interests in China and Asia. Prior to Linkasia Lawyers, Mr. Wan was a legal counsel for 6 years in early 1990’s at Emerson Network Power and Schneider Electrical Investment China. In the year 2004-2008, Mr. Wan served as the China CEO of Linkasia Capital LLP, and managed diverse funds in China and Asia worth 2 billion US dollars, including private equity funds, mutual funds, and venture capital funds. Some of the significant investment projects that he participated in include, joint venture (Merlin-Gerlin Electronics Tianjin, Schneider China Investment), business formation and outsourcing (Libert-Emerson Network, Saha International), venture capital investment (Shanghai Tourism Web), private equity investment (China AME fund), M&A (Vivax Asia), Corporate restructuring (Shanghai GSY). Mr. Wan also extensive experience from Chinese privately owned companies with their foreign IPO listing endeavors on OTCBB and NASDAQ (US listings), ASE (Australian listings), and AIM (United Kingdom listings). Mr. Wan is a director of China M&A Association, and a director of the Climate Change Committee of China New Chamber of Commerce. He served as the China legal counsel for Standard & Poor’s Vista Research in 2007-2008. He is also a frequent speaker at several international conferences including the International Bar Association, Asia Pacific Law Society and SNP’s Vista Society of Industrial Leaders.
Keystone Symposia...February 15-20, 2010......
The "Stem Cell Differentiation and Dedifferentiation" meeting/conference is being held February 15-20 in Keystone, Colorado. Lead sponsor is Pfizer, along with Genzyme and Sangamo BioSciences.
If you look toward the bottom of the page, you will notice that Vitro Biopharma is listed among the companies that are acknowledged for providing support for the conference......
http://www.keystonesymposia.org/Meetings/ViewMeetings.cfm?MeetingID=1032
DesertRat1...interesting development.....
The management of Cienega Creek Holdings, Inc. is pleased to announce that the company’s Board of Directors has agreed, in principle, to a majority ownership purchase of the company’s common stock. The company is in the final phases of the transaction. The expected buyer is one of Wall Street’s most respected and successful consulting firms. Baring any unforeseen circumstances, this transaction is expected to occur within then next 10 days. Additional information, as required, will be made available in our public filings at www.sec.gov.
http://www.cienegacreek.net/LETTER%20TO%20SHAREHOLDERS%20Nov%202009.pdf
The letter doesn't specify whether the consulting firm itself or a potential client will use the CCKH shell to go public. But either way, this change in majority ownership is a welcome sight. I'm assuming this means that CCKH will no longer be concentrating on the start-up software subsidiary the CEO is/was trying to establish, and will instead focus more on a merger/acquisition.
I wasn't particularly enamored with the dual approach that the CEO was taking previously as I felt it was more of a hinderance toward completing a reverse merger. And, in my opinion, retail investors probably stand a better chance of making some decent money on this shell if a quality reverse merger of an already established business can be completed.
This could get pretty interesting, depending of course on the exact nature/structure of any deal. Shell investing can be a hit-or-miss kind of thing, but I figure if a person concentrates on picking up some "quality/value" shells you stand a good chance of eventually hitting some home runs.
The current shell structure of CCKH is relatively attractive when compared to the share structures and valuations that you see on some of the shells receiving attention recently. For example, both AMCG and JNTX have shell share structures (adjusted for cancellations) significantly higher than CCKH. Pre-merger shell valuations on both of those shells has exceeded $9M. For comparison, that is the equivalent of CCKH trading at nearly $4 per share.
rkor...Travel Engine owners......
"where did you find this info?
Konstantin Derenstein (one of the owners of Travel Engine)"
The owners of Travel Engine can be found in two different spots in the quarterly filing (pages 16 and 19). From page 19......
Travel Engine is beneficially owned by Matt Krieg and Konstantin Derenstein, and as a result of the entry into the Subscription Agreement and the transactions described above, Matt Krieg and Konstantin Derenstein obtained voting control over the Company.
RonnieD...Frank Jacobs, business direction.....
"I really don't think that's the same Frank Jacobs listed as a Director for Maverick. Maverick has been listed since 2006 and explores for oil off the South African coast. Frank Jacobs is a common name."
