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 for them for admitting NTEK lied about 1,000 movies. At some point, enough is enough. Don't worry some clown will say it's not a big deal or come up with some excuse for ntek. Mark it.
NTEK's "subsidiary"? Ultra Media Group.
Motion Picture Scanning Services
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/VGTL/news/Motion-Picture-Scanning-Services-Signs-Cooperation-Agreement-With-New-York-City-Post-House----Domicile-NYC?id=99370&b=y
Grand Schema Entertainment
http://m.marketwired.com/press-release/vgtel-grand-schema-nyc-announce-strategic-partnership-launch-movie-co-financing-business-otcqb-vgtl-1902863.htm
http://www.360entertainmentandproductions.com/media-center/company-news?detail=184
http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/grand-schema-nyc/new-york-new-york-10002/grand-schema-nyc-christopher-j-scott-jason-birnbaum-john-molli-never-give-them-your-1187801
Yes.
"VGTel-360 Entertainment, which finances and develops, produces and distributes 4K UHD content through subsidiaries Motion Picture Scanning Services and Grand Schema Entertainment, licenses its films for distribution through Los Angeles-based K2 Communications, which reached agreement with NanoTech."
http://4khub.com/news/48527/vgtel-adds-4k-library-to-nanotech-ultraflix-channel
Wow. What state was the court case tried?
I'm not sure how an article that isn't about Ultraflix is DD either.
Here's an example of that "loose" logic:
Apple has been listed as a "partner" on NTEK's website for years now. I'm not sure how they are partners, there is more evidence to support they are not.
Ntek developed an app that apple doesn't offer, you have to get it from ntek, not apple. Did Apple even have to approve the app? I think if they did, you'd see it on the Apple Store but, it's not there.
Apple NEVER leaks future plans on their products through companies like NTEK, again, not a partner.
If Apple comes out and says they are upgrading Apple TV to support 4k, still doesn't make ntek a partner, because I could create and submit an app for approval from my garage, Apple doesn't care as long as it works. Doesn't make me a partner.
Sorry, not partners.
This is an example of awful DD and deplorable speculation.
I would love to see an independent test of bandwidth requirement but for now, I'll take Roku's word for it who stated 15-20 Mbps required for Ultraflix. Just the facts for me please.
Ultraflix.com streams h.264, not hevc. Roku also says you need around 15mbps to watch Ultraflix as well. This jive with you?
I'll go with Roku.com, just the facts for me, great DD Tks.
Good post cat. Fair question good Budz, I'm interested in hearing an answer, I can't think of any..
"The ridiculous thing about the situation isn't that Lucas doesn't want to make the cut of the film that I want to watch.
It's that it was illegal for Harmy to make it.
And it was illegal for me to download it.
And it would be illegal for me to make it available for download from Vox.com or even to put a link on this page that would let you go get it.
It's illegal
because of how Congress has over the years extended and expanded the scope of copyright law in ways that have become perverse and destructive to human culture."
http://www.vox.com/2015/1/30/7952859/despecialized-edition-download
Onnnnnnnnnn the fifth day of Christmas.
NTEK gave to me,
5 MORE MONTHS OF WONG!!!
4 Useless "Updates"
3 Dancing Foley's,
2 Lawsuits Pending,
And some dude barred by the SEC. (Since 2001, great catch NTEK)
It's a work in progress..
Next installment "coming soon". Which in NTEK-ese may mean never and please don't ask -or- as an option, throw silverware in the air and if the forks all land pointing up, you may ask again next quarter.
Do tell sleepy... Re: lawsuit....
What news? The only news I read was that riordan is no longer the CEO on paper anymore which, really, wasn't news to anyone at all. So,
There was no news today. Sorry. Oops.
Those relieved riordan is gone need to realize that he was the CEO on paper only. Ted and Jeff told him where to sign and he said yes. Nah, that's probably wrong too. Ted and Jeff didn't tell him anything, and signed their own names - more likely. My guess is that on a lot of their recent inner-workings - don't want the public to see stuff - documents that should come out in the lawsuits during discovery , you will likely see foley and Campbell's signatures all over everything. In my opinion, they don't have a need for a CEO or CFO unless they can dupe a couple of idiots into becoming liable for fraud.
Wait, what? What have they done about the pps?
Based on the 2 lawsuits, court documents and exhibits, Foley and Campbell have their names on everything. It's clear to me who's running the company. Does anyone dispute this?
There was the 2015 Wong Non-Update Update and now the P Foley Non-Update Update. Investors must live on a different planet than ntek insiders. What do they take us for? Who's pleased with any of that? Ridiculous.
Onnnnnnnnnn the fourth day of Christmas.
NTEK gave to me,
4 more awkward dinners (Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, Easter, Thanksgiving)
"So cuz, that stock you talked me into..."
Sing it with me now!!!!! Yeeeeeeeeee Haaaawwwwww!!!
3 Dancing Foley's,
2 Lawsuits Pending,
And some dude barred by the SEC. (Since 2001, great catch NTEK)
Still working out the kinks here..
Next installment "coming soon".
Has the marketing campaign started yet?
What's the status of Ultraflix streaming the super bowl?
Yeah but, he watched a stock quote 10 minutes on TD Ameritrade.
Here's the question:
What Entity and what Address
in on the letter from NTEK to ClearTrust to issue the Royal Capital Group share certificates to?
Let's start with a yes and no question:
Is the address in the US?
"The pps does not affect the company" - Lorraine Cullivan
NTEK Hype Analysis:
Expected after-news price: 0.0029
Daily Expected return: - 1.96%
"NanoTech Entertainment is abnormally-risky asset"
"About 62.0% of the company outstanding shares are owned by corporate insiders".
(Seems low...)
Nanotech performance score on a scale of 0-100: 0
https://www.macroaxis.com/invest/market/NTEK--hype--NanoTech_Entertainment_Inc
Shipped and delivered from one warehouse to the next? I'd believe that.
No dumping = no volume lolz. Can't hide the lack of interest in this stock. Who in their right mind would invest here based on share structure alone?
Onnnn the third day of Christmas.
NTEK gave to me,
3 Dancing Foley's,
2 Lawsuits Pending,
And some dude barred by the SEC.
Still working out the kinks here..
Next installment "coming soon". Which sometimes means never, or possibly double the time frame given divide in half and then multiply by three, and if it still doesn't happen - go with never.
Lol. If news wasn't leaked, what has changed? Mm hmmm
Nothing.
If it's "coming soon" news, what has changed? Mm hmmm
Nada.
And, what can we count on to occur daily here? Mm hmmm
Dilution.
