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.
No, I didn't misconstrue anything. That's what you do quite consistently as one reads your posts and now you are also becoming a copycat, saying I do the same thing whatever I say you are doing. Sophomoric but understandable. There was nothing ABOUT me in my post. I simply wanted to disagree with your statement that the vplm story was same as the wiper story, and I did so very simply but I saw there was the need to mention also that my opposite opinion was not based on the usual rebuttals, so I added that with an example, to save anyone going down that same old road again. You're problem is you're ornary in your replies and you keep twisting words or misunderstanding them and you seem to be missing those particular neurons that would allow you to otherwise be able to discern the difference between posting a differing opinion vs posting ABOUT oneself. That's ok, I lend you those neurons so you can see the difference. When someone posts their OPINION, that's not the same as someone talking about oneself. Pretty simple concept, both things. As to me replying to you "as if" you asked me, lol, I would have to judge that as your ego or similar to when peeps think others are talking about them when they aren't. Fact o matter is that I went out of my way to explain why I added the additional comment above and beyond my simple comment that it's not the same as the wiper story. You see, I mentioned, for your benefit of understanding, that this issue about the wiper story had been gone over here multiple times and normally, I don't like to make short statements about something without in some way supporting it or backing it up. So since I didn't want to go thru my whole set of reasons for why I don't see the wiper story same as the vplm story, instead I thought to just mention that my reasons were not the usual ones that are always shot down. That was INTENDED to help you see that I wasn't just disagreeing for the sake of itself but surprise, you missed that and turned into it's all about me. . And of course posters do not need to reply to a post made to them in oder to want to chime in. You imply that's not good but there's nothing wrong with doing so I'm here to tell you.
Lastly, I don't at the moment recall exactly what court info your referring to OR that I needed you to explain. I'd have to go back and relook, but I have the sense that you THOUGHT I needed you to explain something when in fact I was rather looking for you to show what YOU thought about the court info. Again, I don't really recall the details at the moment but if you choose to belabor it (which reminds me, I remember giving my opinion and saying you gave yours and I gave mine and we might lay it to rest but that wasn't good enough for you and you opted to go on about it), you will quote it and I will most likely show again how you did the chubby checker or needed those unfortunately missing neurons (not your fault). Actuality, you seem to think you have to explain alot of things that don't need splainin
The patents have, for about 20 yrs, proven themselves......to have zero value.
When you're not twisting things, you're misconstruing them. I didn't say or imply it was about me. I simply jumped in to say it's not the same as the wiper story and then, since I said that and since I wasn't gonna go thru that whole deal again, I thought I should at least add that the different conclusions I've reached were not based on the usual reasons that ppl often respond with that have nothing to do with my reasons, ie, what I listed. I said that to save anyone the trouble of bringing those same invalid reasons. For ex, they repeatedly try to make me understand that the patents are valid due to all the IPR decisions. I have always stated that the patent are valid, but not for that reason.
So again, it wasn't about me it was about me disagreeing with the so called good example......and then adding something to remind that my reasons aren't the usual ones that get debunked.
It's ok that you usually find fault... Not my fault, lol
No, it not "a great example"... It's a far different story and situation. This wipers thing has been brought up and discussed here numerous times. If you think it's the same thing, that's fine. I don't. I've explained all that here before.
Besides, it has no bearing whatsoever on my conclusion that there are no infringements and the patents are useless. I've explained enough times, in great detail, my basis for that conclusion. It has nothing to do with wipers or companies stalling or invalid patents or slow courts or anything along any of those lines, even tho ppl keep ascribing those reasons to me, as though I have ever used them to explain my sentiments about vplm and the value of the patents. Nothing whatsoever. My conclusions are based on well thought out inferences and dot connecting. It's the same as how we know almost everything there is to know about atoms, via inference rather than direct observation.
That's what you think, but not the way it is from my perspective. Vplm thrives off ppl who believe that's how it is. It's been explained... In any event, why don't you explain why you think the bigs are stalling. For what purpose?
