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.
Where is the best place to see whether a TA is gagged or not.
words to live by:
If the company's transfer agent, or TA is "gagged", you will have no way of knowing changes to the A/S, O/S, or float. We do not recommend playing a stock with a gagged TA for anything more than a quick trade.
above from: http://www.thethirddimension.net/stocks/stocksharestructure.html
Amazing. There are still two buy indicators...
http://www.barchart.com/opinions/SPNG
And in five years (assuming he gets five), he can come out and do it all again?
I was kidding. I lost a little, but learned a ton. I said along time ago, I appreciated those who were critical, kept me from going stupid on this stock. I also learned that there are some very super sleuths on here that can find almost anything. And that information is nearly always linked, accurate, and beneficial....so though I hate losing money, the experience will serve me well. And you can bet money that I will watch yours and a few others analysis on here going forward: because you were right.
Hey, I didn't like you either. You were accurately predicting this while I was hoping the opposite. You were right. Okay, now I like you.
There are a number of companies that make antimicrobial sponges.
I might ask the question: Why buy anything other than perhaps the IP,if available. Purchcasing everything else after the fact would be much more prudent, since you are not incurring any bad will, or existing debt.
The second question I would want to know is how viable of a market does the product have? If 99% of the sales were "bogus," I am not sure there is a business enterprise there worth investing in.
Third question: Is there any foreign companies doing something similar already. If the answer is yes, then they might be best postioned to move into whatever market there might be... If, no, back to question #2.
I worked for several years in Flushing (NYT), and there are certain neighborhoods there that real estate is insanely expensive. Even in smaller neighboring communities it isn't unusal for a 1000 sf home to sell for 500k, and the home sits on a postage stamp piece of property, maybe 40 X 100.
The problem is the damage to many has already been done, and what the courts decide will be long after the fact.
Damn. Are you saying I can't blame anyone but myself for my losses? I hate when that happens. Nice to see you back!
What I would like changed is this: When people are found guilty of ponzi, pump & dump, etc schemes - they receive fines and prison terms commensurate with those who commit crimes with lethal weapons. Simply they go to the same jails, not some medium or minimum security place. Clearly there is a place for medium and minimum security prisons - but if the crime of stealing money was intentional (yes I believe good ole Martha did not deserve to go to a hard core prison - another story however), then whether the weapon of choice was a gun or purposely using false PRs, phony customers, phony manipulation - the result is often the same: grave harm to the innocent.
I do believe that the investor needs to be responsible for his actions and his risks. But that does not mitigate the guilt of those purposely attempting to deceive.
Unfortunately, that makes perfect sense. The scary part though is that since they, SEC, must have a random sampling process, they must also be highly dependent on people who alert them. The second scary part from my perspective, is that many companies may quietly operate under the radar for years, sucking the "newbie" type investor for a lot of money. I wonder how often, this happens and the company never gets caught? Just fades away while taking the money. If that happens, then for some crooks it is a basic risk/reward analysis.....
When I say "newbie," I am including myself...unfortunately. But lesson well learned.
OMG...what a novel thought - blaming the root cause responsible party! Very nice and exactly to the point.
Please explain to this moron, that would be me, what this means in layman's terms.
Can anyone tell me how, when you've been caught, you are under investigation, and you continue to pass off non-existent companys that you purported to buy millions of dollars worth of you sponges...and you still attempt to present that as evidence to the investigators as proof? Did they think no one would check? That is such remarkable leap of faith that even the most novice investigator wouldn't check, that it blows my mind. At what point do these guys attempt to mitigate the self-inflicted damage? To me, unless they know something that has been kept secret on par to the Manhattan project, that is spitting in the face of the investigators.
If the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department know what they are talking about, then Steven Y. Moskowitz is a very good liar.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/business/06place.html?dbk
Gotta feeling two wrongs ain't gonna make a right.
u.s. Department of Justice
Antitrust Division
Freedom o f Information Act / Privacy Act Unit
Liberty Square Building
450 5th Street, NW, Suite 1000
Washington, D.C. 20530
Voice: (202) 514-2692/ Fax: (202) 616-4529
April 26, 2010
Re: Freedom of Information Act Request No.ATFYI0-050
Dear Mr. Anderson:
This letter responds to your March 24, 2010 Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request for records regarding SpongeTech Delivery Systems, Inc., Steven Yahuda Moskowitz and Michael L. Metter. We received your request on March 24, 2010 and assigned it the above referenced control number.