Enjoy.
The number of shares that went to FS and Roycap is staggering. If they get investigated, I think they just admit they set up the websites and start by saying "so what?" - or - throw foley under the bus and claim ignorance.
My problem is they called them "unrelated" and "unaffiliated" and there are a lot of corrupt ways you can make that technically true. One needs to look no further than when NTEK dealt with IPC Corporate Services in 2013. Even though ntek shows those shares were returned you go to IPC for one or all of three reasons: to hide the identity of the share profiteers, launder money and commit securities fraud. For the spoon feeders Google IPC corporate services.
Since ntek is a form 15 stinky pinky, their best defense is to go silent and hope the transfer agent request letters don't get requested by the sec, FBI or the courts.
That will either clear their name or take them down. If it's the latter, you never address this, ever.
FS GLOBAL CAPITAL + ROYAL CAPITAL GROUP = NTEK.
http://m.whoismind.com/whois/fsglobalcapital.com.html
There more I look into this sh*t, the more shady NTEK appears. Excellent DD. Guess who else now shows up at that IP address?
ROYAL CAPITAL GROUP
If Foley is hiding behind a nominee then of course he can claim its unrelated or unaffiliated. So sketchy. This ALL stinks.
Remember myec who retrieved fraudulently issued shares from Titan international securities inc? Titan and IPC are linked in the Godfrey, Bandfield and IPC indictments.
Anyone follow this? How did they prove myec didn't allow his to occur?
Here's the IPC link to Titan:
Case 1:14-cr-00476-ILG Document 1 Filed 09/08/14
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- against -
ROBERT BANDFIELD,
also known as "Bob Bandfield,"
ANDREW GODFREY,
KELVIN LEACH,
ROHN KNOWLES,
BRIAN DE WIT,
CEMCAN,
also known as "Jim Can,"
IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC,
IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC.,
IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC,
TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC.,
LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. and
UNICORN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LLC,
Defendants.
http://whitecollarsecuritiesdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/9.08.14-Indictment.pdf
A. The Corporate Defendants
1. The defendant IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC was a Nevada limited liability company with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize, and a mailing address in Clackamas, Oregon. The defendant IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC. was a Belize corporation with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize, and an office in St. Vincent, West Indies. The defendant IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC was a Nevis, West Indies, limited liability company with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize, and mailing addresses in Clackmas, Oregon, and Nevis, West Indies. IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC. and IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC (collectively, "IPC CORP") were offshore management companies that marketed themselves on their website as providing, inter alia, the following services: (a) offshore company formation; (b) nominee services; (c) trust formation; (d) licensed trustee services; (e) full banking services; (f) offshore credit cards; and (g) offshore brokerage (securities) accounts.
2. The defendant TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC. ("TITAN") was an offshore broker-dealer and investment management company with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize. TITAN marketed itselfon its website as a fully licensed broker- dealer, regulated by the International Financial Services Commission ("IFSC") of Belize, which serviced, inter alia, the Over-the-Counter ("OTC") markets for both corporate and individual clients. TITAN emphasized that it considered client confidentiality paramount and adhered to Belize's strict privacy laws.
3. The defendant LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. ("LEGACY") was an offshore broker-dealer and investment management company with its principal place of business in Panama City, Panama, and an office in Belize City, Belize. LEGACY marketed itself on its website as a fully licensed broker-dealer, regulated by the IFSC of Belize, which provided investors with full access to the major global exchanges worldwide from a single investment account. LEGACY emphasized that its management consisted of seasoned executives who had extensive experience in the offshore financial industry and distinguished backgrounds ranging from top-performing financial advisors to experts in banking, public policy, securities law and regulatory compliance.
4. The defendant UNICORN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LLC ("UNICORN") was an offshore broker-dealer and investment management company with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize. UNICORN marketed itself on its website as a fully licensed broker-dealer, regulated by the IFSC of Belize, which provided investors with full access to the major global exchanges worldwide from a single investment account. UNICORN emphasized that its clients could "trade with confidence" because, inter alia: (a) information about beneficial owners, shareholders, directors and officers is not filed with the Belize government and not available to the public; (b) Belize does not disclose banking and financial information to the United States, or any other foreign government, for any reason, including for cases involving tax- related issues; (c) no government approvals are required for the transfer ofdividends, interest and royalties, and for the repatriation of capital; and (d) it provided online brokerage features, including order routing to different market makers and 24-hour access to cash and securities transactions.
B. The Individual Defendants?5. The defendant ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," a
U.S. citizen, founded and controlled IPC CORP. BANDFIELD worked at IPC CORP's office in Belize City, Belize. BANDFIELD also claimed to have created TITAN, LEGACY and UNICORN.
6. The defendant ANDREW GODFREY, a citizen ofBelize, was employed by IPC CORP and worked at IPC CORP's office in Belize City, Belize. GODFREY was the primary contact at IPC CORP for its clients.
7. The defendant KELVIN LEACH, a citizen ofthe Bahamas, was the President of TITAN. LEACH worked at TITAN's office in Belize City, Belize.
8. The defendant ROHN KNOWLES, a citizen ofthe Bahamas, was employed by TITAN as the Head Securities Trader. KNOWLES worked at TITAN's office in Belize City, Belize.
9. The defendant BRIAN DE WIT, a citizen of Canada, was the President of LEGACY. DE WIT worked at LEGACY's offices in Panama City, Panama.
10. The defendant CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," a citizen of Canada, wasthePresidentofUNICORN. CANworkedatUNICORN'sofficeinBelizeCity,Belize.?II. Relevant Regulatorv Principles and Definitions
11. The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act ("FATCA") was a federal law enacted in March 2010 that targeted tax non-compliance by U.S. taxpayers with foreign accounts. FATCA required U.S. persons to report their foreign financial accounts and offshore assets. Additionally, F A TCA required foreign financial institutions to report to the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") certain financial information about accounts held by U.S. taxpayers or foreign entities in which U.S. taxpayers held a substantial ownership interest.
12. An international business corporation ("IBC") was an offshore, untaxed company, formed under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction, which was not permitted to engage in business within the jurisdiction in which it was incorporated. An owner of an IBC could deposit money and transfer stock to an IBC to facilitate banking and securities trading activities while maintaining a level of anonymity for the IBC's true owner because an IBC's ownership records were typically not publicly available.
