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.
Oregon...lol, that's cute...thanks...lol
Carpe, that's the sweet thing about going to FINRA. If you will notice, in my original post, I mentioned rolling shorts.
Let's say you have brokers at Penson, WDCO, Alpine and ACAP that are working in concert to short against a stock. Broker at Penson initiates the short, time runs out and they ask buddy at WDCO to take their short position...he does....his time runs out, now it's ACAP's turn..etc.
FINRA comes in and does the Short Audit. Would you want to be ACAP....lol. ACAP is left holding the bag and left to cover...ha ha ha.
But yes, a rolling short is most certainly an example of how shorting can and is abused.
Carpe, agreed 1000000%.
Sorry Ichimoku...that's the way it works...and it CAN work to your benefit.
Shorts are not all bad.
The ability to short a stock was not built into the way our markets function for the purpose of harming shareholders. Shorting was built in to protect the shareholders.
Hypothetical: You have a stock that is running, for no apparent reason, it's trading at 20.00 per share. The fundamentals cannot come close to supporting that pps. Fundamentals dictate that the stock should be 1.00 per share. Do you want to be the one buying the stock at 20.00 or do you want the market to work the way it's designed to work by allowing the shorts to come in and control the artificially inflated, unsubstantiated price of the stock by knocking it back down to where is should be trading, based on fundamentals?
By allowing the short, that keeps the price from continuing to become artificially inflated, protecting the shareholder from paying too much money for a stock that cannot support that price.
I know this is not a popular view and I know this is not what a "long" wants to hear. And yes, I do know that shorting can be and is abused. All I'm saying is, please try to understand that shorting can and is designed, to protect investors. And, a naked short can help support your stock because they have to cover...bid support is nice to have.
yeahhh, well alrighty then...I'm getting the hang of this pic thing...ha ha...
Oh my, almost forgot you Alexa. Ok, here goes. Let' see if I can do this right...lol...
Couldn't get a real clear picture of the back of the box with my camera so I put the box on my scanner. If you have any doubt, compare the location of the little tab like thing under the company info ...
Scanned Box:
Cell phone Pics
TY Carpedeim. Didn't respond to your response to the post before this one. You did make some good points in that one as well. I'm referencing the one with regard to market cap.
spngwho...oh great. Maybe I should have bought instead of post...lol.
phrantic, "increasing the AS" in and of itself does not hurt you. It does not dilute you. I've spoken to newbies before with regard to this matter and there seems to be some confusion about what Authorized Shares really represents.
Authorized Shares is nothing more than the number of shares a company is ALLOWED = AUTHORIZED, to issue. That DOES NOT mean they have actually ISSUED them. That simply means that they anticipate the need, at some future point, to have a need for additional shares, for whatever reason.
Again, this act of increasing the number of shares a company is allowed to issue does not in and of itself dilute the shareholder. It only become dilutive if the company issues shares.
If a company is increasing their authorized, that tells me they are looking ahead to the future and determining what their needs will be going forward. They are planning and preparing the proper paperwork to ensure that they do not get in a pinch and not have enough stock available to them to fulfill their needs. They're looking ahead and planning accordingly.
Remember, stock is their currency. Let's put this in laymans terms. Hypothetical for you:
Let's say you have an equity line of credit on your house. You have 20,000 dollars available to you that you can use for improvements, pay off bills...whatever. But, let's say you are going to remodel and the remodel is going to cost you 40,000 dollars. Are you going to start the remodel and hope like he11 the bank approves an increase in your equity line so you can finish the job you started? Or, are you going to get approval on the equity line BEFORE you start your project, so you KNOW you can finish it. Would hate to see you with a bathroom wall knocked down and no money left to replace the wall.
Now, let's say you got approval for the 40,000 dollars and you have only spent 20,000. A friend steps up to the plate and does some work for you because he likes you and you end up not having to spend the full 40,000.
You had the money in place IN CASE you needed it.
Using the scenario above, the company is simply getting the "stock in place" in case they need it.
