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.
Good Post.
That Poster is noted for putting out misleading statments. I knew her long before I found out about IHub. She was very pro- ARSC for awhile. Take if for what its worth. I am sure news will be put out at some time but I can bet that no one here are with Yahoo thinks they have an inside connection anymore. It's a wait and see thing. Maybe good and maybe bad. My money is on good but I have made foolish investments before and am not about to say that I can't do it again.
Excellent Post Pat. I've been looking around for similar things but it seems you have been most fruitfull. It seems that a few good things will be happening in August. First Production run with one cell being sent to CSA for certification and a positive outlook for the most stepped on development company DMGS. I have a buy in for .02 but I am glad to say that I might not see it happen. I've been trying to get a grip on any reformers that may be of use until the ammonia reformer comes on line. It doesn't look like Conexa has settled on one yet. I expect that type of information will be next on the list of things to see.
How does that apply to what I posted?
I am sure there that there has been no PR concerning the default listing in the May SEC report. It stated that they were in negotiations as a result of that. The no Default thing was a PR concering the Ohio University agreement and that bill may still be pending. It isn't that confusing with so little information comming out.
They may be trying that but have you seen the shape the banks are in ? I am thinking that banks will likely be shying away from anything that even seems speculative right now. For sure solid returns from companies with plenty of equity to back up the loan is very high on the need to do list for the banks.
I am thinking that if they want to get certification rolling ASAP, they need to do what ever they need to. Golden Gate funds are suppose to be used to ramp up production {?}.
Bummer if they burn all their fire wood before it gets cold.
The certification cost big bucks. They haven't indicated anything yet about the funds due Ohio U. . I would say that either or both of these bills would be more likely the options for using the funds . It seems that they want to use Golden Gate funding as little as possible and as a last resort. Just another opinion.
Pending: CSA, UL, CE
These are the certifications that ARSC will be applying for.
The information was obtained from the Conexa website.
My feeling is that if you are asked to hold something in confidence, it should stay private. If you comply with the request, it is likely that a communication line will stay open. If you release that information, you are likely burning a bridge. If nothing is directly said about keeping it quiet then it up to you. If the information is good, and you make a good trade on it,you are open for litigation. If you were to post the information first then it is documented as public. After that you could make a trade based on that information and not be concerned about any backlashes.
I suppose that arguments could be made over what constitutes public information. People post public notices in the local news papers all the time. Since the SEC has allowed companies to post proxies in a public forum in liew of hard copies mailed to the house, I would expect that this board could be considered a public forum.
You don't have to own a computer. Everyone has access to the internet.Computers are available at the local Library.
Don't consider this as legal councel,just an honest opinion.
I don't think any law is broken until the information is used for personal gain. If Frank tells someone something not of public knowledge and that person trades and makes money based on that information, a law was broken.
The catch is knowing who will use the information in an illegal way. Frank has no way of knowing who he is talking to and what their intentions are. Either the info is BS or he knows that no gain can be made on the information.
If one gets information and post it on the board, no law was broken. The information,after posted, becomes public information and can be used for gain if the information is true. Don't be kidded into believing that anyone on this board has a golden line to the inside. I've been told things, posted the information and got mud on my face. I'm not suggesting that everything that I have been told is lies. I am just suggesting that the time line involved may be very different than preceived.
My stand is that it going to take all possible approaches to become energy independent. Wind and Solar will provide power sometimes but both of those need to work with battery systems. Fuel cells are battery systems that consume fuel instead of a stored charge. A fuel cell can be used with Solar or wind power in that the two power sources could be used to supply power and produce fuel for operation of the fuel cell in off hours. There are numerous ways the three could work together to provide a good reliable system.
There were numerous PR's released after public demonstrations of the beta units. At least one news paper article was written on one of the demonstrations. The units did what the company claimed they would do. The only down side was that Hydrogen was supplied by Gas vendors in large cylinders. That fuel cost many times what a reformer could produce Hydrogen for. Understand though, the company was demonstrating the operation of just the fuel cell. These beta units were not just built to prove that the system would work. They were made to test the system and maybe show possible areas that could be improved on before committing to the final production model.
Investors can never count on getting anything back from a penny company that goes under. Usaully so many creditors are involved that come first in recouping losses that by the time it comes to investors, nothing is left. That is a general statment reguarding a small company failure. I am sure some here may assume that I am refering to ARSC just to make the price do down more.
Not indicating that I doubt you but it would be nice to know if you saw this equipment or the information was received through a second party. If it was through a scecond party, its dangerous to talk as if it is fact. Been there,done that.
If there is equipment, I wonder ,the company is so paranoid about other companies, if they would actually allow any pictures.