Please be advised that we searched the Antitrust Division's records indices but we were unable to locate any records regarding SpongeTech Delivery Systems, Inc. In order to provide you with information related to a person other than yourself, you must provide us with that person's written authorization to do so. See 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b). Otherwise, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any records regarding Steven Yahuda Moskowitz and Michael
L. Metter. The disclosure of such information, to the extent it may exist, could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy and is, therefore, exempt from public disclosure in accordance with FOIA Exemptions 6 and 7C, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) and (7)(C). Accordingly, before we even conduct a search for records regarding Steven Yahuda Moskowitz or Michael L. Metter, you must have them complete the top portion of the enclosed Certification of Identify form by (1) inserting their names as the "requester," (2) providing the other identifying information, and (3) printing your name in the "Optional: Authorization to Release Information to Another Person" section.
We are closing your March 24, 2010 request as of the date of this letter. If you wish to pursue your request for records regarding Messrs, Moskowitz and Metter, you may submit a new request enclosing executed copies of their authorization to disclose information to you and we will then conduct a search to determine if records exist.
Kirk Anderson ATFY10-050 Page-2
If you consider my response to be a denial of your request, you may submit a written appeal to the Director, Office of Information Policy, U.S. Department of Justice, 1425 New York Ave., NW, Suite 11050, Washington, DC 20530-0001. Any appeal should be clearly identified as a "FOIAIPA Appeal" and must be received in the Office of Information Policy within 60 days of the date of this letter. 28 C.F.R. § 16.9. Judicial review is available thereafter in any of the following jurisdictions: (l) where you reside, (2) where you have your principal place of business (if any), (3) where the records are located, or (4) in the District of Columbia. 5 U.S.c. § 552(a)(4)(B).
Sincerely,
Sue Ann Slates Chief FOIA/Privacy Act Unit
Enclosure
The first link is above it is page one. Just click on it and it will enlarge. Sorry didn't see name there.
IMG]http://i42.tinypic.com/33lcnfb.jpg[/IMG]
Not sure if this will work but giving it a try. SPNG page 1 and 2 of OT's info.
I've only been playing with stocks for a couple of years. This is my first scam experience. It is very easy to be naive. I am no kid, and pretty street savvy. I read both sides here and felt there were salient points made by both. The one thing that was clear though was the predictions. And here the naysayers won hands down. They warned of the gagged TA; they warned of the pumps; they warned of a (at the time) potential Well's Notice; they warned of a suspension; and on and on. Again, maybe it was because I didn't have a lot of money in this, and maybe not. The one thing that really screwed me up was the audacity. I kept saying to myself, I hear the naysayers, but if all they are saying is true - how in the world could SPNG management be so bold as to forge ahead? That still boggles my mind. A poster from a while back, Hasher, sent me a very nice private note telling me to check out another stock and see the history (also a scam). I did, he was right. Even then I found it unfathomable that anyone would risk jail and be willing to openly lie, especially once under investigation! That's where my "street savvy" left me. I kept thinking there are bold bad people out there, but how stupid can they be. Well it appears more stupid than I thought. Great lesson for me. People like Legal and Overachiever, Panther...they got it. I now, a bit late, get it.
The very first red flag I think was over a year ago, when people here were critical of the gagged TA. The rest just seemed to keep piling up and on: suspension, wells, etc, etc, etc.
The company is the brainchild of Chief Executive Michael Metter, a former stock broker who was accused of cheating clients out of hundreds of thousands of dollars in the 1990s, and Chief Operating Officer Steven Moskowitz. Neither could be reached for comment on Wednesday and one of Mr. Metter's lawyers, Alan Heller, didn't immediately return a call seeking comment.
Probably pretty hard to reach them until/if they get bailed out.
Hate to admit it, but you are right.
The part that never stops amazing me is the audacity to file a lawsuit against some posters, the NY Post, etc., just a week or so ago. They had to know something was coming and soon. How could they possibly do that in light of these charges? How could they possibly do that while being investigated? I cannot for the life of me figure out what they were thinking.
That pretty much what I suspected. Thanks.
Yup, if not finishing up the first verse.
I sat on this forever. LOL I just wanted it to get to ten cents one more time..........damn. Trying to figure out if I should be happy I only had 3k in it, or pissed off I didn't get out back in August. Guess I will be happy since August is long gone. But it does stink knowing I had money invested in some shady characters, ignored all the warnings...think had I had more invested might not have ignored. Anyway, what's done is done I guess.
So what becomes of the company now? Does it just go away?
Perhaps the last glimmer of hope?
http://www.11alive.com/news/local/try_it/story.aspx?storyid=140129&catid=292
I would be happy, but would not gloat. Making money makes me smile, not gloat. The important thing for me when reading negative spng posts, is to ignore the messenger and discern what value is in the message. I don't like the delivery of many here, pumpers and bashers alike. I do, however, read their post for substance and attempt to determine if there is merit in the message. I am losing on the stock, but recognize that I made the choices and chose to ignore or believe certain dd put out by both sides. Blaming anyone for a failed investment or a winning investment is a waste of time. Each of us in the end make the decision to buy, sell, or hold. No one held a gun to my head, and I held. Right now that doesn't seem to be a wise decision...but one I will surely learn by.