There you go again, assuming you are knowledgeable where others aren't. 1st you start with saying "no" as if to summarily dismiss what I had said that you are replying to, but you said no then went on to agree with what I said, which is simply that electronic trading is way faster, and more accurate I might add, than bodies on the floor of an exchange.
As well, it's progress. It's the evolution of trading. It's incorrect to say trading wasn't designed for this because peeps used to make deals under a tree. That was then this is now. Electronic trading works and makes sense and is necessary. That's why H. Ford invented the assembly line. Progress. Speed. Efficiency. To say the way it is isn't what was intended is fallacious. When things or processes are invented, generally speaking, they are not looking far into the future for their workability, they are working with the here and now. Then, progress is when human ingenuity comes up with better ideas and then those ideas are incorporated and thats how things progress. If you wish to go find a tree and write a snail mail to some broker to buy or sell, then by all means. Today its electronic as almost everything is and that's because we are the creator. Again with telling me how I can do research, lolol. To coin a phrase, if I may, arrogance will get you far.....over the cliff.
As I had already reported and posted yesterday, chat AI is the same technology as how Google works. No one has claimed either to necessarily be accurate, but the obvious thing to realize is that they provide lots of results from scraping and allow one the opportunity to research various results and to use checks and balances to discern whats true and not. It's called fact checking. I think most peeps already know that just because something is on the net doesn't make it true.
The issue wasn't whether you said you couldn't or wasn't sure and I never tried to make that a issue. The issue as I made clear from the get, was about you saying some court document info was privy to you and maybe not to others. I didn't understand how that would be so and so I questioned you about it. You also suggested I should go to the trouble and expense of hiring a Texas lawyer to get said info. So I did my own research, something that I've done a massive amount of on vplm amongst other stick issues, for the past 13 yrs or so and have said so here from and demonstrated it here with many documents and laws and definitions, etc. etc. Anyone that has read much of this board would know that. Even today I posted legal DD here. And yet you now are, lol, claiming to have taught me how to do research. That's funny of you to say. You haven't taught me anything, but if it makes feel important to say that, that's ok. And your claim that I was relying on you for research is pretty funny. I like jokes.
So as was saying, after I found your privy claim to be questionable, I did the research, as I always instinctively do and found there was absolutely no validity to what you said. I know you're backpedaling now and will twist and turn it, but that is what went down. There is no such "privy" or privacy issue as you tried to claim might be the case. And you didn't sound as tho you were aware but unless you ordered more than $30 worth of docs from Pacer at a dime apiece, in a quarter, then the docs were free, so no excuse there and if you did happen to wind up paying for whatever docs you were originally referring to, most likely it was under a dollar or so and regardless of that, the research shows that those docs are constitutionally public with no copyright so no reason whatsoever, contrary to what you were trying to feed me, that you could not have shared what you stated might not be shareable. And there is no such thing as court docs that only you are "privy to".
Thus, once again, my instincts and common sense turned out to be right when I had a slight problem with what you originally claimed. The posts are there to see and support what I just said. So now you can:
You misunderstood me. I normally get what I'm told the 1st time. I understood everything you said perfectly. This excerpt from my post shows where I differenciated between Google and your link:
"But it sounds like the service you left the link for is solely there to explain court docs. In fact I should quit guessing about it and go check out your link see exactly how it works."
However, I had not yet tried the link and mistakenly got the idea that it was specifically geared to court docs. I have since looked closely into it and I now understand exactly what it is and had posted something about that. I also posted some info about the fallibility of AI and chatGPT. So you must have misunderstood me. I did not say it was Google. What I was trying to say in that post was based on you saying it (chatGPT) was like Google. I merely was saying I didn't know you could use Google for translating legalese (which I thought better of later). I was just alluding to your comparison to Google to help point out that your link was probably much better. See what I mean now? Then I said I would stop guessing and go check out the link. I did so right after and now am fully up on what it is, which is indeed same technology as google, ie, AI. Sorry if my choice of words threw you off.
Incidentally, there's a new PLUS version of chatGPT and chatGPT will not be staying free.
