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.
Wrong...Try again!!! If you have a pacer account try researching case 09-23658. This should adjust your "opinion" greatly.
Were awaiting news of a reverse merger of KRUSECOM(private company) into the public shell of QSIGQ with most importantly... commons remaining intact.
Was DMGM/INOL runup similar to this? Dips then higher highs??
A little??? Thats an understatement!!!
Put in a buy for 105K @ $0.075 but only got 24K filled.
That was me :)
Thought as much. Noticed him yesterday.
l2 anyone? At work an flyin blind!!!
L2 anyone???
To qualify for the new five-year carryback provision, a small business must have no greater than an average of $15 million in gross receipts over a three-year period ending with the tax year of the NOL. Businesses with more than $15 million in gross receipts still qualify to carry back their 2008 NOL for two years.
Seems we wont qualify since QSGIQ gross exceeded the $15 Million limit set to access the 5 year carryback.
"NOLs may be carried back 2 years"
I believe the law was changed by BO so that these tax claims can be carried back up to 5 years now.
Unknown sales are greater than sells.
BUYS: 885032
SELLS: 207373
UNK.???: 266714
Was SEAB always an MM here???
The point i was trying to make was that neither you nor I...as a matter of fact anyone here knows for sure what's going to happen. So stop posting as if you all do!!!
I remember reading a doc which listed the shareholders of QSIG and their respective holdings. If i am not mistaken J. Riconda held approximately 19.6% of QSIG commons at one time. Can anyone confirm this? I forgot which doc i saw it in.
Not those preferreds. There are 5Mil preferred(par value 0.01 or 0.001) held by company but were unissued. Its in the last 10-Q.
For the so called bankruptcy expert on board. Maybe you should learn about the application of the Absolute Priority Rule before spouting off so much...
"The absolute priority rule requires payment in full to a senior class of creditors before any payments can be made to junior interests. The rule only arises when a court confirms a plan over the objections of a class that the plan is not fair and equitable".
Last time i checked we're not at confirmation or have any objections yet, so your posts are irrelevant and premature.
You sir, like all of us dont know for sure what will happen so stop acting as if you do!!!
From my limited knowledge an IPO would not be possible...correct?
As per your post ...the new shares would start at $0.0001 and not current prices???
96%+ buys vs 4%- sells and we end the day red!!.... SCANDALOUS!!!!!
I can vouch for at least one case to back your point. In the WAM_Q bankruptcy case as early as January,2010 the attornies for the debtors were making statements that commons were...
"out of the money". The POR for that case was made public on March 12,2010 in court, three months later.
"IF" for arguments sake QSGI were to cancel the commons, would'nt the newly issued shares be worth far less than the currently traded shares???
Not one share sold since the 1000 for $0.085 sale at 1:18pm.
Buys: 403831 shrs
Sells: 27390 shrs
???: 5100 shrs
Excellent question!!!! Is this normal for private entities?
I re-read it and yes you are 100% correct. My apologies to the board for unintentionally posting incorrect info.
Not correct. In the settlement agreement there is a section that stipulates that he cant/wont sue any former directors of QSGI including Mr. Sherman. Didn't post it before since I didn't think it was as important as other info in doc.
A simple reminder about J. Riconda's (JR) position in this case:
(1) QSGI will abandon 100% of capital stock of CCSI to JR in exchange for release from $10,909,000 secured claim by same.
(2) JR shall retain an unsecured claim of $10,159,000 for which he will not receive "CASH OR EQUITY" in the reorganized entity even if same should be offered to other unsecured creditors. JR also agrees to not object to but support any plan of reorganization(POR) submitted by debtors.
Don't flip the script buddy, these are your claims not mine.
I was just using them as a means to stir an intelligent exchange of views. Just as i can't dispel your contention about the company 100%. You can't dispel our views 100% either!!!
Gotta leave now, but i'll be back later.
Gonzilee...i believe light the best disinfectant, so thats why i'm sending my response to your PM publicly. I'd prefer our banter to be shared with everyone not just between us.
To answer your statement that the creditors would "take what they can get" doesn't make sense. If they see an opportunity that would maximize their recovery, its obvious which choice would be made.
Again i reiterate, newly issued shares in a "worthless" shell is exactly that...WORTHLESS. The only value attainable is in the existing shares via an R/M with Krusecom.
Believe me if these figures were correct, the UST would have never withdrawn her motion for conversion and we would not be having this conversation right now. This would have been sent to Chap. 7 liquidation ages ago.
This is what is referred to as hoplessly insolvent!!!
I'm trying my best to follow you argument but its confusing. First you claim that the company owes millions to creditors...okay we all know this. Then you assert that the company has no assets and is worthless...okay, this may be.
If this is so, then which creditor in their right minds would want "newly issued" shares in a debt ridden, worthless shell company with no operations??? How else are they to be paid??? (Remember Krusecom has value but is a private entity).