13. The term "beneficial owner" was defined under the rules of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). It included any person who directly or indirectly shared voting power or investment power (the power to sell a security). When a person or group ofpersons acquired beneficial ownership ofmore than 5% ofa voting class ofa company's equity securities registered under Section 12 ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, they were required to file a Schedule 13D with the SEC. Schedule 13D reported the acquisition and other information within ten days after the purchase. The schedule was filed with the SEC and was provided to the company that issued the securities and each exchange on which the security was traded. Any material changes in the facts contained in the schedule required a prompt amendment.
14. The term "nominee" in the securities fraud context referred to a person or firm into whose name securities or other properties were transferred in order to facilitate transactions, while concealing the customer as the actual owner. A "nominee account" was a type ofaccount in which a stockbroker held shares belonging to clients in the name ofa sham entity or another individual. The use of nominees and nominee accounts was designed to conceal the true ownership interest ofthe customer.
15. "Microcap" or "penny" stocks referred to stocks of publicly traded U.S. companies which have a low market capitalization. Microcap stocks were often subject to price manipulation because they were thinly traded and subject to less regulatory scrutiny than stocks that trade don notable exchanges. Additionally, large blocks of microcap stock were often controlled by a small group of individuals, which enabled those in the group to control or orchestrate manipulative trading in those stocks.
16. Wash trades were purchases and sales of securities that matched each other in price, volume and time of execution, and involved no change in beneficial ownership. For example, a wash trade took place when Investor A bought 100 shares at $5.00 per share of Company A through Broker A while simultaneously selling 100 shares at $5.00 per share of Company A through Broker B. Match trades were similar to wash trades but involved a related third person or party who placed one side of the trade. For example, a match trade took place when Investor A bought 100 shares at $5.00 per share o f Company A through a broker, while Investor B, who coordinated with Investor A, simultaneously sold 100 shares at $5.00 per share of Company A through a broker. Both wash trades and match trades were used to create the appearance that the stock price and volume rose as a result of genuine market demand for the securities.
III. The Fraudulent Scheme?17. In or about and between January 2009 and September 2014, the defendants
ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," ANDREW GODFREY, KELVIN LEACH, ROHN KNOWLES, BRIAN DE WIT, CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC., IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC, TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC., LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. and UNICORN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LLC, together with others, devised and engaged in a scheme whereby they agreed to: (a) defraud investors and potential investors in various U.S. publicly traded companies through, inter alia, fraudulent concealment of their clients' true beneficial ownership interests in the various U.S. publicly traded companies, and the engineering of artificial price movements and trading volume in the stocks of the various U.S. publicly traded companies; (b) defraud the United States by facilitating their clients' efforts to impede, impair, obstruct and defeat the lawful governmental functions of the IRS in the ascertainment, computation, assessment and collection o f revenue, specifically federal income taxes under, inter alia, FATCA; and (c) launder money by facilitating for their clients financial transactions to and from the United States, which transactions involved proceeds of fraud in the sale of securities.
18. In or about and between January 2009 and September 2014, the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," ANDREW GODFREY, KELVIN LEACH, ROHN KNOWLES, BRIAN DE WIT, CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC., IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC, TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC., LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. and UNICORN INTERNA TIONAL SECURITIES LLC created various bank accounts through which passed approximately $500 million connected to the defendants' clients, including more than 100 U.S. citizens and residents.
A. The Undercover Operation?19. Beginning in approximately November 2012, a law enforcement agent posing as a stock promoter engaged in fraudulent trading activity (the "Undercover Agent") was directed by John Doe 1, an employee for the now-defunct Bahamas-based broker-dealer Gibraltar Global Securities, Inc. whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, to TITAN and LEGACY. John Doe 1 advised the Undercover Agent that TITAN and LEGACY could establish an IBC for the Undercover Agent to facilitate his stock promotion business, and that same day, sent an email to the Undercover Agent providing him with the contact information for the defendant KELVIN LEACH.
20. In or about January 2013, the Undercover Agent placed consensually- recorded telephone calls to the defendants ANDREW GODFREY and KELVIN LEACH. During these telephone calls, the Undercover Agent explicitly stated that he was a U.S. citizen who was interested in opening an offshore brokerage account with TITAN. The Undercover Agent added that he was a stock promoter who wanted to conceal his ownership of stocks and money transfers in order to avoid scrutiny from the SEC and the IRS. LEACH informed the Undercover Agent that TITAN did not open individual accounts in the name ofU.S. citizens but explained that TITAN could open a brokerage account for the Undercover Agent through an IBC that could be created by IPC CORP. Shortly thereafter, GODFREY informed the Undercover Agent that IPC CORP could establish a corporate structure that concealed the Undercover Agent's ownership interest in his brokerage account at TITAN, which would provide the Undercover Agent with the desired protection he sought from the SEC and the IRS. Specifically, GODFREY explained that IPC CORP would establish a limited liability company ("LLC") and an IBC for the Undercover Agent and designate IPC CORP's employees as the beneficial owners, or more appropriately, the nominees. In this fraudulent structure designed to conceal the Undercover Agent's control and ownership, the IBC, which opened the Undercover Agent's brokerage account at TITAN, would be owned by the LLC and the Undercover Agent's name would not be associated with either entity.
21. In or about October 2013, after the Undercover Agent had paid $3,300 for the IBC and LLC and the brokerage accounts at TITAN and LEGACY established for him by IPC CORP to conceal his true beneficial ownership, the Undercover Agent made consensually- recorded telephone calls to the defendants KELVIN LEACH and BRIAN DE WIT. During these telephone calls, in furtherance ofthe Undercover Agent's fraudulent scheme to conceal his true beneficial ownership of his brokerage account, LEACH and DE WIT confirmed to the Undercover Agent that IPC CORP had established brokerage accounts, not in his name, but in the name of the Undercover Agent's designated IBCs.
22. On or about November 6, 2013, the Undercover Agent met with the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," and ANDREW GODFREY at IPC CORP's office in Belize. The entire meeting was recorded by the Undercover Agent with a recording device. During this meeting, BANDFIELD and GODFREY explained, in great detail, how IPC CORP assisted U.S. citizens, like the Undercover Agent, in evading U.S. laws and regulations, including the IRS's reporting requirements, by establishing sham IBCs and LLCs. To assure the Undercover Agent ofIPC CORP's expertise with managing this fraudulent arrangement and BANDFIELD's own experience in dealing with clients seeking to manipulate the markets and effectively transfer money and stock into and out ofthe United States without leaving a trail, BANDFIELD revealed that he had created TITAN and LEGACY and had incorporated more than 5,000 sham companies. BANDFIELD then suggested means by which the Undercover Agent could circumvent the SEC's reporting requirements by concealing his beneficial ownership of more than five percent of a public company's stock through nominee accounts, and the IRS's reporting requirements by having a nominee sign IRS Form W-8BENs for the Undercover Agent's IBCs and LLCs. Finally, BANDFIELD and GODFREY explained that IPC CORP would soon offer its clients prepaid MasterCards that allowed for transfers up to $50,000 per month, adding, "We can make it so it's not attached to you."