Thought I should note that AI in general and specifically ChatGPT, are not to be depended upon or trusted esp in important cases where accuracy is paramount. Always do appropriate amt of parallel DD to compare and corroborate facts before accepting them as gospel. I just thought that's a disclaimer that should be said.
“Knowledge acquisition is the difficult problem of obtaining knowledge for AI applications.[c] Modern AI gathers knowledge by "scraping" the internet (including Wikipedia). The knowledge itself was collected by the volunteers and professionals who published the information (who may or may not have agreed to provide their work to AI companies).[29] This "crowd sourced" technique does not guarantee that the knowledge is correct or reliable. The knowledge of Large Language Models (such as ChatGPT) is highly unreliable -- it generates misinformation and falsehoods (known as "hallucinations"). Providing accurate knowledge for these modern AI applications is an unsolved problem."
I'm thinking that most trading these days is electronic. As far as what you said about flash.....so what is the problem with it? To me, flash infers the speed at which these programs can operate. Seems necessary these days?
My take is that federal law and constitutional law trumps judges discretion even in Texas. I think Ghost only wanted to make the general point that in most cases, court is open. I guess I inadvertently got this whole thing going when I asked or suggested that courts are open, but I only said that because someone said something about they being privy to certain court docs while others might not be. I had a problem with that so I questioned it. Turns out, he was talking about the fees paid via Pacer, but to me that didn't adequately answer why he thought he had to hold back certain info he said was ok for his eyes but maybe not others. So I looked up about the copying and sharing of such info gathers from Pacer and there is no copyright nor any reason the info cannot be shared online because it's public info to begin with. So I think the poster was wrong to say the docs were only for him. No reason I could find why he couldn't freely share. That then led into this whole discussion about open courtroom and judge discretion. The answer is that indeed it sometimes is up to a judges discretion and in other cases it's a matter of constitutional law. In most cases where there is not sensitive and/or personal privacy and safety involved, courts are usually to be open to the public.
For anyone interested, here's some Texas law on the issue:
https://www.tdcaa.com/journal/revisiting-the-perils-of-closing-a-courtroom-to-the-public/#:~:text=Before%20a%20judge%20may%20exclude,tailored%20to%20protect%20that%20value.
I didn't even know that you COULD use Google to translate legalese. Is that so? I mean not directly, more likely you'd just get a whole mix of different incoming opinions in conflict with ea other if you tried to use Google for that purpose. But it sounds like the service you left the link for is solely there to explain court docs. In fact I should quit guessing about it and go check out your link see exactly how it works.
10-4 on the old school values. That's me. But I have no problem with electronic trading. Electronics don't lie or manipulate as long as hoo-mans ain't tweaking the software, which of course they are. Sad truth is when money is involved, human beings will do whatever it takes to get their hands on it. That's generally speaking. Not saying everyone is a crook, but sooner or later, 99.9% do crooked stuff for money sake. Especially when times get rough or their freedom or continued existence is at stake. You can't even trust yourself sometimes when push comes to shove.
Was no need for you to apologize to anyone. You just needed to a little widening of your perspective. And again, must be an awful thin line between greed and not greed. What is the dividing line?
As to why I'm here... I've told my whole story here a million times. I've been 100% truthful. Yet it begets all sorts of disbelieving me and disrespect and ridicule and accusations of everything under the sun, mostly because those peeps are simply mean spirited or dumb or followers of well known mean spirited ppl with hardcore agendas. Some of it is utterly amazing to see ppl who act try to present themselves as mature, smart, knowledgeable, good judges of character, fair, objective, etc etc........but then throw all that out and act like children, not nice children but mean children who were abused. And they talk so knowingly and sure if themselves but are the worst judges of character there can be. And they act very sophomoric and pedestrian and deceitful. Of course all of those attributes are their mental issues, not mine. I don't harass ppl or get into name calling or rude nasty vulgar PMs sent on a regular daily basis for years. And yet, there are peeps here who follow ppl like that as tho they are god or a guru. Me, I get alot of entertainment from some of it. If it becomes annoying I just block. Some of them are so driven, they continue to post mean spirited stuff to me daily even tho they are blocked and i never see their posts. A couple ppl pm'd me to tell me but I tell them not to pm me as I don't care. Their mental issues are theirs not mine.