We make Chlorine and solvents here. Others have the same technology but for some reason the company doesn't allow any cameras in the plant. They don't want anything to get out that could benefit a competitor. Don't you think ARSC would take the same stance ? I won't be surprised if the pictures don't show up.
Maybe in the next 3 to 4 weeks, we will have our last shot at the "Low" prices.
T. Boone is the Man. I enjoy listening to him as he seems to be more insightfull that most public figures today.
Many things have made sense to me when I have called in the past. I have since learned to double check if at all possible. Would you consider what you were told missleading?
I may not always sound like it but I am behind the product and think that it is a very good chance at a winning investment. I have been pumped up on several occasions over the phone. I am sad to say that it may take several months to find out if the conversation was misleading. I bet that if you were to call back a likely reply would be that they missunderstood the question.
Equiti Trend reports that they were told in a conversation with Frank and Bob a few weeks ago that ARSC is appling for several certifications. This doesn't mean they have several products. They are appling for certificaion,most likely in several different countries. U.S.A requires one Europe requires a different one and I think that there is another general international certification. They are listed on the CSA website.
The reason given was that of extreem cost of certification each seperate time. Doing them all at once won't be much more expensive than having one done. Either way,IMHO, it is likely that we won't see anything for 4 or 5 weeks after the fuel cell is received by CSA.
I guess that isn't bad considering how long we have been waiting.
I have given my employer notice that I will be retiering within the next two years.
I had a buy in @ .038 last Month but saw what was comming and canceled it. I may reenter it for .02 . Barring real good PR, it will be forced down in that area again before the cert comes out. IMHO
I still haven't got a response on what you think you may know so I did the DD and copied the Real info for you.
SEC Filing dated February 27,2008
Item 5.01 Change of Control of Registrant
To affect the actions necessary to complete the funding agreements and to indemnify Mr. Neukomm and Mr. Farr, the Company’s Board of Directors unanimously approved the indenturing of the Company’s previously unissued Preferred stock as “Super Voting Convertible Preferred” and issued it to Mssrs. Neukomm and Farr. Each share of the Preferred carries voting rights equal to 500 shares of the Company’s $0.001 par value common stock
I'm not sure what you are saying. You stated " If I'm correct" and that indicates doubt. You followed by saying that you made a phone call several weeks back to ask.
Are you doubting the answer given to you or your memory ?
You were likely given a answer. Was it complicated ?
I know that the term preferred shares and Super voting rights were brought up before April. I expect the current shares to already have that status. It would be nice if we could vote on that also. I would say NO. Stockholders are suppose to be like the Congress, Keep the President in line.
Giving super shares is like giving the President dictatorship powers.
I'm sorry, you take the word "Ratify" way too lightly. The stockholders have to approve the move in an official vote. If it doesn't pass, there will be no increase in AS. That's the rest of the story.. Since the board has preferred voting shares, it is really a non issue.
The board has authorization to increase the total AS. The key is that the increase has to be ratified by the stockholders at the next meeting. If it isn't accepted, the board has a serious problem dealing with shares used,over the origional authorized amount.
I am well aware of that and suggest that,based on the calculations given, What on earth would move them to request bumping the preferreds to 2 million ? So, You suggest that since it is a hopless situation, We need not even vote. We need more people in the country to suggest the hopelessness of voting.
I did send an email to the author. I'll see if she sends a reply.
What about an email to the person that wrote the article ?
If you can get that,I wouldn't mind calling American Hydrogen for confirmation on the article.
I'm not aware of any testing done past the one in March. If you found something recent, It could be something that involves a beta ACE unit. I would find that very interesting.
The beta testing is done for the Hydra 5000..
That verifies what I suggested about her knowledge of the product.
I wasn't asking for an explanation. I am confident in what I said. Is there anyone other than Lowman willing to suggest that things aren't as they seem ?
I'll bet a doughnut that Beth Sergent Bsergent doesn't have a clue to what she is talking about. I know that the hydrogen for all the fuel cells "beta units" was supplied by high pressure cylinders bought from a commercial vendor for gasses.
There are several pictures showing the bottles with regualtors to drop the pressure down. I'm sure that people would rather take her word for it though.
ARSC currently has 1,000,000 preferred shares with super voting privliges. With 500 to 1 votes per share, it gives them 500,000,000 votes. The amount of stock currently called Float can be completely purchased by Relion and they still wouldn't have a majority stake. I do find some fault with that idea.
The 500 to 1 just seems to be overkill at attempt to take stockholders out of the equation completely.
In your wildest dreams, could you explain why the company would want to raise the preferred shares from 1 to 2 million.
