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.
sandvet: Interesting theory. Going after Plant first makes sense in either case - Either he's the main target, or they're looking to squeeze him.
If he's the main target, then I'd expect to see him ousted soon. If they're looking to squeeze him, I'd expect Heaton et al. to keep him in place as long as they think that might help keep him in line.
This whole thing has got a long way to go...
whiteshadow: Sorry I couldn't respond to your message yesterday, as I used up all 15 posts.
Thanks for your comments. I appreciate it. What is really funny is that the action on the Friday before the halt made me feel very sure I was going to get out of my last trade the next Monday, which we all know what happened.
I'm in a whole lot better shape than others here. Worse case scenario, I'm up about 11K. Best case, I'm out of here with at least 21K.
I can live with that.
Danno123: You get my 15th post for the day, you lucky dog.
Thanks for the info, particularly the highlighted portion at the end. Most interesting, indeed.
Thanks. I didn't think he would be, but I was sure the company would.
knowlesmsncom: He was probably released on his own recognezence (sp?). And yes, the warrant was for three felony charges filed with the federal court in Philadelphia.
The only complaintant that can file felony charges in a federal court is the US Justice Department, at least as far as I know. Individuals can't.
The SEC does require that. What it doesn't do is have any rule that prevents a company from gagging its TA.
A simple rule to prevent this from happening is all that is needed to help investors keep on top of the OS/AS for companies they are invested in (unless the TA is in cohoots with the company).
Thanks.
knowlesmsncom: So, you're telling me that since he was charged with nothing when he was arrested and released, he isn't charged with 3 felonies?
Maybe you should keep guessing...
Dickmo: My info may be wrong on the Nevada thing, but I do vaguely remember I had the same response to that info as you did when I saw it posted. I'm not sure, but I think there was a link to that info. Doesn't matter that much, since I doubt they can protect officers/directors in case of fraud.
As for the DTC, I was unaware that an IR firm was provided copies of the DTC sheets. Yikes. That said, I don't know of any published info by BA about the share structure, at least in quite awhile, and we have no idea of what dilution has occurred, and when. If they have knowingly misled investors as to this, and that could be quite possible based on what the DTC sheets say, and what BA has said, then they should find their financial balls squeezed.
As for Heaton, it probably makes sense that Plant would make sure he was surrounded by morons...
knowlesmasncom: He wasn't charged? He was arrested on a federal warrant by an FBI agent. A federal case exists in the Philladelphia federal court charging him with 3 felonies.
When you are arrested on a warrant, you go before a judge to have the charges read to you. That judge doesn't charge you with anything. He can set bail, or, or as it appears happened, release you on personal recognizance (sp?).
He is facing 3 felony charges.
jeanette36: Maybe Jim can offer to autograph any products that are purchased?
As far as I can tell, and yes IMNSVHO, there are two other individuals besides Jim that can be looking as serious SEC and Justice Department problems: Thomas Heaton and Joel Krautheim.
Assuming that there has been some serious irregularities occurring at CyberKey, I don't see how Heaton can possibly not be involved. Could he possibly be that deaf, dumb, and stupid? I don't think so.
Joel Krautheim, on the other hand, may be able to squirm out of any serious trouble since he would not be involved in day-to-day operations, and could reasonably claim to have been totally dependent on the information he received from Plant and Heaton. But although he could excape SEC and Justice charges, from the standpoint of possible financial liability in law suits, he may not be so lucky.
And the company, itself, should be carrying an insurance policy that could be liable for any damage awards due to neglegence on his part, as well as for Plant, and Heaton.
There is a possible flaw in this scenario - I haven't been able to find the info, but someone on another board, a long time ago, pointed out that the officers of companies registered in the State of Nevada are protected by that state from being sued for financial damages. I just don't remember if that included damages as a result of criminal activity.
Can people go after BA? No. Their job was to pass on information about the company that the company wanted them to do. Did they know that the info was probably bogus? Could be - based on the clientelle they appear to specialize in, assuming anything a company tells them is bogus is very reasonable. But they have no responsibility to investigate that info.
Can people go after the TA? That would be very tough because there is nothing in print from the TA that says anything at all that they can be complacent with. Did they lie to people who called them? Probably. But nobody can prove that.
One interesting possibility for some potential action is Greentree Financial. Assuming, as I do, that Plant has never actually hired them to do any financials, their silence on the question of whether they are doing any auditing for the company, when there is no restriction on their ability to identify who their clients are, plays right into any illusion about the AFs that Plant may be fostering on investors.
If Plant goes, AFs may follow. They should show just how viable the company really is.
So, here we sit, still waiting for the AFs...
That's quite possible. But I doubt he'd want to be anywhere his adoring fans can actually come face to face with him even if he had no legal restrictions.
Yep, everything is back to normal, it just looks like his sense of normal is, well, abnormal.
msgbrdinfo: As long as Jim is still the CEO, he will be doing everything he can to act like a real company.
The company will be at FOSE, but I seriously doubt that Jim will.
