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.
Until defendants are forced to pay defense costs as routine instead of rare exceptions in limited jurisdictions…that will continue.
In this case, CCAA/BIA is a distinction without a difference. The US has Chapter 11 and Chapter 7, Canada has CCAA and BIA. So what? Companies still get liquidated and shut down in Chapter 11.
This other excerpt from that same judge's order seems to get ignored for some reason:
An appraisal isn't a sale price, and even at that distressed value, shareholders and all the unsecured creditors would still have gotten nothing. Some secured creditors would have gotten more.
Under the "scrap" theory, you overlook the costs of doing so. It was a chemical plant, and would have to be cleaned up for scrap. And, yeah, there was a desire to sell to someone who intended to operate the plant, pay taxes, employ people, more taxes, etc.
The "seeming inconsistencies" are just more made up nonsense to further the fairy tale. The case was closed over 4 years ago, plant sold over 5 years ago, approaching the 4th year anniversary of the stock ticker being deleted, and all this without even a whisper from the company itself which you and others pretend to believe is secretly in operation.
The company doesn't win on these collection lawsuits...
https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/spotify-settles-with-pro-music-rights-founder-who-sought-over-1bn-in-damages/
Note the allegations Spotify had in their countersuit. Also note the reference to "Pro Music Rights v the Music Industry," case # 3:20-cv-00309-JAM in the federal district court of Connecticut. Dismissed....
There was $432M of accounts receivable as of this report (later corrected):
https://www.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/344114/content
So, $65k collected out of the $432M...
I fully understand "accrual accounting," but it doesn't give license to book $100's of millions of "revenue" only to see $65k in collections. There's a fiduciary responsibility to only show what you expect to collect, and you can't say you expect $100's or even $10's of millions when the track record is less than $100k.
Shore interest was "no records found"...
Nobody is going to put $2.50 in margin per share to short a stock with a maximum gain of a half penny. That would be stupid.
They also had the opportunity to object to the sale of the assets, but they didn't. Unlike the equity holders, they understand the bankruptcy process, and when a bidding process for the assets that solicited 80 or so companies ends with only 2 low bids for all of the assets, they knew that was all they were getting. Taking possession of their collateral would have ultimately cost them more money.
Nothing is happening, ever, to Immune Pharmaceuticals, the subject of this board. Immune Pharmaceuticals is in Chapter 7 bankruptcy, being liquidated and shut down. Your investment in it is a total loss. Here's the court docket if you ever get through rehab and want to know what really happened to your investment:
https://www.docketbird.com/court-cases/Immune-Pharmaceuticals-Inc/njb-2:2019-bk-13273
None of the other companies you babble about have anything to do with Immune Pharmaceuticals. You don't have equity in any of them.
Convention?
Maybe they can get all 5 of the Backstreet Boys to perform.
"Investor money" was gone as soon as there were no bids in the SISP and it moved into liquidation. There was no way investors were seeing a recovery, considering the creditors, administrative costs, and other liabilities would have to be paid first. PWC coordinated a bidding process amongst 80 or so prospective bidders and took the best bid with the approval of those creditors and the 2 federal courts, and they did it right out in front of everyone. The only other bidder that bitched about it at all had offered $3.5M with a potential $1M more.
"In good faith?" How can you read through the Asset Purchase Agreement, with a listing of everything that was sold, in bad faith? The patents and everything else that was listed was sold.
BioAmber's interests in that patent were sold to LCYB, page 93 of the 6th monitor's report:
https://www.pwc.com/ca/en/car/bioamber/assets2/bioamber-043_120718.pdf
It was a jointly owned patent. Later on, Cargill was making the case that their development agreement with BioAmber on the jointly own patents said that they'd have sole ownership if one of them went under. One of them did, but Cargill didn't act until the court had approved the APA and the sale was closed.
It isn't unusual for a dead name to continue to be listed on patents and other documents. It is up to the new owner to get it changed.
I'm not here to warn you, I'm just warning the people you want to buy your stock. The OTC isn't an investment or a gamble, the vast majority of the "plays" are scams perpetrated by POS companies, lenders, and the con artist pumpers who support them.
It's very simple logic and the 8K that they posted showing the share exchange that is to take place. The logic is that no legitimate business is going to merge into an OTC shell company that has been a perpetual scam and hand over the equity ownership of that business to the bagholders of the shell for nothing. It would be monumentally stupid to do that.
The 8K they issued describes the shares that are to be awarded to the owners of the business merging in. If you read it, in the aggregate, those owners are going to own the lion's share of the equity in this company, which means the bagholders can expect to be wiped out by it. The pumpers will tell you it won't happen immediately and/or that the new stock will be restricted until registered, but they're not going to hang around anyway. For the owners of the company merging in, who collectively own 100% of it, it makes perfect sense they'd expect to still own the company after consummation of the merger.