Hope that makes sense to you...made sense to me...lol.
Bottom line, don't panic when a company increases their authorized. That does NOT mean they have issued them and it does NOT affect the pps until they are ISSUED.
rookinvestor, in re Naked Shorts...believe it or not I actually believe they serve a purpose in the markets as well. Let me explain before you go ballistic on me.
Naked Short is typically a term associated with a position held my a market maker. When a stock first begins trading, often times, the market for that stock is very thin. By that I mean, there are not very many shares in the public float to create a liquid market with.
So, what happens is, let's say NITE has decided they want to play in the market of your stock but they don't have any stock. Well they want to be a participant so how do they do that? They fill your order to buy, by selling you stock they don't own, going "naked". Ohhh, terrible thing right? WRONG !!!
If NITE sells you shares they don't own, at some point they have to cover, right? How do they cover...they buy the stock. How do they buy the stock? They sit on the bid and wait for somebody to sell them shares to cover their short position. So, in essence what this does is create BID SUPPORT for the stock.
I know longs like to bash the shorts but they do serve a necessary function to the overall market. Can this be abused? Certainly.
Is there a remedy for this abuse? Absolutely. As I posted in my original post. The Company has the option of contacting FINRA and requesting a "short audit". This "short audit" will determine whether a clearing firm is over 51% short. If it is determined that the clearing firm is over 51% short, they will be forced to either put up $1.00 per share or cover their short position and they have three days to do it.
*DISCLAIMER : I have not dealt with FINRA and the short specialist if over 5 years so the criteria etc may be different today. But that's what it used to be. Either way, there are safeguards in place to protect the integrity of the market.
Now, let's talk about Clearing firms...an example of a clearing firm would be Penson. Penson clears for many, many brokerage firms. So, when conducting the audit, FINRA does not look at individual brokerage firms to determine the short status..they look to Penson. So, let's say Penson has 100,000 shares on deposit, in various brokerage firms they clear for. With some exceptions, Penson can short against those positions. If the audit determines that PENSON is over 51% short against their positions, FINRA can force the $1.00 collateral or the cover.
DrWilson...lol, I'm not lazy. I just like EASY...lol
Carpedeim, "traders" ...all I have to say is enter at your own risk...lol. "Investors" ...different story. Traders are selfish and here for a quick buck and typically end up damaging the share price but at the same time they do provide liquidity. So, I guess they serve their purpose in the market as well.
Investors, on the other hand, are more interested in the fundamentals and provide stability to the market. If I were the company, I would be more focused on satisfying the "Investors" rather than the traders.
Conference call...bbiaf
z4lover, umm, I quoted the 10Q !
Carpedeim, although I agree in principle, I have to take issue with the statement about stock price. The stock price and number of outstanding shares determine the market cap. When brokering the purchase or sale of a public entity, market cap is most certainly something that is CONSIDERED. Although it is not the end all to the decision making process, it most certainly is a contributing factor.
phrantic, you gotta spend money to make money. Stock is a company's form of currency and it can be used to pay for certain products, services, collateral against loans etc.
Perhaps at the time they increased the AS they needed stock to pay for services, product ..whatever. Then, once they saw cash flow from their efforts, they purchased the stock back to minimize the dilution? Mind you, this is just speculation and you are certainly free to speculate differently.
Now, let me pose a question to you. If this were simply a printing press, dilution scam, why would they even bother to buy back any stock? Why not just keep raising the AS and printing paper?
rookinvestor...uh yeah, thanks for pointing out the grey hair....lol.
I was actually one of the first posters on Ihub. In fact, I actually saw it before it went "live". A bunch of us from the Stockpit came over here and kind of jump started this whole thing. Now I'm really telling my age.
Alexa...oh no honey...I've already taken the pics and I am getting ready to create the post in a few. I'm not going to leave any doubt. If there is one thing I can guarantee you...I don't post it if I can't prove it. I'm going to prove it for you.
ok Liable, would you care to qualify your statement. Show me ONE statement that is BS in my post or I may hold you "liable" for your statement.