To answer you question, I'm here for a number of reasons. For one, I'm a long time stockholder and come here to see what's happening. Also, it's a great source of entertainment to me. Also this board is like social media to me. I don't do Facebook or X or any of the main social media. Never have. I think they are bad places where you just give away all your privacy and let yourself be used by all the bigs involved who buy and sell your personal info left and right. At the same time I like to talk and especially I like to write and here I have something in common with everyone, vplm. I also have done a ton of research and I'm smart in certain areas and have followed this play as closely as I can for almost 13 yrs and I believe every word I've said here about vplm and I figure I'm just as entitled to speak my mind as to what I have determined as those who are pro vplm. That's my right and that's what the forum is here for. Meanwhile there are many who have shown clearly that they think if you aren't pro vplm you dont belong here, lolol. I love pushing back and pushing their buttons especially since I usually don't say anything unless I know what I'm talking about and can back it up. So it's a great for of social media for me. I also provide lots of good info and documents and insight. And I definitely have a well developed sense of humor and provide some laffs here and there. No hidden agendas. Never any thoughts of driving price up down or anywhere. Never shorted. And the dummies who hang on every word I say and are infatuated with me and can't wait to say something hateful to me, I hope it makes them feel better and I hope it helps keep them off the streets, haha. All I can say to them is wise up, don't hate. There's no time for hate. Get a grip. You're not impressing anyone except yourself.
I truly hope vplm pulls off a big bingo but in my head and heart, I'm pretty sure I know better as I've spelled out many times why I think so. I've written off my remaining shares to likely never be more than toilet paper but there's always that miracle possibility. I'm locked into the black forever with vplm as long as I don't buy anymore which I won't. And if I ever get the 50 cents I want for m y shares, too bad oh well...
Makes one wonder about the veracity of the sec as well. There are volumes attesting to sec corruption. The fcc takes kickbacks why not the sec?
Settlement in principle was announced 5/2. If that's not the settlement date, then where is the settlement date listed?
I'd have to agree there's some truth to that but I don't know about 95%. That amount of peeps not caring about the truth is scary. But hey, if ppl want to play stocks like they were a scratch off or a one arm bandit, that's their perogative. That can be fun. Maybe they don't want to do the research cuz they already know that the really low priced pennystocks are a complete crap shoot so they want to take their chances. It all comes down to whether you can afford to lose or not. I take it very seriously and don't want to lose. That's why quit gambling. And I have lots of fun here and make alot of jokes but all lightheartedly and once I realized what I think vplm is up to and that day trading was too risky, I quit buying vplm.
"Is it time yet to face the reality that the only reason anyone bought this stock was for greed?"
I can't agree with that. It's true for some I suppose but in my case and others I'm sure, I bought in way back before any of what you suggest is true. I got in somewhere around 2009 or so. I know it was that far back because that's when I started buying stocks, having recognized the apparent major opportunity to get into it after the big crash, even though I knew absolutely zero about stocks and the market. And also because I remember getting in somewhere 1 to 2 yrs before I discovered there was a msg board. For a long time I had no idea there was this msg board. And I did register here almost back to 2010, so that puts me getting into vplm near 2009. Thats almost 15 yrs. It was long before there was even any talk about patents. I had rcvd a tip about vplm and when I saw it was a company involved in voip, I was already aware of voip and thought it would get very big because it already was getting big.
I don't consider that greed per se. Greed is a funny and somewhat ambiguous word. Where does it cross the line from simply wanting to leverage things to make a profit.....to becoming obsessive or overreaching, thus greedy?
And the way you characterized it is all wrong... It sounds as though you're channeling your own feelings into what the rest of shareholders thought and believed. You need to, as I have often recommended ppl do, go back and read the history of this board. Only then, can you truly know what everyone was thinking as it's all documented right here.