I'm not interested in learning how to profit as a con artist. Those that listen to the fairy tales and buy these POS's at grossly overpriced values lose their money to the con artists. It's really just that simple.
Con artist pumpers may have profited from the scam, others who fell for it lost an equal amount in the aggregate. That's the elephant in the room that you'd rather have ignored. People are being conned out of their money.
"Fun?" It's called con artistry, duping other people into buying stock so that the con artists can take their money.
I know that honesty is a concept that escapes con artists, and any disruptions or warnings about the con are unwelcome in the social media boiler rooms, but you may as well get used to it.
It's simple. Some of us are honest and won't play scams.
They awarded insiders 1B shares last year just so they'd have something to PR about cancelling while the toxic lender with a note converting at $0.000025 was dumping shares. That lender converted 675M shares, and the company issues a PR about cancelling 500M shares. The lender converts another 280M shares, and the company PR's another 500M cancellation. The lender has since converted another 150M on 11/1.
Those 1B shares never entered the market and were issued for the purpose of a smokescreen cover of the lender's conversions. They're playing everyone for fools.
@Tz3sports here's your questions for the event tomorrow:
In this report initially issued for 2020 and 2021, the company showed accounts receivable of $107,281,764 and $323,387,126. How much of that has actually been collected after invoicing 2-3 years ago? Later revisions to the report for these years suggest that none of it was successfully collected.
https://www.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/344113/content
In comments received on the S-1/A registration statement for the stock awarded to the insiders, the SEC questioned the practice of claiming the accounts receivable above but characterizing it as deferred revenue. In response to the comments, both were removed in a revision to all the uploaded financials (example below) and the PR below was issued. Why has the company returned to similar accounting practices claiming $100's of millions of revenues that the collection history would suggest are, at best, grossly exaggerated?
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SONG/news/Music-Licensing-Inc-Enhances-Financial-Transparency-and-Compliance-with-Balance-Sheet-Amendment?id=386354
https://www.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/361988/content
If we were to assume the company could actually collect on those revenues, how much of it would be owed to the artists whose works are what's actually being paid for by the streaming services? Why is that payment not shown on the financial statements?
What is it that you do that the company saw fit to award a $12M promissory note as an annual salary?
It isn't an elective fee. It's a FINRA rule:
https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/rulebooks/finra-rules/4210
(c) Maintenance Margin
The margin which must be maintained in all accounts of customers, except as set forth in paragraph (e), (f) or (g) and for cash accounts subject to other provisions of this Rule, shall be as follows:
(1) 25 percent of the current market value of all margin securities, as defined in Section 220.2 of Regulation T, except for security futures contracts, "long" in the account.
(2) $2.50 per share or 100 percent of the current market value, whichever amount is greater, of each stock "short" in the account selling at less than $5.00 per share; plus
(3) $5.00 per share or 30 percent of the current market value, whichever amount is greater, of each stock "short" in the account selling at $5.00 per share or above; plus
(4) 5 percent of the principal amount or 30 percent of the current market value, whichever amount is greater, of each bond "short" in the account.
(5) The minimum maintenance margin levels for security futures contracts, "long" and "short", shall be 20 percent of the current market value of such contract. (See paragraph (f)(10) of this Rule for other provisions pertaining to security futures contracts.)
(6) 100 percent of the current market value for each non-margin eligible equity security held "long" in the account.
I'm not. It would be incredibly stupid to put $2.50 in a margin account per share to short a stock for a maximum gain of less than a penny. Nobody does that, it's just an excuse by con artist pumpers to deflect attention away from them flipping the stock for profit.
We're not starting the "used to be on the NYSE under JPEP" thing again, are we?
JP Energy Partners was acquired by American Midstream Partners on March 8, 2017, and has no subsidiaries. It's been gone for over 6 years. Here's the 8K:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1523404/000119312517074861/d328538d8k.htm
And here's their Edgar filings:
https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=0001523404
They have absolutely nothing with the company created out of nowhere very recently.
That video is from the promotion for an offering they were doing in 2021. It's 2 years old.
https://pages.reachoutit.com/invest
Dude. That just means they're going to let the convertible note lenders and others that are no longer affiliates dump their stock before they wipe it out. Those lenders have convertible notes at 63 and 65% of the lowest trade in the 10-15 days prior to conversion, and we're in that window where it had dumped down. They do appreciate all the help, though.
Up 60%, more dumps on the bid than buys.
Nothing unusual about that.
SMH
The CEO spends a lot of time on social media pushing standard OTC stock narratives.
Get real. No legitimate business is going to allow a bunch of bagholders to own any significant piece of their company. That's just dumb.
