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.
If Jon were truly serious about not selling, he would’ve simply extended the conversion date further in the future for his shares. That he didn’t do that and then gave a meaningless statement about his intentions tells you everything you need to know about whether he’s actually planning on selling or not. His statement only fooled those who already hold deep convictions that this is a great company and nothing wrong is happening here.
He said he was “not planning to start now.” When is now? Maybe he wasn’t planning on selling those shares two weeks ago, but maybe he is planning on selling them as of today. See? It was a meaningless statement.
I’m not planning on going out to eat tomorrow. But I might still go out to eat if a coworker or a friend asks me to go out. I’m not planning on it now though. Do you see how that works?
If Jon were truly serious, he would have extended the conversion date further in the future.
It’s not a SEC matter. And the SEC almost never involves itself in OTC stocks anyway. That’s why this will never be uplisted. It can’t. DLM and Jon wouldn’t be able to withstand the scrutiny that comes with being listed on a serious exchange. They can barely withstand the scrutiny from a few individuals online.
I already told you that it was a clear violation of Jon’s fiduciary duty. It was also a material event and should have gotten an 8-K, but investors didn’t learn about it until the 10-K/A was filed like 6 months later.
I just gave you all the evidence. The licensing fee is payable to Arknet. Jon owns Arknet. It’s all in the 10-K. The rest of the information isn’t important.
It looks to me like Julia Culled Investments was simply renamed Arknet, Inc.
We don’t have any evidence that DLM ever purchased common shares with his own money. He’s never denied the accusation that he’s never purchased shares, so I think we can assume that his shares were granted to him by Jon in exchange for his promotional efforts.
You can tell that they’re the same entity because the preferred shares granted to Julia Culled Investments as part of the licensing agreement show up on the next 10-K as being owned by Arknet, Inc. in the Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters footnote. Julia Culled Investments also had the same address as another failed company that was founded by Jon.
Too bad that’s never going to happen. By the way how’s the patent enforcement situation going?
They created a contract without shareholder approval to take money from shareholders in exchange for a patent that 1) Tautachrome doesn’t need and 2) should have been the property of Tautachrome anyway since it was developed by Tautachrome’s own CEO during the course of his tenure.
I know this concept is slightly abstract, but NEOs have a fiduciary duty to shareholders. Jon was an NEO. Patents he files during the course of his tenure that are related to Tautachrome’s business activities should be the property of Tautachrome. If you work for a company, the products and ideas generated in the course of your work are the property of the company. The CEO of Coca-Cola can’t make a new formula for a new drink and license it to Coca-Cola. The CEO of Ford can’t develop new battery technology on his own and then license it to Ford. These things are clear violations of their fiduciary duty.
I’ve actually taken business law courses, so this isn’t just “speculation”.
I don’t need screenshots. It’s right there in the licensing agreement.
The nature of the licensing agreement is inappropriate and wrong.
J Culled Investments is Arknet Inc. It’s a holding company owned by Jon and probably DLM that licenses a patent for 7.5% of REVENUE to Tautachrome. This is another way that Jon and DLM extract money from Tautachrome.
Not surprising. Everyone there preaches transparency, but serious questions are either left unanswered or DLM gives a vague response. The really nasty responses to the questions about Jon and DLMs past seem to indicate that even the most bullish shareholders know that there is something sketchy about it and would simply rather avoid even thinking about it.
I wonder how long they will try to go this month without updating the OS.
Hey, how’s that patent enforcement going?
How’s that patent enforcement working? Oh it’s not? Maybe that’s because you can’t just patent NFTs or the metaverse. You can patent specific processes/products but not the idea. Similar to how you can patent a specific drug that treats cancer but you can’t patent “cancer treatment” in general. Make sense?
Great question since it seems they’re the ones making money here.
The fact that DLM couldn’t explain this in 30 seconds is a terrible sign for longs.
The fact that he just said that Tautachrome is further along in building the metaverse than Facebook is even worse. Facebook spent billions on this last Q. Tautachrome can barely afford to pay Honeycomb a few hundred grand a year for R&D. Facebook has thousands of employee working in this. Tautachrome has zero employees. Facebook has real AR products. Tautachrome just has some 3D models that can be overlaid over whatever your camera is pointed at. Seriously how does anyone believe any of this?
It should have been accrued but not paid. So if will appear as an expense on the income statement and as an increase in accounts payable on the balance sheet. Assuming it was recorded correctly. This is so easy DLM should be able to tell you without even looking at the 10-K or consulting the accounting firm that prepares these statements.
How will it work? Please enlighten me. I can’t seem to understand it. The 80 year old woman gets it. The cat lady gets it. That other lady with no cell phone gets it. But somehow I don’t. Help me out here.
How? They’re digital Chuck E Cheese tokens. What can you even buy with them? Items from the five vendors that actually use the app?