23. That same day, the Undercover Agent also met with the defendant ROHN KNOWLES in the presence of the defendant ANDREW GODFREY. Consistent with the defendant ROBERT BANDFIELD's explanation of IPC CORP's fraudulent coordination with
TITAN and LEGACY, KNOWLES acknowledged that TITAN could not open an account for U.S. citizens, like the Undercover Agent, without IPC CORP's IBC and LLC arrangement. When the Undercover Agent explicitly indicated that he wanted to engage in fraudulent market manipulation through wash trades and match trades between two accounts controlled by him, KNOWLES stated that he could orchestrate those trades through close coordination with the defendant BRIAN DE WIT at LEGACY, and stated that "me and Brian do it all the time for other clients."
24. A few months later, on or about March 4, 2014, the Undercover Agent met again with the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," and ANDREW GODFREY at IPC CORP's office in Belize. This meeting was also recorded by the Undercover Agent with a recording device. During this meeting, BANDFIELD and GODFREY touted, inter alia, IPC CORP's success in establishing fraudulent corporate structures, including six IBCs and two LLCs for the Undercover Agent in order to conceal the. Undercover Agent's true beneficial ownership of the brokerage accounts at TITAN, LEGACY, UNICORN and two additional broker-dealers. BANDFIELD explained that this "slick" structure was specifically designed to counter U.S. President Barack Obama's new laws, a reference to FATCA. BANDFIELD and GODFREY advised the Undercover Agent that the designated nominees, who included a security guard and courier, would sign any stock purchase agreements on behalf of the IBCs at the Undercover Agent's direction. As payment for IPC CORP's services, the Undercover Agent paid BANDFIELD and GODFREY $9,600 in cash and was informed that IPC CORP would refund the earlier $3,300 paid via PayPal to erase the paper trail.
25. Following this meeting, the defendant ANDREW GODFREY escorted the Undercover Agent to UNICORN's office where GODFREY introduced the Undercover Agent to the defendant CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can." GODFREY informed the Undercover Agent that IPC CORP conducted a lot of business with UNICORN and that UNICORN expedited the opening of accounts for IPC CORP. After the Undercover Agent explicitly revealed his intentions to manipulate the stock of a publicly traded company, CAN confirmed that IPC CORP's scheme of establishing sham IBCs and LLCs enabled UNICORN to execute trades for U.S. citizens like the Undercover Agent. To further conceal its clients' true beneficial ownership and fraudulent activities, CAN explained that UNICORN provided its clients with unidentifiable debit cards which could be used by UNICORN's clients to pay "consultants" in stock manipulation schemes. CAN also advised the Undercover. Agent to keep his wire transfers to Belize under $50,000, and vary the amounts, because a wire transfer of $50,000 and over caused banks to inquire into the source of funds.
26. Following his return from Belize, the Undercover Agent continued communicating with the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," ANDREW GODFREY, KELVIN LEACH, ROHN KNOWLES, BRIAN DE WIT and CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," in furtherance of the Undercover Agent's purported scheme to conceal his true beneficial ownership, engage in market manipulation of publicly traded companies, evade reporting requirements and the payment of taxes to the IRS and transfer proceeds of fraud in the sale of securities to and from the United States. For example, on or about April 9, 2014, during a consensually-recorded telephone call between LEACH and the Undercover Agent, LEACH confirmed that any wire transfer requests to TITAN must go through IPC CORP and that IPC CORP's nominee must execute stock transfers. When the Undercover Agent explicitly stated that he wanted to orchestrate trading in the stock of a publicly traded company between LEGACY and TITAN, LEACH responded that TITAN worked well with LEGACY .
B. The Corrupt U.S. Clients?27. On or about and between March 21, 2014 and May 22, 2014, law enforcement authorities conducted judicially-authorized wiretaps of two IPC CORP, one TITAN and one LEGACY telephone lines, specifically: 305-671-3493 (IPC), 503-305-3897 (IPC), 305- 395-7896 (TIS) and 888-400-5461 (LGM). Additionally, on or about and between May 1, 2014 and May 30, 2014, law enforcement authorities conducted a judicially-authorized wiretap of TITAN telephone line 305-407-8426. As set forth below, these five judicially-authorized wiretaps (collectively, the "IPC-TIS-LGM Wiretaps") and emails obtained through judicially- authorized search warrants further revealed the fraudulent scheme devised and engaged in, as set forth above, by the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," ANDREW GODFREY, KELVIN LEACH, ROHN KNOWLES, BRIAN DE WIT, CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC., IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC, TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC., LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. and UNICORN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LLC, and how far the scheme extended beyond the arrangement with the Undercover Agent
28. The emails from the search warrants revealed that the defendants were engaged in similar fraudulent schemes to the ones exposed by the undercover operation. Specifically, the emails confirmed that the defendants were assisting a number of U.S. citizens and residents (the "Corrupt U.S. Clients") to evade, inter alia, U.S. securities and tax laws by establishing sham IBCs and LLCs in order to conceal their clients' true beneficial ownership of stocks and funds and engage in market manipulation of U.S. public companies. For example, on or about September 6, 2013, the defendant BRIAN DE WIT sent an email to the defendant ANDREW GODFREY requesting that UNICORN waive its account opening fee of$1,000 because "we agreed to open accounts at each others['] firms and we don't charge such a fee ...." On or about November 6, 2013, the defendant ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," sent an email to Corrupt Client 1, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, forwarding IRS Form W-8BEN signed by GODFREY as the nominee for the IBC in response to a request received by Corrupt Client 1 from a U.S. transfer agent. On or about December 4, 2013, the defendant KELVIN LEACH sent an email to BANDFIELD informing BANDFIELD that a client requested that $75,000 be wire transferred from a brokerage account to a law firm in the United States. On or about December 16, 2013, the defendant ROHN
KNOWLES sent an email to BANDFIELD, copying LEACH, in which he forwarded an email from Corrupt Client 2, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, requesting six wire transfers totaling $1.9 million for various IBCs.