Wolfie123: The company does sell real products, but they are somebody elses products. Some of those products (the safe and door lock) they contribute nothing of value, while the big question is how much true value they contribute to the flash drives.
As for their showing up, any attempt to read anything into that other than the fact they showed up is a very long stretch, particularly the idea that it means Jim is gone.
You don't think they'd put out a pr about him being gone as soon as he is? Until they do, you cannot assume that anything that happens means he's gone.
msgbrdinfo: You are correct in that any additional fraud he commits, he faces possible additional charges.
That said, his latest PR may echo the story that he told the SEC during their investigation (a story which they and the Justice Department clearly didn't buy), and, thus is just additional evidence of an existing fraudulent act.
I don't know. What I do know is that whe are looking at a spider that has essentially dropped only two of its shoes, and it will take some time before all the other shoes have dropped.
In the meantime, the stock will probably settle somewhat higher than the .0002 it closed at, particularly since there will be 'wannabe' bottom-feeders coming on board who will be buying for a chance that somebody will pull something off regarding the company, or for a deadcat bounce.
The funny thing will be is that those 'wannabes' will be jumping all over the existing bagholders, labeling them as whinners and bashers.
Could be some interesting food fights coming up...
kkgd: And you can't figure out that 'as someone who believes in the company' is a descriptive phrase for 'and yours'?
The point I was making is that we all have beliefs and we all feel attacked, personally, when those beliefs are attacked.
kkgd: And what in my posting history makes you think I have any belief in this company or Jim Plant?
Man you've got me confused with somebody else...
kkgd: What beliefs am I acting on? The belief in human nature? Guilty. The belief that people should attack messages, and not messengers? Guilty.
As for any other beliefs when it comes to any stock, on any exchange, sorry, not guilty.
ToddWHO2: I can understand your issues with people who attack others, scream about how anyone who buys a particular stock is an idiot, or that "IT'S A SCAM! CAN'T YOU SEE THAT?" (or any of its 100 variations) while making no attempt to provide any evidence that it is.
I also understand the desire to strike back, to try to protect the company's honor (and yours, as someone who believes in the company, because when someone attacks our beliefs, we see it as an attack on ourselves, and reasonably so).
I understand that, not only in your case, but in the case of everyone here. The only problem I see is when people tar all 'disbelievers' with the same brush. It is a common response, and an acceptable one when the idea or message is attacked, but not the person.
There are quite a few here that never bothered to attack the message, only the messengers. I don't consider you to be one of those (though you may have slipped a time or two).
But now that you have slipped over to the 'dark side' here, try to keep attacking the messages, and not the people who deliver them.
Good luck to you.
therealtruth10: Wouldn't hurt if he'd also publicly identified the alledged auditor.
Or publicly identify the alledged third-party.
Or maybe explain how his scapegoat, hired back in September, managed to fake the information about the April PR about the first 4.2M payment received from the DHS.
Or how she managed to have anything to do with the last 5 quarters of financial information being wrong.
Small list. I'm sure we can all think of other things it might help to have him provide information about.
luvtradin1: He PR'ed the first 4.2M payment back in April 2006, long before his scapegoat came to work for him.
My last post (15th) for today: liquid has been added to the banned list (not by me).
I Had an order in for .121 to buy back 15000 shares I sold at .16 in for awhile now.
Filled at 10K and 5K shares. Not so comfortable that this was all that smart a move anymore.
Oh well, less than a month to go until we know what's up...
Were the moderators overzealous? Perhaps, but from my personal experience, I can't say that.
I've been known to make a lot of negative posts about this company. I do try to have done the DD to back up my posts, and I do try to dot the i's and cross the t's (not always right, but willing to admit I'm wrong). As a result, I have never had a single one of my posts here deleted.
None. Most negative posts that I've seen deleted were those who made claims (most of which I agreed with) about Plant and company that were not backed up with any facts.
I personally don't like the posts the mods made in response to me (except for AngelHill who never responded to me in anyway that was negative), but they didn't delete my posts.
Unless they have been working with him to hide the true OS.
You do know that they got hit by the SEC for doing just that with another company a few years back?
ToddWHO2: Nope. And its a one-time deal. You cannot keep getting it for new periods of time. But you can make an application for a patent for the technology involved.
You can search the db for patent applications. Nothing shows up.
Divine Madcat: I, also, cannot find anything about any criminal case involving a Jim or James Plant. And the number he gave lists about 7 cases, all for USA vs someone else.
No record in the patent db for any patents or for any patent applications.
As for the type of patent that people have cited Jim told him he has, they expire after 1 year, and cannot be directly converted into a real patent.
The only evidence of any patents is Jim's word. Wow. That's something we all can believe, right?
yellowdog1: They have patents? Really? What direct, independently verifiable proof do you have that such patents exist?
TIA...
CAnder7373: Because they only have the power to suspend trading for that 10 days.
Any additional action must be taken in civil court, regarding CKYS. Criminal action, as is clearly being taken, will not stop the trading.
