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.
1. you could be right about when he joined their board
2. We he joined it was around .05. The stock hit a high of around .14 just after the company got US Govt approval and BL helped oust the CEO and then it was all downhill to .01. So yes, I totally blame the stock price on BL and the board. He was also chair of the comp committee that gave the new CEO the most ridiculous package I've ever seen.
3. BL was definately booted see below. I love the fact that he says they aren't getting sufficient working capital when as part of the board he allowed the replacement CEO to go hog wild and blow through MILLIONS with nothing to show for it. BL and gang totally screwed this company financially and then objected when the Class A shareholders presented crappy terms to keep the place afloat. Trying to keep the company afloat is not the same as trying to protect the interests of common shareholders, something that at times seems apparent at IMSC.
"In light of the financing proposed by Jim Cacioppo and Jeff Arens and the demand requesting my resignation post signing of the Board Consent, I am resigning effective 9 November 2015. I do not desire to hold up the company’s opportunity to acquire more financing for its operations, but, I am not going to sign the Consent form only to immediately resign my position, hence I am submitting it without signing the Consent. I understand the company needs more working capital, but I believe the amount of working capital offered by this financing isn’t sufficient and the terms aren’t favorable to the company, however, it is clearly the only alternative at the present time.
I have enjoyed working with you, the other directors and the executive team and wish you continued success.
Best regards,
Bob"
PS.
I'm sure Liscouski is a nice man but I wonder whether he has entrepreneurial acumen as President since his background is mostly government corporate and advisory services.
I believe what happened to IMSC is that they got access to some easy credit years ago and ramped up way too early with way too many staff, bloated top level management and overhead because they had delusions of immediate growth that is only coming now. Liscouski has been on the board through the whole toxic financing mess and he was on the board of VSYS as he allowed that company to implode.
The role of any board is to ask hard questions in their fiduciary role and question costs - not to simply go WOW at the revenue possibilities presented by the CEO at meetings. This is even more dangerous when the board has little to no equity or skin in the game to protect. Familiar?
I believe that if Liscouski and the board had done their job and run a tight small ball ship while they worked towards the TSA and big stuff everyone would be sitting pretty right now.
They can get out of this but the chickens are roosting.
Re Liscouski.
I normally don't do company cross-talk on ihub since this may violate the terms of service since this deals with IMSC management any may prove insightful here goes.
Liscouski joined the board of VSYS in late 2012. The company had just released an amazing new security technology called Freedom.
In Feb 2014 the technology was approved by the US Government and DHS then awarded them initial projects valued between $10-$20M. Other agencies who started ordering were DOL and VA. The company was poised for huge growth.
Then within weeks and for no apparent reason Liscouski helped oust the CEO. The company had just raised $2M to market the new technology but from what I've heard Liscouski and gang did almost none. Instead, the board proceeded to spend money like drunken sailors. Highlights included renting the new CEO a penthouse for somewhere around $7k month, lots of renovations, 100% raises for the board etc.
The company started to run out of money within months, the board resorted to desperate financing options. The largest shareholders stepped in and fired Liscouski's hand picked CEO in July 2015 to stop the madness and forced Liscouski and crew off the board around November. They are now trying to save the company.
The stock was at .15 in Mar. 2014 and is at .01 now.
There you have it. Exciting company. New security technology lands a break through deal. Liscouski helps navigate the stock into the toilet. Familiar?
Once upon a time someone recommended 2 stocks to me. Liscouski was a director of both. Liscouski helped oust the long time CEO of the other company and promptly helped the company's stock tank by 95% before being forced to resign by a new board last fall.
With IMSC he helped oust Bolduc so he could have a prime place at the through and the stock has only tanked by about 66% so all things considered maybe he thinks he's a big success.
Fortunately I pretty well got out in one piece and because I started selling both stocks just about the time he became management at IMSC and I get to be a dispassionate observer of the carnage. I feel your pain.
Ain't this company swell. This thing fell off the cliff when the Raefield gang took over including Sierecki. As per the patents, Sierecki wasn't there when the technology was designed, he has no background in engineering and my guess is that he doesn't even understand the patents, let alone know how to commercialize the technology.
Furthermore, he was hired as VP of Sales and as the news shows has created no successes with the basic Freedom technology so how could we expect him to lead the company to the next level.
Let's see if the CEO can get this under a penny this year. Was thinking of redoing my den and Vsys stock certs might be cheaper than wall paper.