It has been awhile since I read through some of the Maverick filings, but if you search through probably the proxy filing you will find some biographical information about the Frank Jacobs listed as a Director for Maverick. It is definitely the same person.
"I also don't believe this company is interested in anything other than geothermal/gas in SE Asia."
Based on the limited information available in the filings, I believe it is more likely VOIG is moving in a different direction. The change in control coupled with the background of one of the people involved with Travel Engine suggests to me that an energy-related reverse merger is probably not as strong of a likelihood as it was before. Now, it is possible that while the name Travel Engine could suggest that the RM will be something related to travel or information technology, it is also entirely possible that Travel Engine could merely be some type of "intermediary" toward something in a completely different kind of industry.
Konstantin Derenstein (one of the owners of Travel Engine) has a fairly distinctive name (meaning you can google his name and not get flooded with possibilities). Assuming this is the correct "Konstantin Derenstein", Google searches show he is the CEO of Kostya, Inc, a US-based company involved in information technology......
http://www.kostya.net/about-us
RonnieD...new business direction for VOIG.....
"potse, a couple of us have seen a .pdf file from frank over the summer. kind of an outline of what Velocity is going to consist of when this is fully setup. One part is indeed "the Australian company". what is the r/m on the Aussie exchange you're talking about ? give more info on that and i will share the .pdf"
The Australian company I was referring to is Maverick Energy (see link below). However, at this point it appears to be a moot point.
Based on the information in the "subsequent events" section of the latest quarterly filing regarding change in control, it would appear likely that VOIG will be going in an entirely different business direction. I'm not entirely sure but it is probably something in the travel and/or software industry, judging by the name of the entity and the background of at least one of the people involved. Initially, it doesn't sound particularly exciting if that is indeed the direction, but it is kind of interesting that Frank Jacobs has agreed to a one-year lock-up on all of the shares he currently owns.....
Frank Jacobs, the Company’s current Director shall have entered into a lock-up agreement, approved by Travel Engine, pursuant to which Mr. Jacobs will agree not to sell any Company securities for a period of one (1) year.
Also interesting to note that the Capersia promissary note has been sold to two other entities.....
On or around November 10, 2009, Capersia sold its entire interest in the Note (as described below), which had an aggregate balance, not including any accrued and unpaid interest of $11,764 as of September 30, 2009, and as of the date of the note sale, each to Cascata Equity Management, Inc. (50%) (“Cascata”) and Seven Palm Investments, LLC. (“Seven Palm”) (50%).
http://www.asx.com.au/asx/research/companyInfo.do?by=asxCode&asxCode=MRK
032798....VOIG downfalls, touts.....
1) "Has Potse been wrong before? No offense to Potse. For he has a cool handle and i like his dd. But no one can totally know what the company has up it's sleeves. Heck, it wouldn't surprise me if CCKH(which I believe he owns, I own it also) did a r/s even with its small float. I am not saying these will do a r/s. But with both companies letting float control slip through their fingers(cckh to a lesser extent imo), it makes me feel the chances for one in the future has increased."
2) "I wonder if some of these touts have been wrong before? LOL! Some do not understand the downfalls of VO*IG that are evident from the filings. Some don't care. But things never change in this arena, do they? LOL!"
I can't speak for others, but I am well aware of the potential downfalls in VOIG. Just as I am aware of potential negatives in virtually every other shell I am invested in or have on watch lists.
Shell investing can be an incredibly exciting, frustrating, and humbling thing primarily because you never know for certain what might happen. Some people are comfortable with the inherent risk/reward present in shell situations. And some people probably shouldn't be delving into these types of plays.
Personally, I find this particular situation to be intriguing enough to take a good-sized position. IMO, I think there are reasons to believe that something of significance will be happening here sooner rather than later. I base that on......
1) Some of the items in the latest filing suggest to me that things are progressing closer to an acquisition.
2) I don't know to what extent Frank Jacobs is actively involved in any VOIG negotiations, but now that a reverse merger he was working on the Australia exchange was approved by shareholders yesterday I would assume he probably could turn more of his attention toward VOIG. Back in June 2009 (about a week before VOIG's new CEO was appointed), Frank's company Triangle Energy purchased an Indonesian gas field from ExxonMobil, and he reverse merged those assets into an Australian company.