DrWilson...hmm, interesting perspective here...think about this.
Compare the cost of buying a bucket, detergent, wax, two sponges and Chamois.
I paid 9.99 plus tax for a total of 10.69. I doubt seriously if I could purchase all the above for less than that.
However, the bucket would be a one time expense and the Chamois and sponges would surely last longer than 8 washes as well. Detergent and wax would be a recurring expense.
I'm not quite anal enough to sit here and figure the exact cost of buying each item separately as opposed to the packaged product. But, if I had to guess, I would think it would be more cost effective to buy the packaged product.
Not to mention the sheer convenience. I don't have to hunt for my bucket, detergent, wax and sponge...it's all right there. All I need is the hose. I can usually manage to find that pretty easily...lol.
Thank you happyguy
Alexa, oh God...you're going to make me do this picture thing again aren't you. Ok, fine...JUST FOR YOU though. Umm, not real good at it so give me a few min.
Soapy, iBox?
MsPenny, yeah I know... Hey, I thought I was doing good to manage to get the pics in there at all...roflmao. I won't even tell you how long it took me to figure out how to do it...roflmao.
rookinvestor, I can honestly say, I know for a God given FACT it's there.
Stratford, don't bash the bashers...I'm a basher...lol Just not bashing this one.
Word to the wise...pay attention to the bashers, I can't tell you how many times people have come back to me and said "I should have listened".
I don't know what the bashers are saying about this one and I don't follow the pack. I make my own decisions and I really, really liked what I saw this company doing.
I know there are concerns about dilution but damn, how many companies dilute and then don't take any steps to correct it. This company is doing buy backs.
From what I can see, they are doing it RIGHT. They are focused on getting their products out there and increasing revenue. THAT's the RIGHT way to do it.
TAKI, manager also told me that the product is on "auto order". I didn't mention it in the piece I wrote because I don't remember EXACTLY what she said. I believe she said that it means it is automatically shipped to the store and that they don't have to "order" it
TAKI...oh wow. Hi stranger!!! How are you? Long time no see. Glad to see you are still around.
Yes, I have to admit, I'm much more comfortable bashing and that's what I intended to do when I first started looking at this company. Then, I saw what all they were doing and thought, holy cow...what do you know.
Like I said, this company "gets it"
It's always been my policy that if I post on a stock, I don't own it long or short so unfortunately I can't hold a position. I couldn't decide if I should post or buy...lol. I was pleased with what I found that I opted for sharing it instead of owning it.
Hi brainstorming, you are quite welcome. I was pleasantly surprised when I started looking at this company.
You are quite welcome. Most of you here probably don't know me since I don't have time to post very often anymore. But those of you that do know me, know I am a basher and darn proud of it. I started out looking to bash this company. Much to my surprise, it didn't work out that way.
Cool beans...thanks for the advice. Obviously, I live in Florida so we already have pollen all over everything. Looking forward to just taking my sponge and hose out there to wash my SUV. Saves me from having to run around and find soap, wax and a bucket. I like easy !!! lol
Hey JP, I have not tried mine yet. Plan on doing that this weekend.
SpongeTech ® Delivery Systems, Inc. : A “Squeaky Clean” Start Up Company?
I’ve been dealing in the public markets for nearly 12 years now and for the first time, I’ve finally found a small cap company that “gets it”. This company in not focused on its share price, they are focused on building revenue. They understand that revenue and profit is what dictates market price for their stock. I only wish more small caps would start to “get it” so they too can be successful.
The company I am talking about is SpongeTech (SPNG:OTCBB) SpongeTech(R) Delivery Systems is a company which designs, produces, and markets a unique line of reusable cleaning products for household use. These sponge-based products utilize SpongeTech(R)'s proprietary, patent (and patent-pending) technologies involving hydrophilic (liquid absorbing) foam and polyurethane matrices. The Company's sponges are specially configured with an outer contact layer and an inner matrix, the latter of which comes pre-loaded with specially formulated soaps and wax that are released when the sponge is wetted and applied to a surface with minimal pressure. The Company's current product line is designed for Car Care and Pet Care, however, SpongeTech(R) is currently exploring additional applications for its technology including an anti-bacterial, kitchen and bath cleaner, as well as a unique 'foaming' bath sponge for children.