29. The IPC-TIS-LGM Wiretaps also revealed that the defendants were engaged in similar fraudulent schemes with Corrupt U.S. Clients to the ones exposed by the undercover operation and the emails from the search warrants. For example, on or about March 24, 2014, Corrupt Client 3, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, called the defendant ANDREW GODFREY, whose name he received from the defendant KELVIN LEACH, to have IPC CORP establish an IBC for him to enable him to trade through TITAN. On or about March 26, 2014, Corrupt Client 4, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, called GODFREY and stated that his biggest concern was getting his funds wired back into the United States. In response, GODFREY advised Corrupt Client 4 that he/she could use his/her IBC account at UNICORN and UNICORN's unidentifiable debit cards to alleviate this concern and get his funds transferred. On or about March 28, 2014, Corrupt Client 5, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, called the defendant ROHN KNOWLES to inquire about his trading order and wire transfers to a third party. In response, KNOWLES stated that TITAN could execute third-party wire transfers but reminded Corrupt Client 5 that he needed to send the wire instructions through GODFREY or "whoever the signatory is on the account." On or about May 19, 2014, GODFREY called Corrupt Client 6, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, and stated that IPC CORP's fraudulent scheme using sham IBC and LLC structures was created to evade the IRS, specifically FATCA. On or about May 29, 2014, LEACH called a representative at Cayman National Bank to confirm three wire transfers, including one wire transfer that was requested in the name of an IBC.
30. The IPC-TIS-LGM Wiretaps also revealed that the defendants were involved in a conspiracy to manipulate the stock of Cannabis-Rx, Inc., a microcap or penny stock company which traded under the ticker symbol CANA. CANA's purported business plan consisted o f expanding its business to cater to the real estate needs o f the regulated cannabis industry in states where such business was licensed and permitted. CANA's purported business plan also consisted of purchasing real estate assets and leasing facilities to licensed marijuana growers and dispensary owners for their operations.
31. Specifically, the defendant BRIAN DE WIT was actively involved in the manipulation of CANA's stock. On or about and between March 27, 2014 and April 16, 2014, DE WIT and Corrupt Client 7, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, engaged in a series of orchestrated transactions which resulted in CANA's stock price plummeting from $13.77 per share on March 27, 2014 to $0.50 per share on April 16, 2014. On March 28, 2014 alone, DE WIT received at least five telephone calls from Corrupt Client 7 with specific instructions to fraudulently orchestrate the trading of CANA's stock. That day, CANA's stock, which had not traded since July 2, 2013, had a trading volume of 189,800 shares and the share price plummeted from the previous day's closing price of$13.77 per share to a closing price of $1.90 per share.
If I were a professor of a business school "investment class" and the topic of "death spirals" came up, I think I'd be asking my students to study NTEK. What is aged debt, convertible debt, cost basis, conversion ratios, classic convertible debt scams, what is a non-reporting form 15 company and how it relates to this type of scam, methods of raising capital, offshore llc's, tax benefits of entities like Royal Capital Group, etc, etc. ?
Of course, you may end up giving the students the tools to go out and commit securities fraud, which, in hindsight, this is perhaps a bad idea.
Maybe David Foley could get out of prison early by offering to help the Feds bust OTC securities fraudsters? You know, like ex hackers or thieves?
Fact, NTEK dealt with IPC Corporate Services in 2013, it's in their financial disclosure under "Galaxy Worldwide".
It came out in the Longside Ventures lawsuit that in the letter to Stalt, that Galaxy Worldwide was a front for c/o IPC Corporate Services which was also accompanied by the exact Belize address of this scam that recently got busted by the FBI and SEC under the same name.
Who is IPC and how may this relate to FS Global Capital, Royal Capital Group that nobody can find information on except evidence of NTEK trying to cover their tracks on Royal Capital Group?
Investors should be demanding to know the address and all other info of the entity the discounted "aged" debt shares went to.
From the investigation there is a list of at least 100 corrupt OTC clients who wanted to have their names concealed while they dumped stock.
Here's how IPC Corporate Conducted their scam, the playbook if you will:
Case 1:14-cr-00476-ILG Document 1 Filed 09/08/14
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- against -
ROBERT BANDFIELD,
also known as "Bob Bandfield,"
ANDREW GODFREY,
KELVIN LEACH,
ROHN KNOWLES,
BRIAN DE WIT,
CEMCAN,
also known as "Jim Can,"
IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC,
IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC.,
IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC,
TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC.,
LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. and
UNICORN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LLC,
Defendants.
http://whitecollarsecuritiesdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/9.08.14-Indictment.pdf
A. The Corporate Defendants
1. The defendant IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC was a Nevada limited liability company with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize, and a mailing address in Clackamas, Oregon. The defendant IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC. was a Belize corporation with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize, and an office in St. Vincent, West Indies. The defendant IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC was a Nevis, West Indies, limited liability company with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize, and mailing addresses in Clackmas, Oregon, and Nevis, West Indies. IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC. and IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC (collectively, "IPC CORP") were offshore management companies that marketed themselves on their website as providing, inter alia, the following services: (a) offshore company formation; (b) nominee services; (c) trust formation; (d) licensed trustee services; (e) full banking services; (f) offshore credit cards; and (g) offshore brokerage (securities) accounts.
2. The defendant TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC. ("TITAN") was an offshore broker-dealer and investment management company with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize. TITAN marketed itselfon its website as a fully licensed broker- dealer, regulated by the International Financial Services Commission ("IFSC") of Belize, which serviced, inter alia, the Over-the-Counter ("OTC") markets for both corporate and individual clients. TITAN emphasized that it considered client confidentiality paramount and adhered to Belize's strict privacy laws.
3. The defendant LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. ("LEGACY") was an offshore broker-dealer and investment management company with its principal place of business in Panama City, Panama, and an office in Belize City, Belize. LEGACY marketed itself on its website as a fully licensed broker-dealer, regulated by the IFSC of Belize, which provided investors with full access to the major global exchanges worldwide from a single investment account. LEGACY emphasized that its management consisted of seasoned executives who had extensive experience in the offshore financial industry and distinguished backgrounds ranging from top-performing financial advisors to experts in banking, public policy, securities law and regulatory compliance.
4. The defendant UNICORN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LLC ("UNICORN") was an offshore broker-dealer and investment management company with its principal place of business in Belize City, Belize. UNICORN marketed itself on its website as a fully licensed broker-dealer, regulated by the IFSC of Belize, which provided investors with full access to the major global exchanges worldwide from a single investment account. UNICORN emphasized that its clients could "trade with confidence" because, inter alia: (a) information about beneficial owners, shareholders, directors and officers is not filed with the Belize government and not available to the public; (b) Belize does not disclose banking and financial information to the United States, or any other foreign government, for any reason, including for cases involving tax- related issues; (c) no government approvals are required for the transfer ofdividends, interest and royalties, and for the repatriation of capital; and (d) it provided online brokerage features, including order routing to different market makers and 24-hour access to cash and securities transactions.