Doing so, you would find that some or many had already got on the bus long before any talk of acquisition or patents. Then, fast fwd to about 2011 when almost to a person, all believed in the BS story STORY (read yarn) that vplm began putting out there (read spinning) in what is to me, the infamous PRs put out repeatedly, one after another, full of lies, by Dennis Chang, then CEO or president or whatever the hell he was. It was those story spinning PRs that persuaded me and many others to buy and buy or to become new shareholders. Many BIG promises were made in those PRs, which were never honored, BUT THEY DID INDEED GARNER MANY NEW SHAREHOLDERS AND SOLD MANY SHARES (to get the managers of vplm all setup). To be honest, I can't say for certain if and when the scamminess began before this or later on after lord Emu took over. It's possible that those PRs I refer to were on the up and up until after the deal was done completely and lord Emu came in. So what parts kipping, sawyer, Chang played, in terms of when it went rogue, I can't say for sure. It became known to me that something was very wrong when it became apparent that vplm was up for sale. All the plans, and the plans were fantasic and exciting, were abruptly thrown under the bus. And then lord Emu took over. So hard to tell how early the scamminess started and whether it was preplanned or evolved.
Point is, the word greed has a perjoritive component, as tho the ppl that invested in vplm were doing so for some untoward reason. I don't see that. Perhaps for some, but most, as you can read the history here, just wanted to invest in a winner. I don't percieve that as greed. It's like any other business. You invest in it and try to see a profit. Calling it greed kind of makes it the fault of the shareholders when it doesn't happen. Where I fault the shareholders is letting vplm slide and getting away with the way things have gone.
Mr WBW... Your post poses very good questions, some directly, some indirectly. In my opinion, and I don't know if the implications are there purposely or just kind of floated to be nice and show respect, but I was almost yelling to myself that the implications ought to be more forceful. Your questions/implications seemed to answer themselves, the way you laid it out. Very nice job of it, you did, as I would not have been able to show that much respect and restraint to lord Emu and the Emu-ess, considering his past history here and prior.
Kudos to you for not letting yourself become infected with the "patience is a virtue" and "best position ever" viruses.
Please be on the lookout for any indication that lord Emu has reimplemented his infamous so called anti dilution plan, where he automatically maintains 40% of all sales for himself. A few weeks ago and I just can't remember where I read it, but it said something about that having had occurred and I didn't follow up on it to see if true. I did see it in print though.
I have long been astonished at what the shareholders and the sec allow vplm to get away with and of course, getting away with stuff is equal to encouragement. Many still revere and cheer him on. It reminds me of the times when bandits on the run get cheered on by the townsfolk as they pass through on the run, just cause they're getting away with it and are besting the man. The difference here is those cheering on the robber are his own victims. And THAT is what helped him get here. And THAT, I think, is what he planned on in the 1st place.
Before I even finish reading your post of such diligently compiled figures on the share selling, I feel the need to put out to prominence this 1 fact you noted. It needs to be repeated and to stand alone, in bold.
"IN 2020 THROUGH 23 THE AVERAGE PROFIT OF SHARES SOLD IS $845,672 PER YEAR. FOR A COMPANY THAT HAS NO REVENUES AND JUST A PATENT CASE THAT IS A HEFTY AMOUNT OF PROFIT" .
VPLM.....if it hasn't rendered you nuts yet.....give it 5 minutes, that'll change...
Not bad front either..............to say the least
Most definitely a good link and service there. Definitely saving that one. What a great service to be offered. 1st time I ever heard of it. I would think many would be happy to see that one.
Basically true but to be exact and just for the record, for those who may be interested, not all courts are open to the public. As is true with most everything, there are numerous exceptions. For example, certain child molestation cases and cases involving peeps in witness protection program, certain cases involving undercover detectives, so forth and so on. So generally true but not always.
Also true you can get copies direct from courthouse clerk, but not all filings are always immediately available. For ex, there are certain filings that are not available for 90 days. I forgot which ones they are at the moment, but it's a fairly common court document. So again, true but with certain exceptions.
I think these rights fall under the 24th amendment but once again, I might have the wrong amendment. I try...