You guys are ignoring the shares being awarded in the agreement. Here's a copy from the first 8K:
On November 7, 2023, Yuengling’s Ice Cream Corporation (the “Company” or “YCRM”) entered into an Share Exchange Agreement (the “Share Exchange Agreement”) with ReachOut Technology Corp., Delaware corporation, (“ReachOut”), pursuant to which the shareholders of ReachOut (the “Shareholders”) agreed to sell 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of ReachOut to the Company in exchange for the issuance of such number of shares of newly created Series C Preferred Stock, par value $0.0001 per share of Company (the “Series C Preferred Stock”) which, collectively, shall be convertible into that number of shares of common stock of the Company which shall equal Eighty-Seven Point Five Percent (87.5%) of the total issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company as determined at the consummation of the Acquisition (on a fully diluted basis for a period of twenty-four (24) months) as set forth in the certificate of designation to be filed at Closing for Series C Preferred Stock.
At the Closing, Trillium Partners, LP (or its affiliates ) shall receive 1,000,000 shares of newly created Series D Preferred Stock, which, collectively, shall be convertible into that number of shares of common stock of the Company which shall equal ten percent (10%) of the total issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company as determined at the consummation of the Acquisition (on a fully diluted basis for a period of 24 months) and carry rachet and anti-dilution rights, as set forth on the certificate of designation to be filed at Closing for Series D Preferred Stock.
At the Closing, Everett Dickson (or his designee) shall receive 250,000 shares of the Series D Preferred Stock, which, collectively, shall be convertible into that number of shares of common stock of the Company which shall equal two and one-half percent (2.5%) of the total issued and outstanding shares of common stock of the Company as determined at the consummation of the Acquisition (on a fully diluted basis for a period of 24 months) and carry rachet and anti-dilution rights, as set forth on the certificate of designation to be filed at Closing for Series D Preferred Stock.
You haven't read the latest quarterly either, I see. The board already approved the RS and amended the corporate charter. It's done as far as they're concerned. They can tell FINRA to put it into effect anytime they want.
Of course, if they actually do it without the offering/uplist, it's the kiss of death on the OTC.
While I would understand recognizing invoices as revenue for a business with a history of actually receiving the "accounts receivable," the history here doesn't support that practice. They'd removed those account receivables during the registration process for the 3.5B shares awarded to the insiders when the SEC asked them to explain what they were doing. The financials then reflected the payments they were actually receiving as revenues.
Given the track record on collections and the outcome of the lawsuits filed so far, it seems a stretch to show any of it as revenues.
Read it again.
They were authorized to do a reverse split with a deadline of April, 2023. In September of 2022, the board decided to do a 1 for 400 and recorded it in the corporate charter. It's done, they just haven't notified FINRA to put it into effect.
Page 2 of the most recent quarterly:
On October 8, 2021, the shareholders of the Corporation approved a written resolution, authorizing the Board, until April
8, 2023, to effect a reverse stock split of not less than 1-for-2 and not more than 1- for-10,000 of the Corporation’s
Common Stock at the discretion of the Board. On September 26, 2022, the company filed an amendment to our amended
and restated articles of incorporation with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida to effect a reverse stock split at a
ratio of 1-for-400. While the amendment was approved by the Secretary of State, our Common Stock has not yet begun
trading on a reverse stock split basis. Within the next twelve months, the company anticipates the Board to effect a
reverse split in conjunction with a completed offering and registration statement filed with the SEC
The IFLM days when the concept of "control block" was introduced:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/msgsearchbyboard.aspx?boardid=18180&searchstr=noch&srchyr=2019
Read the links in the sticky post. It gives a timeline of the balance sheet claims, provides a link to the SEC's questions about the accounting practices being deployed, gives a link to the PR the company issued when they "fixed" it, obviously not for good. The financials linked show what the cash collections were.
Then google the company vs those streaming services, the lawsuits that have been filed and their outcomes.
And, finally, just ask yourself, if a company really had that much money coming in, why'd they inhabit a dead OTC shell? The ownership prior to the RM could have kept all that money for themselves.
The O/S is over 16M shares, so the market cap would be $3-3.5 M
They've already approved the RS and incorporated it in the corporate charter, so it's done, ready to pull the trigger with FINRA at any time.
I cannot imagine the RWOD board being able to sell a $94M valuation of a target company that's currently trading at a market cap of $1M. I expect more of the RWOD shareholders to redeem their holdings if they push it.
You're joking, right?
This has nothing to do with the beer company.
https://www.otcmarkets.com/filing/html?id=17058167&guid=ekJ-kFm2KSHRB3h
12M shares issued, quadrupling the O/S, $29k in revenues.