Over the years, I cannot even begin to tell you how many times I have preached “focus on building your company and your stock price will take care of itself”. Well, that’s not an entirely accurate statement either. Unfortunately, the small caps are not as regulated as your listed companies and face market forces that aren’t as common with your listed companies. The “market forces” I am referring to are such things like uncontrolled naked shorting, rolling shorts and market manipulation. Oh and let’s not forget dilution, the sometimes necessary evil to growing your business.
You may be asking, what does this have to do with SpongeTech? When I first became familiar with this company it was due to the volume of shares it was trading on a daily basis. I watched it for a while and then thought…hmm, let’s take a look at this company and see what they are doing. My first thought was, (having been a basher that even holds the distinct honor of having been sued for bashing, however I prevailed), it’s a scam and they’ve hired a ton of stock promoters.
What I found is a company that is doing a lot of things RIGHT and realizes the importance of advertising. I mean the traditional methods of advertising and marketing of their PRODUCTS. Go to this company’s website www.spongetech.com and look at the forums they have chosen to get the word out that they EXIST.
When a small cap goes public, they have to have some way of letting the public at large know that they exist. Otherwise, how can people be expected to buy their products, much less consider them for investment purposes. Advertising and marketing of the company’s PRODUCTS and/or SERVICES. That’s how you do it! This company “gets it” !!!
In the company’s most recent 10Q filed on Jan. 14, 2009, the company reported, for six months ending Nov. 30, 2008, $6,483,892 in advertising and promotion fees (unaudited) and a NET income of 3,397,038 (unaudited). That’s not the only thing I found interesting in the 10Q. I also found this:
As of January 13, 2009, the Company had 1,170,332,648 shares of common stock issued and outstanding. The Company intends to return to the treasury and cancel an aggregate of 3,265,050 shares that were repurchased under the publicly announced repurchase plan through December 31, 2008 and an additional 76,623,293 shares that were purchased by certain of our affiliates through December 31, 2008 who have agreed to return these shares to treasury. In addition, the Company intends to return to the treasury and cancel an additional 133,577,066 shares that were returned to the Company by a principal shareholder. Thus, the Company will have an aggregate of 960,132,289 shares of common stock outstanding after giving effect to the cancellation of the shares to be returned to the treasury described above. For a complete description of the shares to be returned to treasury and cancelled(see Part II. Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds). http://pinksheets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=6346743
This tells me that the company is also addressing the concerns of dilution. So, although share price is not their PRIMARY focus, it is obviously something they do pay attention to and are concerned about.
I have heard rumors that this company also suspects a large short position, remember those adverse “market conditions” I mentioned earlier. Since I have no direct contact with the company, I cannot confirm of deny this rumor. However, something everybody should know is that FINRA offers a service to those companies that suspect a short position. FINRA has a department of “Short Specialists” that can and will conduct an audit of a company if they suspect illegal shorting activity. Perhaps this is something SpongeTech will consider looking in to.
So, to recap here, so far, we have a company that 1) understands the value and importance of traditional advertising, 2) is generating significant revenue and 3) is concerned about shareholder value and dilution. Not bad.
My next step was to actually go out and see if their claims of “having products on the shelves” was true. I went to the local Walgreens and looked on the cleaning aid isle…nothing there. I looked in the automotive section…nothing there. Hmm, I wasn’t ready to give up so I asked to speak to the store manager. I explained to her that I had been told that SpongeTech Car Kits are a product they carry but that I was unable to find it in the store. I asked her if she had any way of telling me if ANY Walgreens carried the product. She stated that in fact she did and promptly headed to the computer.