Basically true but to be exact and just for the record, for those who may be interested, not all courts are open to the public. As is true with most everything, there are numerous exceptions. For example, certain child molestation cases and cases involving peeps in witness protection program, certain cases involving undercover detectives, so forth and so on. So generally true but not always.
Also true you can get copies direct from courthouse clerk, but not all filings are always immediately available. For ex, there are certain filings that are not available for 90 days. I forgot which ones they are at the moment, but it's a fairly common court document. So again, true but with certain exceptions.
I think these fights fall under the 24th amendment but once again, I might have the wrong amendment. I try...
I know why....
If the patents were truly so powerful, foundational, necessary and valuable....
The why didn't vplm.......who was a voip service provider before they obtained the patents, keep their 2 year long, repeated over and over and over, promise to fold the technology into their own platform......and become the king of the hill voip service provider, take total control of the voip arena, and begin collecting 10s to hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties, plus all the millions of new subscribers, etc etc etc.........?????????
I know I know..... what a dumb question, right?
Even inYA pockets, Inza, admitted (allegedly, according to a poster who said he spoke to him on the phone recently) that the optics of the insider selling like hotcakes, wasn't good.
Updates... Shmupdates.... Shareholders don't give much weight to what lord Emu has to say, aside from the fact he doesn't have much important to ever say anyway........well..thats aside from when he tells those big whopper lies that he has so many times. I won't re-delineate them here.....is you don't recognize and acknowledge his lying mieading ways by now, I doubt you ever will. Same as you most likely couldn't less at his name being at the top of the list of vplm peeps who were found guilty of breach of fiduciary duty AND unjust personal enrichment. The fact that you can so easily ignore that and blow it off as not worth your consideration because you refuse to allow yourself to look directly at all the obvious and factual connected dots that form a clear shape and pattern of deciet, misdirection, failure to pay the appropriate homage to his support, the retail shareholders......obviiusly having zippo respect for them..... Not to mention you don't even think the massive dilution of years past, now followed by the massive sell-off of shares at piss prices and doing so by Emu, wife, and various board members as fast as they can get rid of them, even after agreeing to all these dismissals that have brought nothing to you or me, and not filing the forms for all these selloffs as required, for up to 2 yrs, and not filing the required forms for the so called Amazon settlement.
The reason this has always been a bust and will stay that way is because they have been allowed to get away with these things and not have to answer to anybody but instead are revered and applauded and trusted. The insiders are given lavish lifestyle on a silver platter because they had such a great STORY and such a great DELIVERY and so much support that peeps here used to say everyday that it would never be possible for vplm to fight the bugs, but guess what no problem year after year. They love it. They love you and you and you....because so many are satisfied living in the dark and being fed bullshit.
The simple fact is there is no reason or basis for the price to increase. And it's kept down by all the selling of the bosses. And it's manipulated to not go too low and collapse as there's too many in this scheme who depend on the steady income they rcv from it in the way of shares by the bazillions year after year.
Even when he does say something, it's really nothing but pocket lint wrapped in fluff... He knows he's better off just keeping his mouth shut and just keep putting gas in the big green 5 STORY high monster share printing, share selling, personal insider ATM machine.
I don't expect the pps to stay under 2 for long...
You said that court docs or certain ones, we're open to you but not to the public. I asked what would be open to you but not the public. Your reply was Texas court information. I asked why and you said you were paying for the docs and they might not be open to the public or something close to that. With ZG's info and now my own research, I see that in general, all trials, civil or criminal are open to the public with some few exceptions and that the courts proceedings are also open to the public via Pacer and the fees are small and are waved if the requests are under a certain amount. Therefore, unless I misunderstood you, I think I should take exception to you telling me that what you had been referencing was not available to the public and that perhaps I should hire a lawyer to be able to access the courts info. Sorry if I misunderstood but thats how it came across to me.
Now, I don't yet know if the court documents that are accessed via pacer are ok to copy/paste here but I'm guessing they are since they are indeed public information. I'll check into that further. But if it's ok, and the docs are free or very inexpensive, I don't see why they aren't shared more than they are, generally speaking.
