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.
All that means is that a corporation was formed for InVogue Accessories. Has nothing to do with a stock symbol. Every corporation that is formed has stock authorized. Your local neighborhood mom and pop corner deli is probably a corporation with shares issued and outstanding. Does't mean it's got a ticker symbol and is publicly traded.
Steve Nickolas and Andrew Stewart patent number: 6,855,358. From Feb. 2005
Better plan on playing 18,000 holes!!
The whiners are now out in full force. This board is certainly entertaining!!! Poor Kevin hasn't been heard from for all of 6 days and now he's part of the problem, or Steve in disquise, or a spy for NUBV, etc., etc. Maybe he has more important things to do. Obviously a lot of people on this board don't. There are some people on this board that 75,000,000 shares and $35,000 invested is not worth a lot of effort when their income is very high. I would guess Kevin is one of them. Maybe you're lucky he's taken the interest that he has in NUBV.
Have watched suppliers, vendors and business owners interact for many years. One thing is a fact - if you are a business owner and owe money to suppliers and creditors from past business failures they will still be happy to supply you in your new business if they think it has a chance of being successful. They may tighten the term of payment, reduce the amounts they will initially supply, etc., but they will still sell to you and view this as a way to get back lost $. Have seen it happen over and over.
Articles of Incorporation are registered with the state of incorporation and are public documents. You can request a copy for a small fee. The Articles will tell you little or nothing. Simply gives name of corporation, address, type of business, authorized shares (not who owns them) and the initial directors. These can all be changed (and usually are) by subsequent meetings of the BOD.
Hey. Thanks for your effort. I know Colunbia and Tysons are malls in high income areas. Dulles Town Center and Fair Oaks Malls also have high income demographics and are near Tysons. If you get nearby might want to check them out.
Again, thanks for your effort.
Seems to be some confusion with InVogue. If InVogue is a separate co.,and it looks like it is, then shares have already been issued. You can't have a corporation without issued shares. Question is who owns the shares. We don't know. MNTY could own all the shares of InVogue. If InVogue is later spun off, that has no effect on the value of the shares owned by MNTY and thus MNTY shareholders. Let's say InVogue is worth $5,000,000 and has 1,000,000 shares issued to MNTY. Theoretically each share is worth $5.00. InVogue is spun off and then InVogue issues 2,000,000 more shares to public shareholders and collects $10,000,000 for them. Now InVogue has 3,000,000 shares issued and in worth $15,000,000. Same as before spin off - each share worth $5.00. Only difference is MNTY shareholders now own 1/3 of company worth $15,000,000 instead of all of company worth $5,000,000. Everybody is spending inordinate amounts of time speculating on what is fact. We don't know yet. CHILL!!
Go on zillow.com. It's a house in a development valued at 2.21 million.
Par value is a meaningless term, used for accounting purposes. No relation to stock price. Many companies have authorized stock without par value (ie par value zero). When you form a corporation a lot of states charge you a tax based on the par value of authorized shares.
Since bottled water is regulated much less than tap water, bottled water must, in general, be worse than I thought.
Unfortunately most things I have read claim tap water is more strictly regulated AND safer than bottled water. See http://www.communitywater.com/core/content_tapvsbottled.htm
All it means it that since the address for Enhanced Beverages, LLC and NUBV are exactly the same, I'll assume that NUBV now owns the patent.
Steve and Andrew DO NOT have the patent. Patent was assigned to Enhanced Beverages. The assignment transfers all rights of ownership. That's how inventors make their money. They invent and then assign to a company who wants the patent and is willing to pay for it. Sometimes payment is shares or ownership interest in the assignee.
Most normal corporate actions (ratification of Board of Directors, etc) require a majority vote. Extraordinary corporate actions (merger, buyout, etc) usually require a higher percentage of votes. Percentage is set by corporate By-Laws. It's usually at least 2/3 and sometimes 3/4. What we don't know is how many shares are out there and who owns them. If Ron and his atty group own enough shares then they can do pretty much wwhat they want as long as it's not illegal or fraudulent.
OK, so what do we really know? Steve is gone - removed. By vote of shareholders. How did that happen? Normally Board of Directors appoints officers. Board of directors is elected by shareholders. If Board wants to get rid of officer that their perogative. Most extraordinary action of the co.(acquisition, merger, etc.) requires a 2/3 vote of the shares - but not always- could be 51% depending on by-laws of corporation. A vote of shareholders can often be held by telephone in most states. If they held over 2/3 of shares they can pretty much do what they want as long as not illegal or fraud, etc. Thing that's unusual is that atty is now sole member of BOD. What happened to rest of Bd? Bd makes decisions on long range plans of Co. Officers carry out day to day plans. Highly unusual to have BOD be ONE person.