B. The Individual Defendants?5. The defendant ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," a
U.S. citizen, founded and controlled IPC CORP. BANDFIELD worked at IPC CORP's office in Belize City, Belize. BANDFIELD also claimed to have created TITAN, LEGACY and UNICORN.
6. The defendant ANDREW GODFREY, a citizen ofBelize, was employed by IPC CORP and worked at IPC CORP's office in Belize City, Belize. GODFREY was the primary contact at IPC CORP for its clients.
7. The defendant KELVIN LEACH, a citizen ofthe Bahamas, was the President of TITAN. LEACH worked at TITAN's office in Belize City, Belize.
8. The defendant ROHN KNOWLES, a citizen ofthe Bahamas, was employed by TITAN as the Head Securities Trader. KNOWLES worked at TITAN's office in Belize City, Belize.
9. The defendant BRIAN DE WIT, a citizen of Canada, was the President of LEGACY. DE WIT worked at LEGACY's offices in Panama City, Panama.
10. The defendant CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," a citizen of Canada, wasthePresidentofUNICORN. CANworkedatUNICORN'sofficeinBelizeCity,Belize.?II. Relevant Regulatorv Principles and Definitions
11. The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act ("FATCA") was a federal law enacted in March 2010 that targeted tax non-compliance by U.S. taxpayers with foreign accounts. FATCA required U.S. persons to report their foreign financial accounts and offshore assets. Additionally, F A TCA required foreign financial institutions to report to the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") certain financial information about accounts held by U.S. taxpayers or foreign entities in which U.S. taxpayers held a substantial ownership interest.
12. An international business corporation ("IBC") was an offshore, untaxed company, formed under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction, which was not permitted to engage in business within the jurisdiction in which it was incorporated. An owner of an IBC could deposit money and transfer stock to an IBC to facilitate banking and securities trading activities while maintaining a level of anonymity for the IBC's true owner because an IBC's ownership records were typically not publicly available.
13. The term "beneficial owner" was defined under the rules of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). It included any person who directly or indirectly shared voting power or investment power (the power to sell a security). When a person or group ofpersons acquired beneficial ownership ofmore than 5% ofa voting class ofa company's equity securities registered under Section 12 ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, they were required to file a Schedule 13D with the SEC. Schedule 13D reported the acquisition and other information within ten days after the purchase. The schedule was filed with the SEC and was provided to the company that issued the securities and each exchange on which the security was traded. Any material changes in the facts contained in the schedule required a prompt amendment.
14. The term "nominee" in the securities fraud context referred to a person or firm into whose name securities or other properties were transferred in order to facilitate transactions, while concealing the customer as the actual owner. A "nominee account" was a type ofaccount in which a stockbroker held shares belonging to clients in the name ofa sham entity or another individual. The use of nominees and nominee accounts was designed to conceal the true ownership interest ofthe customer.
15. "Microcap" or "penny" stocks referred to stocks of publicly traded U.S. companies which have a low market capitalization. Microcap stocks were often subject to price manipulation because they were thinly traded and subject to less regulatory scrutiny than stocks that trade don notable exchanges. Additionally, large blocks of microcap stock were often controlled by a small group of individuals, which enabled those in the group to control or orchestrate manipulative trading in those stocks.
16. Wash trades were purchases and sales of securities that matched each other in price, volume and time of execution, and involved no change in beneficial ownership. For example, a wash trade took place when Investor A bought 100 shares at $5.00 per share of Company A through Broker A while simultaneously selling 100 shares at $5.00 per share of Company A through Broker B. Match trades were similar to wash trades but involved a related third person or party who placed one side of the trade. For example, a match trade took place when Investor A bought 100 shares at $5.00 per share o f Company A through a broker, while Investor B, who coordinated with Investor A, simultaneously sold 100 shares at $5.00 per share of Company A through a broker. Both wash trades and match trades were used to create the appearance that the stock price and volume rose as a result of genuine market demand for the securities.
III. The Fraudulent Scheme?17. In or about and between January 2009 and September 2014, the defendants
ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," ANDREW GODFREY, KELVIN LEACH, ROHN KNOWLES, BRIAN DE WIT, CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC., IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC, TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC., LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. and UNICORN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LLC, together with others, devised and engaged in a scheme whereby they agreed to: (a) defraud investors and potential investors in various U.S. publicly traded companies through, inter alia, fraudulent concealment of their clients' true beneficial ownership interests in the various U.S. publicly traded companies, and the engineering of artificial price movements and trading volume in the stocks of the various U.S. publicly traded companies; (b) defraud the United States by facilitating their clients' efforts to impede, impair, obstruct and defeat the lawful governmental functions of the IRS in the ascertainment, computation, assessment and collection o f revenue, specifically federal income taxes under, inter alia, FATCA; and (c) launder money by facilitating for their clients financial transactions to and from the United States, which transactions involved proceeds of fraud in the sale of securities.
18. In or about and between January 2009 and September 2014, the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," ANDREW GODFREY, KELVIN LEACH, ROHN KNOWLES, BRIAN DE WIT, CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC., IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC, TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC., LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. and UNICORN INTERNA TIONAL SECURITIES LLC created various bank accounts through which passed approximately $500 million connected to the defendants' clients, including more than 100 U.S. citizens and residents.
A. The Undercover Operation?19. Beginning in approximately November 2012, a law enforcement agent posing as a stock promoter engaged in fraudulent trading activity (the "Undercover Agent") was directed by John Doe 1, an employee for the now-defunct Bahamas-based broker-dealer Gibraltar Global Securities, Inc. whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, to TITAN and LEGACY. John Doe 1 advised the Undercover Agent that TITAN and LEGACY could establish an IBC for the Undercover Agent to facilitate his stock promotion business, and that same day, sent an email to the Undercover Agent providing him with the contact information for the defendant KELVIN LEACH.