The only plausible answer is to R/M Krusecom into the QSGI shell with its existing shares and offer creditors shares already held by the company.
The alternative to this would be an IPO for Krusecom which is unrealistic in terms of the "hoops" they will have to go through procedurally and the financial costs associated with this method.
I eagerly await your opinion!!!!
Claims register from Pacer:
Chapter: 11
Date Filed: 07/02/2009
Total Number Of Claims: 83
Total Amount Claimed Total Amount Allowed
Unsecured $8990277.26
Secured $910107.56
Priority $196773.30
Unknown $3469.12
Administrative
Total $10100627.24 $0.00
This list includes J. Riconda, the IRS and *Victory Park*...all of whom have substantial amounts owed to them and some form of settlement agreement with the debtors.
These are the preferreds i was referring to as per the 10-Q you are quoting from...
Preferred shares: Authorized 5,000,000 shares in 2009 and 2008, $0.01 par value, none issued .
What will become of these un-issued shares...are they not a company asset???
So the question is why would the company obviously not retain the commons, allow it to attain the $2.75 price for the alotted 20 days then require the investors to convert the preferreds to commons. This would pre-empt the holders of the pref's from demanding the $30 redemption on DEC/10/10. The debtors will save themselves from the full cash payout and the investors can cash in the shares for $36.66 minimum instead of $30.00.
Both parties win.
On the topic i did notice how you did not comment on the first part of my post regarding the settlement with QSGI and
J. Riconda.
Any thoughts???
Is this the $10 Mil claim u speak of wall_st???
This info is from the settlement agreement with J. Riconda.(JR) and QSGI.
(1)QSGI will abandon 100% of capital stock of CCSI to JR in exchange for release from $10,909,000 secured claim by same.
(2)JR shall retain an unsecured claim of $10,159,000 for which he will not receive "CASH OR EQUITY" in the reorganized entity even if same should be offered to other unsecured creditors. JR also agrees to not object to but support any plan of reorganization(POR) submitted by debtors.
In addition remember there are 5 Million "convertible" preferred shares that were never issued by the company and could be conceivably used to compensate the other unsecured creditors.
What possibly could they be converted to....hmmmmm.
But hey...what do i know!!! Your guess is as good as mine.
For anyone with a pacer account there have been several notices to the debtors as far back as 12/07/2009 which read...
"Notice to Filer of Apparent Filing Deficiency".
As i contended, the UST does not interfere with cases unless infractions of the relevant bankruptcy laws have been comitted or is suspected. It is apparent from these notices that a warning(conversion) was sent to the debtors to file the required info with the court "or else"(non filing is a breach of bankruptcy law). The necessary filings were subsequently submitted to the court.
Once the relevant documents were filed, the motion for "conversion" was withdrawn by the UST and the "notices of deficiency" were also removed from pacer(check case doc history on pacer) since there was no longer any "deficiency" in their filings and they were in compliance.
Note:Just as some here have posted a negative spin of this situation, i am just proposing an alternative . The difference is i have used fact based data to back my theory not inuendo.
As i stated...their role is to oversee and ensure the integrity of the bankruptcy the process. If the UST made that request i would speculate it would have been in the context of their role to attempt to "force/coerce" the debtors to comply with regard to their obligations in the case.
The statement you made that the motion was withdrawn tells me that he was satisfied with the action taken by the debtors to accede to his requests.
Again "MOTION WITHDRAWN".
All bankruptcy cases have a us trustee so that point is moot. The assertion that "grudge" made was that the trustee wanted to convert the case which a us trustee does not do.
A US trustee only gets involved when some sort of malphesance is suspected and to ensure state law is followed...its the judge who has control of the case.
Their(ust) only role is to oversee(act as a watchdog) the process not make decisions of behalf of the parties involved and will not be heard on the filing of a POR. Therefore its the judge's decision whether this case will be converted and the us trustee will recommend an examiner or case trustee if he/she believes/determines fraud is occuring.
What is being forgotten is that this was a "voluntary" bankruptcy.
You sir are either insane or a blatant liar! As per your trustee claim... "Sorry, no trustee found for case 09-23658-EPK" copied and pasted directly from pacer!!!!
As for the 110 Mil debt, these are the figures from the original bankruptcy filing...
Total Assets: $23,971,267.00
Total Debts: $22,703,773.00 (this includes debt securities ie secured ,unsecured and subordinated debt)
Common Stock:48,797,716 shares
Preferred Stock: 5,000,000 shares
Note: the 10K you quoted yesterday clearly stated that the preferred stock was "NOT ISSUED" so it can be inferred that it is held by the company or its principals.
....Or maybe they just scammed alot of people as is their track record!!!!!!!
That's what I thought since the doc states they are "not issued" but shows divis were/are paid to them. Guess we'll have to wait n see.
Can't seem to get a reply from anyone else so do u know? Who owns the 5million convertible preferred shares of the company????