As to trial proceedings, I don't think I said anything about that, but rather just questioned you on what you said. It doesn't matter if it's non trial proceedings or trials when they occur, it's about the ongoing progress of court proceedings in the vplm cases, is all.
Therefore, if a case is dismissed and I understand several already have been, my assumption is that the reason for dismissal ought to be read from the court minutes or summaries or whatever it is that we can access publicly. And yet, there seems to be a lack of understanding and/or confusion as to certain aspects of those settlements. Add to that, the fact that I see any sort of settlement as a definite material event, yet at least in the case of the alleged Amazon settlement, there have been to my knowledge, no SEC filings so far, such as 10q or 8k and I don't understand why. I'd like to know why. I think there was possibly enough time to have filed that info in the 2nd quarter filing but if not, my understanding is the requirement is for an 8k to be filed (I think it's an 8k) within 4 days, but that didn't happen either to my knowledge. I find all this to be pretty fishy, but not at all surprising.
Totally agree with your 1st paragraph and that's what I've done with this stock, although I had to learn to go that route after being misled by the elitist shareholders who like to refer to themselves as "the true longs", lolol. Then, when there were still nice sizable oscillations in the price, I was able to get to recoup my on paper losses and get profitable. Then, as I learned more and more about what I think this play is really about, I vowed to never buy their stock anymore, which in hindsight has saved me alot of money in lieu of the performance in general.
As to the info about the fees, very surprised to hear that. I've been to the pacer site several times and never saw that info mentioned. If I had seen it, I would've made an acct, even tho I don't deal well with the language in the docs. If true, I'm sure lots of other shareholders will be glad to know that and look into it. It all makes more sense to me now. I'll have to revisit the site and look closer. Thx
Ok. When I said "open to", I meant courtrooms when a trial is underway and I was thinking maybe not? And also whether or not trial minutes or summaries were public. I said I was gonna look it up but got distracted. I see you are saying yes to public and I will accept that as the answer until and unless I see otherwise. I think the main takeaway I getting is that while public, in terms of the docs, they are available but not for free and that seemingly applies to digital downloading but also seems to apply to basic online viewing. So the question arises....if the law says it's all public, then doesn't that imply that public access should be free?
Appreciate you info sharing...
Awesome Z. That was real nice of you to explain all that. I was aware of pacer and have on occasion been able to get some basic info free from the site. I was surprised to hear from you that the prices are cheap as I thought otherwise for some reason. In any event, I'm not into the court proceeding enough to have felt the need, plus I get a headache trying to decipher the legalese. I hope your well thought out post helps some others. Honestly, the only reason I questioned the OP was just my curiosity what he meant by "available to him but not the general public" and he did explain. It's all good info to know.
Just in case you're not aware, my negative sentiments regards vplm are based on I guess you would say, more indirect facts about what the company has done and/or not done, as the case may be, since way back around 2011. I jumped in approx a couple yrs before that based on a tip and my knowledge and interest in voip. I was pro vplm until they began the big whopper lies around 2011, which had me hook line and sinker until they showed their true colors in 2013, I think it was, when they chose, with no known rhyme or reason, to become the #1 poster child for patent trolls. Little by little, after that, dozens if not hundreds of dots connected for me, that the whole patent thing is a farce.
An eminence front, it's a put on.
Thanx for that reply ZG. I know that some court proceedings and trials are open to the public but I didn't know if all were. Somehow, I still doubt they all are. The reason I asked in this case, the poster had said the pertinent court info was available to him but not to the public. I wondered why naturally, and he explained that he was paying for the docs, which I understand but that made me think, well, if the proceedings are able to be bought by ppl, then that must be to pay the court for the preparation of them but at the same time I figured it also meant the court proceedings would/should be open to the public. You seem to be corroborating that. Appreciate it. I imagine certain trials may not be open. I'll look it up.
Thx again.
I see. Does that mean that the courtroom is closed to the public when in session? I'm just curious is all.
My mistake saying "get Napolitano on speed dial". I was thinking of the right person but the wrong name. I meant Janet Reno, not Janet N.
No, I never heard of that story/rumor, but admittedly, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it were proven to be true.