Patents- Patents are usually owned by co. I doubt if Steve owned patents - they are assets of co.
One thing certain is that there is turmoil in co. Focus will now be on what is going on internally and not on getting product to market or moving co. forward. That is not good news. Also not good news is if Ron is who we think he is. We were told he was no longer involved in co. HE'S BACK!!! His history tells us that shareholders are low priority.
Have to wait and see how this plays out.
One of the reasons I liked this co's chances was Steve's 30 yrs in the business. He had done this before. Ron, on the other, hand does not have a very good record with his prior co's or his treatment of shareholders.
45 million was mine. Had limit order to buy in at .0002 since this morn.
I always worry about the viability of companies that release PR's that look like someone forgot to proof them or even worse DID proof them - "less costly than others producer use" ???
Your right. I don't see a whole lot of difference. Kraft foods is a little bit bigger than NUBV as far as marketing, etc. (sarcasm). I think NUBV would have a lot of trouble competing for shelf space. Also I'm not sure what the big deal is with zero calorie vitamin water. There are a lot of fruit flavored drinks that are zero calorie - just add vitamins to THEM. Not all fruit flavored vitamin drinks are sugar ladden or filled with bad stuff. Seems like NUBV would only appeal to a segment of the population that likes the taste of just water.
What happened to all NUBV supporters that were going to play it all week??? Seems to have dived. From .0013 to .0007 - WOW.
.0004 too tempting. I bought 5,000,000. Limit order got filled right away.
Shakerz on MNTY at 3:30. Whether you like or hate him, he has a following.
Bought thru Etrade online several times. Last bought HWBI online thru Etrade in Nov with no problem, so something must have made them change to not accepting online orders.
Etrade no longer accepting online trades in HWBI. Must call it in. When did that start and what's that all about?
Wow! "'respected opposition' the enemies of evolution and change for the benefit of all". Is this a company we are investing in or a south american revolution? I hardly ever post. I have several million shares of PNMS. I bought them because at the time I felt the risk/reward ratio was very skewed toward reward. I don't think that's the case now. That's the nature of the beast with any investment-you invest when the percentages are in your favor. I just feel sorry for everyone who seems to be hoping for a home run on this stock. C'mon people. There are a lot of smart people on wall Street. A lot of young MBA's who are looking to make a name for themselves at brokerage firms. You think they wouldn't be jumping on this stock if they thought there was a real chance of 2000%-4000% return? Reminds me of the commercial on TV. Guy comes up to you in Starbucks and says buy this stock with ties to South America from me and I guarantee to buy it back in two years at 20 times what you paid. You tell him to get lost. As the announcer says 'it's a lot easier to detect scams face to face than when they approach you on the internet". Really hope this turns out well for everyone but I see a lot of common sense being thrown out the window.
How can we lose here? Anyone who holds shares above .0006 loses (and you're making a BIG ASSUMPTION that IPKL shares will get .0006). After the asset purchase there is NOTHING left - no assets, no money in bank accounts, etc. How can you pursue a new business venture with nothing. The only thing left is a publicly traded shell-publicly traded shells are not that valuable- especially split among all the IPKL shares out there.
WOW! Switch to decaf!!!!!
Chart does not look good. Has broken 25 and 50 DMA. I'm out until I see some strenghtening.
News out. Rated speculative buy. Target $1.00. Unfortunately it's a paid for research report but research co. says it's 'objective'.
Is a sheister a female shyster????
Anthony had a subscription website. The fees to subscribe were high. His forte was shorting stocks. He seemed to have an uncanny ability to pick winners. He would select a stock, go on his subscription website and bash it and then go on silicon investor and other sites and bash it - after his subscribers had already shorted it. He was successful because he had a large following. Many of the things he said about the co's were not completely true. He was able to raise enough doubt in other investor's minds that the stocks went down. I think he later got the idea - why not just go to the company and extort $ from them for not selecting them to bash.
Janice. Google Anthony Elgindy. Convicted of extorting payments from co's or he would bash them online on his web site.
Small car lot? I've got more cars in my driveway!! LOL.
9;26 AM Sharkster says sell at .018 if you can. Reverse merger news taking longer than expected. But if you wait, it pays off.