20. In or about January 2013, the Undercover Agent placed consensually- recorded telephone calls to the defendants ANDREW GODFREY and KELVIN LEACH. During these telephone calls, the Undercover Agent explicitly stated that he was a U.S. citizen who was interested in opening an offshore brokerage account with TITAN. The Undercover Agent added that he was a stock promoter who wanted to conceal his ownership of stocks and money transfers in order to avoid scrutiny from the SEC and the IRS. LEACH informed the Undercover Agent that TITAN did not open individual accounts in the name ofU.S. citizens but explained that TITAN could open a brokerage account for the Undercover Agent through an IBC that could be created by IPC CORP. Shortly thereafter, GODFREY informed the Undercover Agent that IPC CORP could establish a corporate structure that concealed the Undercover Agent's ownership interest in his brokerage account at TITAN, which would provide the Undercover Agent with the desired protection he sought from the SEC and the IRS. Specifically, GODFREY explained that IPC CORP would establish a limited liability company ("LLC") and an IBC for the Undercover Agent and designate IPC CORP's employees as the beneficial owners, or more appropriately, the nominees. In this fraudulent structure designed to conceal the Undercover Agent's control and ownership, the IBC, which opened the Undercover Agent's brokerage account at TITAN, would be owned by the LLC and the Undercover Agent's name would not be associated with either entity.
21. In or about October 2013, after the Undercover Agent had paid $3,300 for the IBC and LLC and the brokerage accounts at TITAN and LEGACY established for him by IPC CORP to conceal his true beneficial ownership, the Undercover Agent made consensually- recorded telephone calls to the defendants KELVIN LEACH and BRIAN DE WIT. During these telephone calls, in furtherance ofthe Undercover Agent's fraudulent scheme to conceal his true beneficial ownership of his brokerage account, LEACH and DE WIT confirmed to the Undercover Agent that IPC CORP had established brokerage accounts, not in his name, but in the name of the Undercover Agent's designated IBCs.
22. On or about November 6, 2013, the Undercover Agent met with the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," and ANDREW GODFREY at IPC CORP's office in Belize. The entire meeting was recorded by the Undercover Agent with a recording device. During this meeting, BANDFIELD and GODFREY explained, in great detail, how IPC CORP assisted U.S. citizens, like the Undercover Agent, in evading U.S. laws and regulations, including the IRS's reporting requirements, by establishing sham IBCs and LLCs. To assure the Undercover Agent ofIPC CORP's expertise with managing this fraudulent arrangement and BANDFIELD's own experience in dealing with clients seeking to manipulate the markets and effectively transfer money and stock into and out ofthe United States without leaving a trail, BANDFIELD revealed that he had created TITAN and LEGACY and had incorporated more than 5,000 sham companies. BANDFIELD then suggested means by which the Undercover Agent could circumvent the SEC's reporting requirements by concealing his beneficial ownership of more than five percent of a public company's stock through nominee accounts, and the IRS's reporting requirements by having a nominee sign IRS Form W-8BENs for the Undercover Agent's IBCs and LLCs. Finally, BANDFIELD and GODFREY explained that IPC CORP would soon offer its clients prepaid MasterCards that allowed for transfers up to $50,000 per month, adding, "We can make it so it's not attached to you."
23. That same day, the Undercover Agent also met with the defendant ROHN KNOWLES in the presence of the defendant ANDREW GODFREY. Consistent with the defendant ROBERT BANDFIELD's explanation of IPC CORP's fraudulent coordination with
TITAN and LEGACY, KNOWLES acknowledged that TITAN could not open an account for U.S. citizens, like the Undercover Agent, without IPC CORP's IBC and LLC arrangement. When the Undercover Agent explicitly indicated that he wanted to engage in fraudulent market manipulation through wash trades and match trades between two accounts controlled by him, KNOWLES stated that he could orchestrate those trades through close coordination with the defendant BRIAN DE WIT at LEGACY, and stated that "me and Brian do it all the time for other clients."
24. A few months later, on or about March 4, 2014, the Undercover Agent met again with the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," and ANDREW GODFREY at IPC CORP's office in Belize. This meeting was also recorded by the Undercover Agent with a recording device. During this meeting, BANDFIELD and GODFREY touted, inter alia, IPC CORP's success in establishing fraudulent corporate structures, including six IBCs and two LLCs for the Undercover Agent in order to conceal the. Undercover Agent's true beneficial ownership of the brokerage accounts at TITAN, LEGACY, UNICORN and two additional broker-dealers. BANDFIELD explained that this "slick" structure was specifically designed to counter U.S. President Barack Obama's new laws, a reference to FATCA. BANDFIELD and GODFREY advised the Undercover Agent that the designated nominees, who included a security guard and courier, would sign any stock purchase agreements on behalf of the IBCs at the Undercover Agent's direction. As payment for IPC CORP's services, the Undercover Agent paid BANDFIELD and GODFREY $9,600 in cash and was informed that IPC CORP would refund the earlier $3,300 paid via PayPal to erase the paper trail.
25. Following this meeting, the defendant ANDREW GODFREY escorted the Undercover Agent to UNICORN's office where GODFREY introduced the Undercover Agent to the defendant CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can." GODFREY informed the Undercover Agent that IPC CORP conducted a lot of business with UNICORN and that UNICORN expedited the opening of accounts for IPC CORP. After the Undercover Agent explicitly revealed his intentions to manipulate the stock of a publicly traded company, CAN confirmed that IPC CORP's scheme of establishing sham IBCs and LLCs enabled UNICORN to execute trades for U.S. citizens like the Undercover Agent. To further conceal its clients' true beneficial ownership and fraudulent activities, CAN explained that UNICORN provided its clients with unidentifiable debit cards which could be used by UNICORN's clients to pay "consultants" in stock manipulation schemes. CAN also advised the Undercover. Agent to keep his wire transfers to Belize under $50,000, and vary the amounts, because a wire transfer of $50,000 and over caused banks to inquire into the source of funds.
26. Following his return from Belize, the Undercover Agent continued communicating with the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," ANDREW GODFREY, KELVIN LEACH, ROHN KNOWLES, BRIAN DE WIT and CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," in furtherance of the Undercover Agent's purported scheme to conceal his true beneficial ownership, engage in market manipulation of publicly traded companies, evade reporting requirements and the payment of taxes to the IRS and transfer proceeds of fraud in the sale of securities to and from the United States. For example, on or about April 9, 2014, during a consensually-recorded telephone call between LEACH and the Undercover Agent, LEACH confirmed that any wire transfer requests to TITAN must go through IPC CORP and that IPC CORP's nominee must execute stock transfers. When the Undercover Agent explicitly stated that he wanted to orchestrate trading in the stock of a publicly traded company between LEGACY and TITAN, LEACH responded that TITAN worked well with LEGACY .