To stop trading, the SEC must get a judge to agree that the company, itself, has no reason to continue as a publicly traded company. Not having any of the contracts Jim claimed doesn't mean that the company is a total fraud.
It isn't clear if CyberKey can actually make a profit without major contracts, but the SEC cannot do what you think they should do, no matter how much corruption and fraud they discovered.
TheloniousM: IF there is any money in restitution available, it would be available to people who lost money on this stock during a specifically defined period of time.
They'll be all kinds of expenses eating away at any restitution that the government can come up with (and actually collect).
That'll be the big question: How much is really available?
imahustler: Nobody who lost money during the period of time is excluded - However, you need to identify all of your trades, and you can only claim an overall loss. So if, like me, you made 21K in earlier trades, then get hit for 10K loss on a swing trade you weren't quick enough to get out of, you cannot claim anything for the 10K loss.
Also, I seriously doubt anyone will be able to claim damage on any shares bought after the SEC 10-day suspension.
The real question will be, when does the clock start on the period of time that will be defined? When the bogus contract was announced? When the UAFs were released (most likely starting point)? If you were holding when the SEC suspension was put into play?
Good luck.
imahustler: Not really - You have to add in everyone who owned this stock and sold it for a loss at anytime during whatever period of time will be defined.
This stock has probably had its fair share of people buying and selling for a loss to someone else who eventually sold for a loss to someone else who eventually sold for a loss...
Hard to tell.
eliaman: Notice that he also doesn't identify who he has hired to do the auditing, which according to him should have already been done.
I find it difficult to understand how anyone can still believe that Jim is telling the truth about anything at all. In the PR he blames someone who wasn't with the company before September, talks about an in-house investigation that's been ongoing since November (how long does it take to call your bank and find out if there's been any big deposits into your account?), and how there is no revenues from what is clearly a totally ficticious contract, and that's all because of what someone did since she was hired in September?
Really? So what happened to the 4.2M payment received from the DHS back in April? It's all been a lie since day one:
http://www.cyberkeycorp.com/press_20060407.html
CyberKey Corporation Receives $4.2 Million Payment for Initial Shipment to the Department of Homeland Security
ST. GEORGE, UT, Apr 04, 2006 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) -- CyberKey(R) Corporation (OTC: CYKC) is pleased to announce that the Company has received a payment of $4.2 Million from the Department of Homeland Security for its initial shipment of 33,000 CyberKey units. The total order submitted by the federal government is for 150,000 units and is expected to exceed $24 Million.
"The relationship with the Department of Homeland Security gives CyberKey a platform for generating a continuous revenue stream. We are very excited about providing a suite of solutions to the Federal Government and the growth we are achieving because of it," stated Jim Plant, CEO of CyberKey Corporation.
The Company recently announced that the second shipment of 30,000 units, totaling more than $4 Million, was shipped last week out of CyberKey's contract manufacturing facility in San Jose, CA. The addition of CyberKey's technology helps to ensure that Government Agencies have access to a secure storage medium that is eminently mobile, which meets stringent government security requirements. CyberKey's technology provides solutions that help to protect confidential data, manage the identities of people and applications accessing that information, and address compliance requirements.
ABOUT CYBERKEY
CyberKey Corporation, based in St. George, Utah, partners with industry-leading manufacturers and distributors to deliver secure USB drive-based solutions to vertical markets and content owners, service providers and resellers. CyberKey solutions solve real world issues in the entertainment, education, government, military, automotive, financial services and medical industries. CyberKey technologies allow users to securely transfer large amounts of data, files and applications software from one electronic device to another while employing a patent-pending USB-based Digital Rights Management process. CyberKey's solutions create new opportunities for existing industries and applications.
For more information, please visit CyberKey's website at http://www.cyberkeycorp.com or contact Investor Relations at 1-866-THE-APPL(E).
Statements contained in this news release, other than those identifying historical facts, constitute 'forward-looking statements' within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Safe Harbor provisions as contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements relating to the Company's future expectations, including but not limited to revenues and earnings, technology efficacy, strategies and plans, are subject to safe harbors protection. Actual company results and performance may be materially different from any future results, performance, strategies, plans, or achievements that may be expressed or implied by any such forward-looking statements. The Company disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements.
Contact:
Investor Relations
1-866-THE-APPL(E)
http://www.cyberkeycorp.com
Source: CyberKey Corporation
SOURCE: CyberKey Corporation
gtell66: The supposed 25M contract was for regular, ordinary run of the mill USB drives that had nothing to do with SQUIM.
Probably released on his own recognizance. Afterall, he's such a pillar of the community (for a guy who went through bankruptcy back in 2001, at least)...
What was he doing at home at 2:15 in the afternoon?
yellowdog1: Yes there are products, but as for Jim not being charged yet, it takes the SEC forever to get to that point.
It took them 7 months from when they started investigating the crew at USXP (August 2003) until they filed civil suit (March 2004).