is... a buy and hold investor of dividend US and Canadian stocks
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.
see my post... find out for yourself... and let us know.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=107382471
Information on Tapcode. They appear to be a Going Concern. I am not sure what the share structure is, or if they are privately held.
Looks like Nolan's sons are running some not-for-profit tech company:
http://twobitcircus.com/
and here is the link for Tapcode:
http://www.tapcode.net/
It appears as if this company is marketing Nolan's software.
I see 2 problems with the basic concept that were always there; they are two distinct products (games vs food service), and this is a bad mix with the restaurant business.
The second point is kind of obvious. Greasy burgers and a computer screen just do not mix. It is unsanitary.
The second point is... I think that in a fast-food context, this product has a chance. I can think of 2 restaurants in my area that rely on a similar concept. In one of them, the customer goes up to the front counter and orders, then takes a sign with a number to his seat. The food is brought to him. In the second case, the customer goes to the front desk orders, and then takes a vibrator back to his seat. When it vibrates, he goes up and gets his food.
In either case, the table service is avoided, the food arrives quicker, and all for giving up a bit of service.
So the target market is fast food. Why then... would that same customer want to sit there playing games???
Just a thought.
How do you know that Kim? btw what was the catalyst for today's events? Why the sudden drop? I assume it is because of losing the contract, but there is no news.
Yes it does. I distinctly remember one of my business school professors saying that automotive companies recycle components into other components of lesser quality (bumpers become interior panels, etc)...
how will we recognize one another?
Like a Reverse Split? It is the only option they have left to raise more money. Repackage the brand (a combined Heddle Marine/ P2O entity?), and launch another marketing campaign to get more funds...
btw, a name change is necessary with a Reverse Split, maybe they just have not announced the split yet... working out the details.
They suck.
Well, that would be highly suspect, and it happens in construction circles I am told. Never witnessed it personally. But Mr. Zecca could influence the County to buy JBI processors and in return be rewarded with a plum position at JBI yes.
That is not insider trading. Insider trading is trading on the basis of insider information, which is supposed to be disseminated to the market in an orderly fashion. A processor sale would be exactly that. And any "insider" at the customer would have that insider knowledge. From an ethical point of view, enforced by the company's ethics agreements, they are bound to secrecy. An insider is any c-level executive or high-level executive involved in deals of this nature.
I was looking for ward to this "DD"... sounds juicy!!!
That is a new one... a customer of JBI's is going to benefit from an increase in stock price from purchasing a processor?
How??
First off... is anybody did, that would be insider trading...
Far-fetched. The Wells Notice and Statement of Claim is just part of their process. The Statement of Claim would be necessary to file a court action. No one is trying to deliberately harm the stock. Usually the way these things work is that the plaintiff writes a letter to the Defendant asking for a Settlement. I can't remember what exactly a Wells Notice is, but maybe that is it. But if that is not what a Wells Notice is there would have been some other letter. That corresponds to negotiation, so they were in settlement discussions.
It is normal for the Defendant's lawyers to tell them where to go, that way all the lawyers get to make lots of money.
Settlements happen because the legal system is designed to minimize costs. If one side proposes a settlement and it is rejected, that would work for them in the courtroom. So settlement is natural. However, if the case had no merit, JBI would not have settled and could have sued for full costs. The only settlement would have been the SEC paying for their costs for wasting their time.
That did not happen. So the case had merit. So, in agreeing to a settlement JBI is DE FACTO admitting guilt.
The rest of it is connecting dots that are not there. It is really reaching.
Your post does not make sense. You said:
"Of course one has to consider that a low float stock it WILL be displayed if the trade aligns with the agenda of the broker's trading activity. "
implying that trades would not be accurately displayed if there was some "agenda". This would be a securities violation as well as probably impossible because it is electronic.
So how would this be possible?
what up with Mart???
that would be breaking the law wouldn`t it? I don`t think so..
How so...? DD is not coming up with some conspiracy theory about the stock price, and conspiracy theories are hardly good reasons to buy stocks. I don't even do DD, I buy good stocks which will go up in value based on the numbers.
Anyway, please enlighten me on this proof.
Yes, you can start with Ontario Legal Aid (assuming you are in Ontario). They can probably point you in the right direction in terms of the legislation on the books.
I would not consider taking it on yourself. Get a group of investors. It is going to be a tough fight regardless. Expensive, and tough.