No, never spoke to inYA pockets. I would never even consider it because #1, the way I see it, his job is to be a paid mouthpiece for a lowly otc pennystock, and as such, I see that as an inherent major conflict of interest. Obviously he's not gonna say anything negative about the mouth that feeds him, right? I recall, way in the past he was actually censured by vplm for going too far out on a limb in some way and I think it happened more than once. So it wouldn't be a good or fair conversation because I wouldn't believe a word he said. SS has posted a couple pieces in the past that didn't present a very good impression based on his record. Granted, it's very old stuff but it's still apparently history:
_____________________________________________________
"Rich Inza is the most honest IR person I have ever talked with in 25 years of
playing pennies..."
Really?
LOL:
"Rich Inza profile:
.
January 2014
Rich Inza served as spokesman for City Capital Corp. during the period when the
penny stock firm was aggressively promoting its Clean Sweep Holdings
sweepstakes, which U.S. securities regulators allege was the second pillar of the
company’s $11 million Ponzi scheme.
.
On his Linkedin.com profile, Inza styles himself as an investor relations
consultant for “publicly traded companies,” boasting that his company’s services
are “directed towards raising awareness of your company in the investment
community and increasing your shareholder value.”
.
However, Inza’s resume does not point out that he has never provided investor
relations for companies that trade on New York (NYSE) or NASDAQ, the major
U.S. stock exchanges for publicly traded companies. Inza so-called investor
relations services are primarily targeted at penny stocks, pink sheets and over-
the-counter companies, thinly traded equities that often have no active trading
market.
.
Currently, Inza is the investor relations contact for Voip-Pal.com Inc., an over the
counter pink sheet shell which has issued a number of speculative press
statements about patent applications that “have received expressions of interest
from well qualified entities to potentially license its suite of patents or acquire
Voip-Pal.com.”
(of course that "interest" never panned out or even was ever validated as reality)
.
Companies
on the Pink Sheets are not required to meet minimum requirements or file with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Typically, companies are on the
Pink Sheets because either they are too small to be listed on a national exchange
or they do not wish to make their budgets and accounting statements public.
(and now, many yrs after continuously promising to upgrade to full reporting, and
having finally done so, they continue to be very secretive about the most
important info to s/h's. Same ol', same ol')
.
Investopedia warns that investors should be aware of four cautions for micro-
cap stocks. First, most OTC stocks do not meet the minimum and do not file
with the SEC. Therefore, credible and reliable fundamental data are not available
for analysis. Second, historically Pink Sheets stocks are penny stocks and are
often near-insolvent
companies. Third, some stocks are illegitimate shell companies set up to scam
investors by issuing press releases, and having “analysts” promote the stock and
issue more worthless shares. Fourth, Pink Sheets only has one requirement for a
company to list - a company needs to have one market maker quoting its stock.
The listing companies do not have to provide any financial information at all.
(all of these above tenets, arguably are still the general fare)
.
As of Sept. 20, 2013, Voip-Pal.com had unaudited revenues of $151.00. Net
losses for the year were $3.38 million with the largest portion of that going
toward ($2.8 million) stock based compensation. The company currently rents
office space for $79 a month through Regus Management Group, a virtual office
and phone answering service.
(4 yrs later, all above still the same story, only worse)
.
On Inza's twitter account here, nearly all of the more than 500 tweets are aimed
at hyping Voip- Pal.com, despite the fact that the company has no current
revenue stream. Inza also formerly served as the investor relations contact for
the now defunct Atlantic Energy Solutions Inc., another pink sheet company that
died on the vine.
(I wonder what that number is now? Actually, I remember that the BOD had to
put a gag on his over zealous tweeting. Remember?)
.
The OTC Markets has issued this bulletin concerning the Atlantic Energy.
"Investors are advised that OTC Markets Group has been unable to contact or
confirm the location of this company," the statement said."
.
http://www.thegreedchase.com/#!rich-inza-profile/cqnc
"Nuggets, Surprises, Catalysts have been nonexistent leading some to invent potential positive moves in the stock."
Very astute observation