I was just thinking (as I watch my three grand float down the river, thank God that's all I am losing) the worse thing that could happen is this stock came out smelling like a rose, and made some money for many of us. I have learned a lesson here - pennies are very, very dangerous. But if this were to be a winner, my fear is many here might be fooled into investing heavily into another penny stock hoping it was a one in a life time deal. Not me. IF, and that appears to be a giguntis if, this were to net me a few bucks, I get it. These things are extremely risky. And I suspect I will never put more than a few hundred in a penny again - and that will be a stretch. The market manipulation through BS is mind boggling. There is much corrupt about this market, and I suspect that will not change in the foreseeable future. The old saying is standing true: "if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is."
To fellow people who may end up losing money here, you have my heart felt sympathy. If we learn from this we will be able to go forward and fight another day. If we don't, the next time will be worse.
I have watched and watched this board, this stock, and constantly stayed in (maybe cause the lost won't change my lifestyle), but last Summer when my gut told me to get out at .20, I allowed my greed to keep me in. If it doesn't feel right, get out!
Lastly Happy New Year to all - time for a couple rum and cokes with a nice twist of lime.
That would be very nice........
Good question! Isn't annual meetings an IRS requirement for Corporations?
This is old but the first paragraph is comical....Hope Sec has improved or SPNG might really be in more trouble than anyone imagined:
SEC Hires a Company It's Investigating
Hired on Monday to work on the commission's new filing system, BearingPoint earlier reported that it would file its financials late—and that it was under investigation by the SEC.
Marie Leone, CFO.com | US
September 27, 2006
A subcontractor hired on Monday by the Securities and Exchange Commission to work on its new, interactive regulatory filing system doesn't have enough confidence in its own financial statements to file on time. What's more, the firm is under formal investigation by the SEC because of the company's poor internal controls over financial reporting.
http://www.cfo.com/printable/article.cfm/7963665/c_8310234?f=options
This message board is funny. We cannot compare SPNG and NYT/WSJ for duel class stocks because of the enormous difference is their sizes, but it is okay to compare SPNG and Enron???? Comparisons of convenience?
I don't know the future for SPNG, but I suspect the dueling sides here on SPNG just lurk over the posts to see how quickly they can make opposing views look foolish and stupid regardless of the plausibility. Guess it is empowering to make someone look foolish. I don't know who is going to be right or wrong, just wonder if they will have the same courage to admit they were wrong as they do to jump down each other's throats.
That's my post for now. Nothing seems to change on "As the SPNG turns." You can read the posts here about once a month and get the gist. Just like a soap opera.
NY Post taken to court - I really doubt it. Why bother for one. Libel is very tough to prove. You usually have to prove malicious intent. And few court judges like to rule against newspapers as they always try to protect the "freedom of the press" veil so as not to set any precedents they might regret in the future. Second it would be a huge distraction and costly, again - why bother. It would be very difficult to prove based on the statements this guy made and the recanted remarks. A lot of wiggle room in there. Third, normally you cannot sue for damages not suffered. Let's agree that Spng did suffer a lot of financial damage, that would be a time consuming endeavor to prove. And they would need to show that, that article was a major culprit. Again, why bother. Their time and resources would be much better spent getting everything cleared up, filings caught up, etc. It may give some here, including me, some personal satisfaction to see the NY Post slapped, but it would be foolish and just drag things out even more. I hope they just let it go and move on.
Thanks...just found it on investopedia.
Okay call me stupid, but what does paint the tape mean?
Ahhh....that's the kind of response I was looking for: not only whether it was usual or unusual, but some of the reasons for doing so other than those I mentioned.
Dlewisfl,
Can't speak for Carp, but I used those two companies because they were the first to come to mind without doing any research. I worked for NYT for 20 years. Employees were generally happy that this was the situation since it was a great place to work, and made selling the company very difficult - as witnessed by the difficulty selling WSJ. Remember WSJ stock was around 25 (if my memory serves me correctly) and Newscorp had to up the anty to 55 per share to entice the Bancroft family disenters to come on board. I was not comparing these two to SPNG. I was simply asking the question is it really that unusual for a company to have a two class structured stock with one class having all the control. I mention that it was perceived as favorable to employees - in recent years it was viewed very unfavorable by major stock holders. Primarily because serious A class holders had little to no influence on how the company was run - particularly in the very turbulent atmosphere newspapers face. Oddly enough WSJ is doing relatively well compared to other newspapers.
I suspect if a company is going to put itself up for sale its a double edged sword depending on which class of stock you own. At NYT the average person like myself could not own any Class B.
Regardless of any comparisons or non-comparisons my question was alluding to some of the conversations regarding SPNG's situation and if it were really that out of the ordinary.