I am losing track of the turnover. Another Sales Director to augment the VP of Sales. If any of these people were doing the job we would be reading about contract wins, not new hires and cash injections. The most popular game at their xmas party had to be musical chairs.
Who hired all these unsuccessful sales people anyways... the Ex-VP of sales and now CEO, and as the recent 8K indicated a disciple of Mr. Raefield. So the cash burn continues, the sales people keep churning... But there is hope at the end of the tunnel since Sierecki is still listed on news releases as the Interim CEO.
Tiring.
Awards are irrelevant. The company has done no real marketing in 2 years and revenues and stock price are reflecting this. Sierecki has done nothing to restore confidence or to generate business. Thank god he's still listed as "temporary CEO". The new board has some decisions to make. We'll see.
$50 moves the stock 25%. wish it always woorked like that
On the other hand You have to give the new CEO crédit. The stock been a Solid 1.5 cents since He took over. Woot woot
Any trading would Be better than no trading.
Agreed. I"ve seem this pattern before. The board replacés a founder with Professional management and the company burns
Coule also be the ex CEO and staff selling shares to finance their lifestyles.
Perhaps This Is the calm before the Storm.
I think he's managing at the Mustang Ranch. After being screwed by Viscount it sounds like the perfect job.
Here's a comment. They have their first net profit in how long?... and they don't bother to mention in the Q news release... and release the Q after the investor call... they need a CEO
I'll take whatever positives I can from my 1.5 cent stock. However since it's been noted that they haven't actually released their announced financials how can we really tell.
Here are my observations based on guesses since the real Q ain't available:
1. They received a $2M software contract during the Q. Awesome news. But cash at Q end was only $230K. Perhaps they didn't get all the cash during the Q but there's a good reason Raefield "resigned" so there is still a cash bonfire at vsys are we're all getting burnt.
2. They reported an increase in gross profit> Who cares since they didn't release net profit.
Here's what I guess. Since total sales went up by about $700K and gross profit went up by $700K then the additional sales must have been very high margin = about $700K of the the US software contract came must have come in. Other than that sales are flat which stands to reason since they have released no project news and the CEO made a huge mess.
Summary, thank god for the US Gov't software contract and the BOD smelled the rotten fish in the CEO's office. Still hoping they find a CEO to make us some $$.
My guess is that they keep him as director in the short term for appearances. It's not like he's a major shareholder. He'll disappear in a few months. The interim CEO seems ok but has no public company experience. I doubt he'll be permanent.
As so ends the public company career of Mr. Raefield. At least he was consistent. He lost about 90% of the market cap at MACE and repeated his "success" with VSYS. FML
You'll never know unless they file a proxy and they won'yt file if they have an adm.
There is an old expression someone mentioned to me the other day. Good Product + Bad People = Bad Deal. Thank management for the collapse. I'd love to see what they are paying management for this mess but they didn't bother having an agm this year so we don't even get to vote on whether they are doing a good job.
I'd like to share your enthusiasm and hope the shares will recover although I doubt even at .06 anyone will be happy, especially the .09 investors from last year.
In terms of revenues, it was suspicious that they had a huge drop in Q4 which leads me to believe that they used some revenue to front load Q1. But the new software contract however should be a big plus going forward.
In terms of lavish spending and abuses I'm still cognizant of the fact that they replaced a $120k CEO with a $300K CEO (including a $5K/ month apartment, flights for wives etc.). Fact is that I was told that almost all the departures were people Raefield hired and revolving doors can be expensive.
Hopefully things will stabilize but it points to a failure of management ( serious interpersonal issues) when people who should be key hires only last months.
PS. I have to differ about feathers in hats. All of these deals were reportedly in the works before he came on board. If you read the news releases for the last 15 months the cupboard is pretty bare of new feathers.
I just read that the keynote speaker for the Marcum Conference was Dick Fuld who was CEO of Lehman Brothers when they went bankrupt after 160 years in business. Viscount has only been around for 40 so Raefield won't get to break the record.
Based on today's volume one must suppose that Mr. Raefield did another outstanding investor presentation at today's Marcum investor conference. But tomorrow is another day.
Nothing wrong with putting some lipstick on the pig.
So they file the 10q one day after their investor call, shady stuff going on.
At March 31 they had $178K in cash and working capital dropped to $60K. Giving their operating loss of about $480K for the Q after having sold off their receivables I'd say they're operating on fumes by now so hopefully the US software revenues with be quick to come.