If you’re saying that he was part of a “coordinated attack,” then you’re assigning a motive to his questions. You are assuming you know what he’s thinking.
Let me make it really clear.
There is no shadowy cabal conspiring to attack this company. That’s a conspiracy theory that serves to explain the poor share price performance. The shares are down because there’s nothing happening here. If someone or a group wanted to take down this company, they could easily strain its resources with a lawsuit.
How can you tell “the tone” of a question on Telegram? You have no way of knowing what E A was thinking when he asked his questions.
Incredible. Now we’re supposed to believe that Tautachrome is somehow the victim in all this. After all the lies, misleading PRs and vague answers, the True Believers still think that tough questions are an attack. The only victims here are the shareholders who didn’t understand what they were buying.
Nah that not it. It’s the fact that even shareholders know that the answers to the questions these people are asking are not good, so they attack the people asking the questions. DLM can’t even give straight answers. “Just ask the accountants” “Highest usage ever”. Totally meaningless.
It’s not a “coordinated attack”. And if it were, why not just concede to disclosing active users in each Q? Why give the “FUDsters” ammunition? If active user numbers are good, then that’s one less thing people can criticize. It would support the idea that this platform is gaining interest.
So why not disclose it?
Because there are probably something like 200 active users. That’s embarrassingly low. Truly humiliating for everyone involved. That’s why, instead of answering the question, you label it a “coordinated attack” and a “combative question”. That way you can dismiss it and avoid facing this evidence of failure.
Combative nature? Coordinated attack? Apparently this company is so fragile that asking simple questions is seen as a coordinated attack. Active user numbers are ABYSMAL. Everyone knows this. That’s why nobody wants to disclose it.
Absolutely bizarre to see people upset that someone was asking for disclosure of the number of users. I think this is because a lot of the shareholders are subconsciously aware that the number of users is really low and don’t want to have to actually face that number. Again, also look at how DLM made a few dismissive comments and then let his army of rubes fight off any further questions.
Hey E A. What you’re experiencing on Telegram is exactly what I’m talking about. When you ask hard questions, DLM gives vague answers or no answers at all. Then he steps out of the way so the other people can attack you or drown out your questions in a sea of unrelated comments. This is how DLM gets to pretend to be a proponent of “transparency”. Yes, he does make himself available for questions on Telegram. But no, he doesn’t answer actually any difficult ones. Also, he doesn’t appear to understand accounting AT ALL. So asking accounting questions is futile.
The “transparency” is all an illusion. DLM only pretends to be transparent. He’s always willing to discuss positive things but is extremely evasive when asked tough questions. He’s downplayed dilution, the inability of this platform to add users and increase revenue and the inability to uplist. He won’t share any details about past press releases about which no updates have been provided. Only sharing positive information while minimizing discussion of negative information isn’t transparency. It’s promotion. That’s what DLM does. He’s a penny stock promoter. He’s been doing it for years, and some of the names he’s promoted are down more than 99%.
But I’m sure this time is different…
The preferred shares were included on the balance sheet. If they were included in the “common shares” line, then they would have been counted twice.
And yes, this does mean that there was immediate dilution of 1.4 billion shares. I’ve made the point on here before that the OS was higher than it appeared because these preferreds existed. I think someone even asked DLM on Telegram and he dismissed it by saying “Not if the holders of those preferred shares choose not to convert them”. Well they did convert them.
The preferred shares were not previously including in the “shares outstanding” number you’re talking about.
The AS will have to be repeatedly increased to allow for the conversion of more convertible debt into common shares since convertible debt is the only major source of financing available to this company.
Wow. Does this update include the cryptotoken that was promised by the end of September?
Remember when there was going to be a cryptotoken by the end of September? What happened to that?
I don’t believe Jon when he says he won’t sell his shares.
He says he’s “not planning to start now.”
What does that mean? How long is now? Does he plan to start selling tomorrow? Next week? Next month?
They own a 3D scanner. That’s it.
Did common shareholders have a choice in the matter? No. Common shareholders weren’t even aware of the licensing agreement until the 10-K/A was filed ~6 months later.
So yes, they were forced. They had no choice in the matter and couldn’t express their opinion by selling shares because they weren’t even made aware of an EXTREMELY MATERIAL development.
Yeah, I can read financial statements. I also understand the incentives that DLM and Jon have through the share structure they’ve created and the licensing agreement Jon forced on Tautachrome.
This is extremely obvious stuff. If you showed this to any accountant or investment advisor or really anyone who works in finance, they’d tell you the exact same thing.
When this fails, DLM will want to keep shareholders as far away from each other as possible. Otherwise they might coordinate to file a lawsuit against him. Someone should make a Tautachrome Class Action Telegram group just in case.
Perhaps he shouldn’t have chosen a career in defrauding old people and novice investors.