That is far-fetched and outlandish. This is a just a case of professionals doing their jobs. No one set JBI up. The Wells notice and Statement of Claim are normal steps in the investigative process. Nothing more, nothing less. There was no conspiracy to hammer the stock price. It hammered itself by misrepresenting the financials to investors.
It was not reported on SMBs, there was speculation. Means nothing. Means a poster knows how the SEC works, that is all.
Settling in negotiations is normal, because it does cost everyone less money. It is up to the judge who pays costs. He does not have to make the loser pay all costs, especially if a reasonable attempt to settle is made. And if the lawsuit is deemed frivolous, the SEC would have had to pay all costs for both sides!!!
Lawyers move around a lot, from case to case. They are just professionals doing a job. I once launched a lawsuit. It ended up being bandied about by 3 lawyers. Milked for all it is worth.
A Settlement IS IN FACT a de facto admission of wrongdoing. If the SEC had gone to court with a poor case they would have been laughed out of the courtroom. They had a good case, and that forced a settlement.
Actually... (I just came upon this now)... BleaveR was right. The term "Post Graduate" includes people doing a Master's degree, not just doctoral candidates.
What a load of crap!
JBI made a serious accounting error that was very misleading to investors. There is no point in engaging in ridiculous conjecture and conspiracy theories about plots, threats, boogeymen, etc. There is no evidence that the SEC made any deliberate attempt to discredit JBI, in fact they just did their jobs as they usually do. It does not matter that the previous owner made the same mistake. A mistake is a mistake. That is similar to saying that, when caught speeding, you were going at "the speed of flow of traffic". JBI is guilty, pure and simple.
JBI is not a threat to anybody. In fact, nobody cares.
The fact that JBI settled is a de facto admission of fraud, and everybody knows that.
It depends where you think the stock is going to go. if you think there is going to be some magical turnaround, I would have to ask based on what? However, if that is the case, keep your shares. The other option is that the shares will go right to zero. Some kind of bad outcome, maybe not bankruptcy, maybe a Reverse Split, but something BAD. The lower it goes, the more you lose on a percentage basis. The loss will grow exponentially until realized.
If you think it can't possibly go to zero, that is just naïve.
:(
those firms always make those announcements... not to worry.
This = today's news. Thought you might know something...don't think you do. btw, I am surprised you were able to post contents of my PM. Not according to TOU. Then again, you are the moderator... don't tell the Admins!!! ssshhhhhhhhh
Doesn't it piss you off when a CEO pulls some shenanigans like this (assuming he did, I don't know). Today he cost investors a lot of money.
My guess would be institutions dumping. They don't like any hint of scandal.
Well, not quite sure what to make of this. I normally trade a lot safer... LOL.
My best guess is that there was some kind of insider trading, and the crook got nailed. What is really important is if the recent deal (the business) is real. If it is... great.
My best guess is this is worth doubling down on.
who are the "players" that are not honest??
aahhh correct!!!
That is an excellent point. That shows that they have no serious intention of fixing the plant.
`RBC`s clamp` is no big deal. For those who don`t know, RBC = The Royal Bank of Canada. We have a different system that our neighbors in the US do. Instead of having many independent banks, we have a max of 6 (is it 5 now?) chartered banks. Also called Schedule A banks. There are lots of Schedule B (foreign) banks here as well.
But, it is different in that the banking is done with less participants. This means that one of our biggest banks (like RBC) can compete with an American bank on the international stage. Remember, we are approximately 1/10 your size.
RBC is a fine upstanding institution. For anyone to suggest that they are somehow involved in collusion in schemes regarding the OTC is ridiculous. They don`t have time to be bothered.
4kids is referring to a poster that claimed that they could not do a JBII trade through RBC because there was some kind of Cease Trade Order.
That could simply be internal to RBC for any number of reasons. JBI has been ... the target of an investigation which resulted in a settlement in Ontario. That is enough of a reason. Plus the SEC thing. Or just the fact that they are an OTC stock. This can happen at a regional level as well. At a retail level. They have retail brokerage offices all over the country.
I myself have had issues trading OTC stocks. I know that one usually has to speak with a trader. Some time back that happened with a Pink Sheet stock of mine. It cannot be electronic. It has been this way since the crash of 2008. Prior to that it was all electronic. Recently I was rejected on an OTC stock trade, with the only reason given that they were looking out for my best interest. That means that if they think a stock is a scam, they can decide for themselves not to trade it. The OSC settlement is reason enough, as is the SEC settlement.