She pulled up the product “SPONGETECH” and at this point I had stepped behind the counter with her. At the top of her screen, the system showed that there were 3 items “on hand” at another location.
There were about 15 or maybe 20 more locations listed below the location that had the 3 “on hand” and the column for the number “on hand” was blank.
Then, below those 15 or 20, there were more stores listed and in the column for “on hand” I saw the words “no activity”.
I questioned the manager about entries or lack thereof in the column for “on hand” and she stated that the stores with nothing in the “on hand” column simply didn’t have product in stock at that time but that at some point and time they have had product. The stores that indicated “no activity” have never carried the product in their location.
So, still not being satisfied, I asked her for the address of store that was showing “3 on hand”. The address was 6006 Beach Blvd, Jacksonville, Fl. It was about 11 miles away from where I was but I thought, what the heck, let’s take a ride.
I arrived at the store, looked in the cleaning aids and automotive sections…nothing. Again, I asked for the manager. I told her what I was looking for and that the store close to my house had indicated that her store had “3 on hand” then I asked her if there was any way she could search her system to find out exactly where in the store the product would be. She headed off to the computer and when she returned she stated that the products should be located in the “On TV” section of the store. She then walked over to that section with me and WAALAA, there it was….SpongeTech 3 Pack Combo Car Wash System. As soon as I got home, I called a friend of mine that has been following SpongeTech and relayed my findings. Last I heard, he was headed out to pick up a kit of his own.
For all you nay sayers…I took pictures with my cell phone. Call the store, I’ve given you the address. If the clerk answering the phone can’t help you, ask to speak to the manager and have the manager look in their system to see if they carry the product. Even if you are told that no, they don’t carry the product, take it one step further and ask if it’s possible that they are just sold out, is it something they have stocked before. Be persistent and I think you will like the results.
To summarize, what I found through all my skepticism is a company that 1) understands the value and importance of traditional advertising, 2) is generating significant revenue and 3) is concerned about shareholder value and dilution and last but not least 4) actually has a real product in the stores, on the shelves.
Way to go SpongeTech !!!
Here are the pictures I took:
Seems to me he should be thanking them for giving him all their money so he can lead such a luxurious lifestyle at their expense.
Jack Chang and Global Vision Holdings. I bet Dorothy Heyl at the SEC would love to hear that you are back in biz.
Oh yeah, I see something real good here
additional 4,500,000,000 restricted shares of the Company are awaiting cancellation, the Transfer Agent requested additional paperwork in respect of those stock cancellations. These are in respect of the cancellation of the "Signing Bonuses" awarded to Alan Santini, Jack Chang and to Leslie Smiedt.
Hey Jack, how did your interview with the SEC go after you claimed you were the "co-inventor" of the ATM machine.
Now the castle has a new owner, South African billionaire Stephen Lumb, who plans to spend £20 million on upgrading what he calls his "Shangri La". He's even said that he would like to buy the local golf club, whose driveway he will have to use to gain access to his new home. But whether he will prove as flamboyant a character as " party girl" Margarita Hamilton, only time will tell.
http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:7z5I3cSilI0J:weldgen.tripod.com/arnos-vale/id5.html+stephen+lumb&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us
Hope he remembered to thank you good ole shareholders for all your support...
Nice find Stav
MUST READ FOR THOSE WHO DON'T LIKE TO CLICK ON LINKS
Cruel threats from tyrant in luxury tower
Tony Hetherington, Mail on Sunday
26 March 2006, 10:53am
THE language is unpleasant: 'You are pathetic, a typical smalltimer.' The threats are unnerving: 'I consider you a target and therefore expendable.' And the arrogance of the message is breathtaking: 'You little people fail to realise that people such as myself do not care about you or your lives. I do not care if I break you and your family financially, I could not give a s**t.'
OTHER STORIESHBOS confirms talks with Lloyds TSB
Branson to bid for £2bn Gatwick Airport
Market report: Wednesday close
Lehman's London staff to be paid
AIG: £48bn rescue plan from US bank
FTSE LATEST4912.40-113.20
ASK AN EXPERT Think of a question, any question. And get an answer here...