That is absurd to go that far. The company only has 500 M authorized. More than 200M is still locked up with no voting privliges.
I see the relion thing as a dead issue and only still poping up as a scare tactic. The company is well protected the way they are now.
Why do you not suggest that stockholders have any say or input. I understand that as being one major perc of a pubicly traded company. Private companies don't need the money so there are no stockholders to deal with. There are a number of major companies that are currently dealing with stockholder objections. If you don't like it leave? Whats the problem with casting a vote? Let them see , with the voting results, everyone isn't a happy camper. Your train of thought might work better in China or Russia.
How can you missunderstand "American Hydrogen". That is the ACE company working with Dr.Botte. No, they don't have a full scale working beta unit as of their last communication. They have a one watt unit that they are using for test. A full scale unit that would be used to supply Hydrogen to a "Hydra Fuel Cell" is not yet done.
The name of the company was spelled out in the first part of the communication. I fail to see the disconnect.
It will be nice once American Hydrogen progresses to the point that they can actually hire some of those prospects..
It may sound negative but I see it as objective. Things seem to be going much slower than they had anticipated. As far as I know, they do not yet have a full scale working beta unit.
There is no litigation so I can't see a reason for them holding back any information. The only obvious conclusion is that progress hasn't been on the fast track.
You are right concerning the perferred shares. I don't agree that one share ,regardless of the type of share, should have more than one vote attached to it.
Happy? Disappointed ? Angry ? Then Vote!
I am and I don’t mind explaining why.
1. Vote for five directors? We have no choice so they will be voted in.
I am voting against Frank Neukomm because he has been less than honest in all conversations that I have had with him. I am voting for the rest.
2. Increase the authorized shares from 200M to 500M.
I am voting against .
We were told that the shares were being increased and that we didn’t have a choice. We may end up with 500M but I want my votes to show the board that the reason give wasn’t justifiable to me.
3. Increase preferred stock from 1M to 2M
I am voting against.
I see this as one more means to make my votes worth less. I would vote to remove the first M if I could. By the investors and for the investors should be the goal in voting at the annual meeting. Super shares is BS.
4. Approve Articles of Incorporation.
I am voting for.
I’m not a lawyer and I have no suggestions for anything otherwise.
5. Ratify Share Issuances and the Derivative Securities.
I am voting for.
The company doesn’t have the cash on hand to pay these people and still move forward with certification.
6 Approve the Companies 2008 stock Option plan.
I am voting against.
We weren’t given a line item veto. I don’t believe that anything other than pay for work done should be given out until the stockholders have some verifiable evidence that the company is moving forward. I am referring to the certification as one example. We don’t have a clue about the time frame and have received BS for the last two years concerning it. Once it is done and confirmed, I suggest that they have earned a bonus.
I also would suggest that a bonus would be in line once the company starts bringing in revenue. Bonuses should be received when a milestone is reached. I don’t believe in handing them out like Halloween candy.
I would hope that the above will sway each share holder to vote in a way they feel .
I want to say that the proxy I received on Monday July7, was 500,000 shares short.
I hope they have the rest in the mail but I will make an issue of it if I don’t receive them before Friday.
No matter what we agree on or disagree on the one concrete thing we have in common is that Your comment below is shared by both of us. Traders and MMs can have their way with it as mucy as they want now and the end results will still be the same. VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
ARSC is going to fly like the dickens once certified and in production!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It's funny about things that seem to be transparent. It's like David Copperfield says," Things aren't always as they seem.".
I'm just suggesting that a justifiable reason exist but one does non the less. I don't express any condonement of what may happen. It may be of help to investors if they can understand cause and effect.
Sorry futrcash but I didn't catch , in default of......"The rest of the story". The Ohio U thing was addressed by Ben Schaffer. I expect that most are satisfied that it is a dead issue.
A form filed with SEC did contain the words "in default" as pertaining to the two lenders that ARSC is dealing with. There has bee speculation as to the context it was used in and how it may impact the company. As of yet, the company has made no effort to address this question form the investors with public release. I,myself have been told that it's not an issue. We all know that an investor isn't suppose to believe what is told to them as rock solid ,unless it can be supported by a different source. Any thing else is just more speculation.
I agree that the 500 unit release shows no imediate positve impact on income. There have been news releases since last November stating that Purchase Orders have been received. The trend has been to release PRs with higer numbers on the PO. I suggest that the negative response is why investors have not gotten too much in the way of PRs from the company in quite a while.
The long term return will be positive only afer the certification is complete and production has started. More money coming in than going out is the launch point of the company and most PR that doesn't address that may be taken in a negative manor by those with different trading goals than the longs.