I don't trade with RBC, but I work with another Sched A bank.
I know from my contacts in NF that people at NF RBC were involved with the initial share distribution for JBI. That tells me that things can happen at local branches that may not be condoned by the higher-ups. This would have been locally-driven, for the benefit of the original distributors of shares (the company officers and IPO participants) and for the benefit of the retail brokers. It would not surprise me if some of RBC's policies were tested. That is all I know. It is certainly history at this point, except for the Selling of shares via the retail channel. My contacts also say that that has been difficult. And certainly they are not involved with any other financial institutions or MMs in some kind of weird collusion.
guessed wrong...
Yeah every financial institution has a Compliance department that does exactly that (making sure they are Compliant with any legislation or ongoing investigation). I know that pre-2008 there was never any problem doing an OTC stock. I had good success with uWink and never had a problem. I think I could even do it electronically.
But, since then I have noticed that they are reluctant. It cannot be electronic now. You have to talk with a trader. I think that once I got told that they simply would not trade an OTC stock. There was no reason other than looking out for investor's best interest, and I believe I got told that.
It would not surprise me at all if trading in JBI was disallowed simply because of a past investigation. Or perhaps... only Sell Orders. They can't prevent you from getting out of it.
As a typical function of a Compliance Department, I once traded a stock twice, a Sell outside of my RRSP and a Buy inside. I was simply trying to move it into my RRSP. I got a call about Wash Trading and had to explain myself and answer some questions. I had to laugh, because it was only a thousand shares or so... LOL.
I learned about "transfer-in-kind".. ROFL.
The references that you have provided refer to 2 distinct problems.
- demand/ prices rising as a result of weather
- mechanical issues resulting from the weather
In actuality, dealing with temperature changes with this equipment is fairly simple. All you have to do is to wrap a conductor around the pipe, and ,let Ohm's law go to work. That is why refinery equipment is usually outside, because this is easily dealt with. There are companies that specialize in this, and here is an example:
http://www.pentairthermal.ca/
The way that this is done, it is an Enginmeering function to write a Specification for the vendor describing the operating conditions that have to be dealt with (temperatures, pressures), and the equipment (like condensers) is ordered to suit.
Usually this is foolproof. That company (I worked for them once briefly) does 2 outages/ year, where they check and refurbish as necessary all of the pipe tracing in the plant at Fort Macmurray. It hits -50 there on a regular basis. So, your references were in the American Midwest, likely not as cold as that.
I think what happened this winter is that it was unusual. As a comparison, New Orleans had dykes in place before that storm hit. They talk about "100 year" storms. That means a storm that only occurs naturally, statistically, once every 100 years. They were not ready for Katrina. Now, that it happened, they are ready.
This has been a problem. One of my other stocks, Essential Energy Services, was impacted by severe weather as well.
In the case of JBI.. they are blaming this for shutting them down. The fact that their plant is indoors raises questions, but more importantly they cannot recover from it because of their finances.
What seems strange is that if proper enginmeering practices were followed, this should not have happened to this extent. If the parts were not specced properly, it is JBI's falt. If not, it is the vendor's fault and would be covered by warranty. If they were specced properly and it was just an unexpectedly bad winter... JBI should have been able to recover from it.
That might be a decision made at the discretion of the Canadian financial institution. The last time I attempted to buy an OTC stock they Rejected the order electronically and, if I remember correctly, refused to execute the trade over the phone.
Actually, I just looked at the Financial Statements. They may not have huge debt... but they are just about insolvent. They have significant ST debt, so that if anybody calls anything in they are screwed. No cash. They pretty much have to liquidate the P&E for what it is worth and call it done.
The fact that they can't get credit to solve a 200k problem proves that they are insolvent. that is about what they had in cash at year-end, which means that now they have zero. The upcoming quarterly I going to be brutal.
You could say they are "insolvent"..
and that was 1 full quarter ago...
"PROs can orchestrate OTC stox to any PPS level "
so you think yesterday's action (which could not have been preplanned btw, since no one knew when the report would come out) and the previous action when the report was supposed to come out (week of May 18) is all orchestration and not the market reacting to events a they occur? The stock fell to .13 upon expectation of this lousy report. It fell to .09 when the lousy report did in fact come out. with huge volume. and you think that is orchestration? Not just people selling because it is a lousy report?
The correlation between events and stock movement is plain as day.
I concur with your post totally, as I have posted. And you know far more about stitch welds than I do.