B. The Corrupt U.S. Clients?27. On or about and between March 21, 2014 and May 22, 2014, law enforcement authorities conducted judicially-authorized wiretaps of two IPC CORP, one TITAN and one LEGACY telephone lines, specifically: 305-671-3493 (IPC), 503-305-3897 (IPC), 305- 395-7896 (TIS) and 888-400-5461 (LGM). Additionally, on or about and between May 1, 2014 and May 30, 2014, law enforcement authorities conducted a judicially-authorized wiretap of TITAN telephone line 305-407-8426. As set forth below, these five judicially-authorized wiretaps (collectively, the "IPC-TIS-LGM Wiretaps") and emails obtained through judicially- authorized search warrants further revealed the fraudulent scheme devised and engaged in, as set forth above, by the defendants ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," ANDREW GODFREY, KELVIN LEACH, ROHN KNOWLES, BRIAN DE WIT, CEM CAN, also known as "Jim Can," IPC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, IPC CORPORATE SERVICES INC., IPC CORPORATE SERVICES LLC, TITAN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES INC., LEGACY GLOBAL MARKETS S.A. and UNICORN INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES LLC, and how far the scheme extended beyond the arrangement with the Undercover Agent
28. The emails from the search warrants revealed that the defendants were engaged in similar fraudulent schemes to the ones exposed by the undercover operation. Specifically, the emails confirmed that the defendants were assisting a number of U.S. citizens and residents (the "Corrupt U.S. Clients") to evade, inter alia, U.S. securities and tax laws by establishing sham IBCs and LLCs in order to conceal their clients' true beneficial ownership of stocks and funds and engage in market manipulation of U.S. public companies. For example, on or about September 6, 2013, the defendant BRIAN DE WIT sent an email to the defendant ANDREW GODFREY requesting that UNICORN waive its account opening fee of$1,000 because "we agreed to open accounts at each others['] firms and we don't charge such a fee ...." On or about November 6, 2013, the defendant ROBERT BANDFIELD, also known as "Bob Bandfield," sent an email to Corrupt Client 1, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, forwarding IRS Form W-8BEN signed by GODFREY as the nominee for the IBC in response to a request received by Corrupt Client 1 from a U.S. transfer agent. On or about December 4, 2013, the defendant KELVIN LEACH sent an email to BANDFIELD informing BANDFIELD that a client requested that $75,000 be wire transferred from a brokerage account to a law firm in the United States. On or about December 16, 2013, the defendant ROHN
KNOWLES sent an email to BANDFIELD, copying LEACH, in which he forwarded an email from Corrupt Client 2, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, requesting six wire transfers totaling $1.9 million for various IBCs.
29. The IPC-TIS-LGM Wiretaps also revealed that the defendants were engaged in similar fraudulent schemes with Corrupt U.S. Clients to the ones exposed by the undercover operation and the emails from the search warrants. For example, on or about March 24, 2014, Corrupt Client 3, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, called the defendant ANDREW GODFREY, whose name he received from the defendant KELVIN LEACH, to have IPC CORP establish an IBC for him to enable him to trade through TITAN. On or about March 26, 2014, Corrupt Client 4, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, called GODFREY and stated that his biggest concern was getting his funds wired back into the United States. In response, GODFREY advised Corrupt Client 4 that he/she could use his/her IBC account at UNICORN and UNICORN's unidentifiable debit cards to alleviate this concern and get his funds transferred. On or about March 28, 2014, Corrupt Client 5, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, called the defendant ROHN KNOWLES to inquire about his trading order and wire transfers to a third party. In response, KNOWLES stated that TITAN could execute third-party wire transfers but reminded Corrupt Client 5 that he needed to send the wire instructions through GODFREY or "whoever the signatory is on the account." On or about May 19, 2014, GODFREY called Corrupt Client 6, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, and stated that IPC CORP's fraudulent scheme using sham IBC and LLC structures was created to evade the IRS, specifically FATCA. On or about May 29, 2014, LEACH called a representative at Cayman National Bank to confirm three wire transfers, including one wire transfer that was requested in the name of an IBC.
30. The IPC-TIS-LGM Wiretaps also revealed that the defendants were involved in a conspiracy to manipulate the stock of Cannabis-Rx, Inc., a microcap or penny stock company which traded under the ticker symbol CANA. CANA's purported business plan consisted o f expanding its business to cater to the real estate needs o f the regulated cannabis industry in states where such business was licensed and permitted. CANA's purported business plan also consisted of purchasing real estate assets and leasing facilities to licensed marijuana growers and dispensary owners for their operations.
31. Specifically, the defendant BRIAN DE WIT was actively involved in the manipulation of CANA's stock. On or about and between March 27, 2014 and April 16, 2014, DE WIT and Corrupt Client 7, an individual whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, engaged in a series of orchestrated transactions which resulted in CANA's stock price plummeting from $13.77 per share on March 27, 2014 to $0.50 per share on April 16, 2014. On March 28, 2014 alone, DE WIT received at least five telephone calls from Corrupt Client 7 with specific instructions to fraudulently orchestrate the trading of CANA's stock. That day, CANA's stock, which had not traded since July 2, 2013, had a trading volume of 189,800 shares and the share price plummeted from the previous day's closing price of$13.77 per share to a closing price of $1.90 per share.
Was not aware FS global was on his server, thanks. Remember the website url? I'll try looking it up today. If he dumps that many shares don't you think he'd want to conceal his name as the beneficiary of the stock sales via a nominee in an offshore scheme? Reading through Godfrey and Bandfield's IPC Corp scheme, they basically had a menu or stable of IBC llc's for their clients to choose from in setting up the scam like what I think Galaxy Worldwide was back in 2013. The shares were returned but since they are a form 15, couldn't they just say they were returned and not get caught?
I think since ntek had dealings with IPC Corp back in 2013 that FS global and Royal capital may be fronts for offshore accounts. I don't know how to find the link except wait and hope it comes out in a court doc.
Godfrey dealt with over 100 crooked OTC insiders to conceal their identities. I don't have a pacer account, does anyone know if the list is available to the public?
If foley is simply dumping millions of shares and sticking the proceeds in a us bank account he's nuts. I think it may go deeper? Maybe I'm nutz.
On the first day of Christmas,
NTEK gave to me,
A brand new SONY UHD TV.
(*cough* 2014)
On the second day of Christmas.
NTEK gave to me,
2 Lawsuits Pending,
And a brand new SONY UHD TV.
(*cough* 2014)
On the third day of Christmas,
NTEK gave to me,
[Next installment, "coming soon"]
It appears Wong has fired up the ol delete button from crisis management hq. It appears the Outerwebz has learned from the best. lmao you can't make this stuff up.
We need to start the "12 days of NTEK" lyrics.
That's a good catch. Seems like magic Ted D may have missed that. Regulatory stuff like that doesn't apply to ntek lol. Wowz