I'm sure the $832k is very high margin since it's simply a software license. On the other hand I'm very suspicious about doing an investor call without telling investors the real results and bottom line.
I used to be negative but am very excited that Raefield through his extremely hard efforts has created such an awesome buying opportunity by providing a bargain .02-.03 cent stock.
One would suppose that the numbers didn't impress the market much. The stock fell on $50 in volume. Weird stuff. Revenues are 40% higher than last year and the stock is 80% lower. Somehow this doesn't mesh with the concept of a well managed public company.
Anyone on the call today. I was out of Tums so didn't feel up to it.
I'll bite. I'd be excited but unfortunately I see Sun Health as another mark of failure by the CEO. Sun Health was announced as a new client at a Q call in 2013, just like almost everything else happening. It would be nice if the new CEO brought something new to the table but the guy's a joke.
I'm a bit neutral on this. They simply announced that their main client is buying what they said they would. If the average site is as they have said before, about $50k, they I'm not sure why they announced $2M and not $10M?
I'd love to see the contract. May not be what we think.
If phase 1 is to upgrade existing sites for $800k. They could slow down sales in the next few K's since they won't be releasing new orders?
The downside of announcing this is that they leave nothing in their news hopper for the future for their one customer unless they keep doing rehash releases.
My guess is they have done this because they have no cash and are desperate to find investors and so the Big release will help.
Q1 today. Hopefully they are meeting their goals. A few comparatives to what I can extrapolate from Raefield's forecasts from last year:
Cash in bank approx. $1.2M
Q1 Sales approx. $2.3M
Q1 Profit approx. $250k
I'm sure he met his goals to hires lots of staff and fix office furniture so he's off the hook on that stuff.
During the 10k call I sent an email and it simply bounced. Apparently the questions@viscount email wasn't set up or something.. or they didn't want to answer questions. Hopefully the questions email is active for the Q so they can take questions if anyone shows up.
Another member of the board resigns. Raefield might be feeling pretty exposed now. Q results next week. Hopefully it's the $2M type Q's he was promising last year.
Mostly what's been talked about is old stuff. The CEO's original contract
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1158387/000106299314001649/exhibit10-2.htm
The 10k
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1158387/000106299315001505/0001062993-15-001505-index.htm
The US CIS contracts were discussed during quarterly reports that are on their website.
Firing their auditors is the 8K news link just above the chat tool.
Anything else?
Polo, which specific info are you looking for.
I don't believe Viscount would fire their auditors just to participate in an investor conference sponsored by another auditor.
That seems slimy and the appearance or actual of conflict of interest on the auditors part and it's like the auditors would be performing an investor relations function.
This would make the entire board look like a joke.
I don't think being Canadian had anything to do with it. They simply did nothing.
You are right that stocks don't always follow performance on the OTC. Just more reason why they should have done real IR last year.
PS. Anyone else notice that they fired their auditors this week. I wonder what that's all about
I agree that silence for OTC stocks doesn't mean a dismal future. But it often means a dismal present.
As far as guidance goes the company is lucky they stopped providing it because the CEO provided some during last years Q calls without a safe harbor and this is dangerous stuff. The old CEO was sometimes too guarded but the CEO guy thinks that investors will dance at every pronouncement but this stuff comes back to haunt them.
I would suppose the Immigration deal is on track but not the way investors think ( why the CEO shouldn't talk the way he does). These types of systems take a lot of internal work, specifications to be written, tenders to be done etc. I think they will get somewhere around their 200 but they are dreaming if they think they'll be done this year. So far they announced 7 so figure about 20-40 this year. Just the way it goes and why the company needs about 3-4 more agencies doing the same adoption to get real traction.
In terms of stock price and volume for me it goes back to last year. OTC tech stocks are a bit like let's make a deal, $1000 or door number 1, mystery sells to a point.
That's why last year the table was set to see real volume and appreciation - patents, approvals, contracts and Q2-Q3 growth.
They could have sold the future (door number 1) with a good IR program and people would buy. But now we're getting a peak behind the door and it has a $4M loss for last year and some bad decisions.. the mystery is fading.
Perhaps that's their big problem right now, up until last year new funds and individuals would look at their private placement based on the future mystery and buck up but try asking the same guys to put up more when they are already in at .09.
There are ways to turn this around. I just don't see Raefield as the guy. If he was we would have seen real IR last year when it mattered. IMO