>> Ask an Expert
SAVINGS ACCOUNT FINDER Do your own homework on the best savings accounts with our account finder tool.
>> Savings tool
Did these words come from a loan shark perhaps? No, amazingly this was the e-mail received by a shareholder who dared to ask questions when mining investment company Hanover Capital Group lost its place on the junior Alternative Investment Market and embarked on a bewildering series of changes.
And the reply came from the company's boss, South African-born self-proclaimedbnaire Stephen Craig Lumb, who in January announced the purchase of Walton Castle, near Bristol. The asking price was £3.35m.
Lumb, 38, took control of Hanover in March 2003. Three weeks later, the company's professional adviser, Grant Thornton, quit and trading in the shares was suspended. Lumb announced that new advisers would be appointed within days. Three years on, Hanover has no advisers and no share listing and has committed a string of Companies Act offences that look set to spark a Department of Trade and Industry investigation.
Accounts due two years ago have still not been filed. A list of shareholders due at Companies House a month ago is also outstanding. And at one point Hanover disappeared from its registered office and failed to replace its company secretary, who resigned - both breaches of company law.
Since Lumb's appointment to the board, Hanover has failed to hold annual meetings of shareholders.
Instead, the company's 7,000 investors learned through a Press release last year that control of the business had passed to an American firm, St James Capital Holdings, headed by...Stephen Lumb. The American company had owned about five% of Hanover.
Overnight, this leapt to a controlling stake of 66%, paid for not in cash but in restricted shares in St James Capital Holdings itself. Those shares cannot easily be resold and are difficult to value.
Meanwhile, Hanover's mineral rights in Africa, valued at £6.4m, were signed over to another US company, West Africa Gold, in exchange for a 31% stake in the business. Within months, they were simply abandoned. Hanover's stake was valued recently at about £18,000.
Lumb is described as a 'consultant' to West Africa Gold, which has changed its name to Great West Gold. It now claims mineral rights in California and Arizona.
Lumb announced that Hanover's investors would all receive a huge handout of shares in the American company, which would be worth three times the cost of their Hanover shares.
Months later, with no handout in sight, Lumb simply retracted the announcement. Great West Gold similarly announced a distribution of assets.
Mining rights would be hived off to five new British companies, with shares for everyone, to be traded in London by the end of January. But on March 10, a fresh announcement put back trading to the end of this month.
It is unclear how the new shares will be traded. They stand no chance of a full Stock Exchange listing. But Lumb has ambitions for a mini-stock market of his own. He has registered about 100 companies with himself as director.
All of which is no help at all to the locked-in minority shareholders in Hanover Capital Group.
Lumb told Financial Mail: 'Quite frankly, we have done the right thing as far as I am concerned for the Hanover shareholders.' The 'right thing' seems to be an offer of shares in Lumb's other company, St James Capital Holdings. There is no timetable, though.
However badly his shareholders may have fared, Lumb himself enjoys living the high life, with a luxury flat in St James's Square, central London, as well as his newly purchased Walton Castle.
He reportedly owns two private jets, three helicopters and a 68ft yacht. In contrast, though, stories persist of bad debts. Top people's party organiser Red Snapper is still waiting to be paid for caviar and champagne dished out at Lumb's birthday party last April.
The company says it never talks about its clients, but sources put the unpaid bill at about £8,000. Lumb is unabashed, saying that he is 'in dispute' with Red Snapper and has 'no time to be a flashy playboy'.
He did find time, though, to fire off another of his e-mails to property tycoon Vincent Tchenguiz, blaming him for leaking the debt tales - something that Tchenguiz denies.
'My security team has been briefed,' he wrote, and Tchenguiz could expect 'major due diligence' into his private life.
With a Department of Trade and Industry inquiry apparently imminent, Lumb should expect to face more than a few questions himself, very soon.
Stavros, has this been forwarded to the SEC yet?