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.
The CEO and BOD didn't take it with them when they RESIGNED en masse. There is NO "magic" happening and there is no "Hakuna matata" miracle coming.
Exactly. Some deluded person may think he can simply buy up a majority of common shares and gain control of the company. However, the majority stock is not in common but in non-trading Preferred shares which have been locked up in agreement with the SEC.
If someone is truly stupid enough to believe that he can take over the shell by buying enough common, is he ever going to be in for a shock and a HUGE LOSS!
No, when the CEO and BOD resigned, they not only ceased all operations for DSUS, they effectively "STAKED" it.
Nope, like I said, someone could buy the ENTIRE FLOAT and they would STILL NOT HOLD A MAJORITY INTEREST.
Even if they could (they can't), they would have ALL OF THE ATTENDANT PROBLEMS THAT CAUSED THE CEO AND BOD TO RESIGN EN MASSE.
Who in their right mind would want to take over all the debt and other problems that go with the shell?
Nope, the ENTIRE FLOAT of DSUS is not a controlling interest.
Nope, that's just 100% PURE BULLSHIT!
Yup, the clause, "...the control block of preferred shares is being placed with an escrow agent", ensures that no one else can gain control of the shell. Perhaps someone doesn't understand this.
Sorry, but that's BULLSHIT!
As I stated and you repeated, "The CEO and BOD still hold the majority interest in shares of DSUS. Legally, NOTHING can be done without them." That means [b]NO ONE ELSE could possibly gain a controlling interest.
Whoever is tricked into buying this turd is just wasting his money.
That's BULLSHIT! Phoenix UAS has nothing to do with DSUS stock. In fact, it appears to be set up by an investor who lost his ass on DSUS stock. There is NOTHING "brewing".
NO ONE lied to the FAA unless it was the CEO or a Director of the company.
That idea is just plain silly. l-)
This shell was named as a co-defendant in the suit brought by the SEC. NO ONE with an ounce of sense would touch this shell with that hanging over it. That's why the CEO and BOD resigned en masse.
ROTFLMAO!!!!
Yup! The "new interests" are the SEC.
The old CEO and BOD still hold the majority interest shares. Legally, nothing can be done without them. The Phoenix UAS site is a sham, probably put up by someone who lost a lot of money and will try anything to recover some of it at the expense of naive investors.
The Company is DEAD. Here is a link to the official company website......
http://www.dsusa.co/
The SEC has named the company as a co-defendant.
Buying this is like flushing the money down the toilet.
That is 100% PURE BULLSHIT!!!!
DSUS is a DEAD company. The CEO and BOD resigned en masse late last year without naming any successors. They claimed they and shareholders were swindled.
http://www.otcmarkets.com/otciq/ajax/showNewsReleaseDocumentById.pdf?id=17810
They replaced the company website with the following notice: "DSUSA are no longer trading".
http://www.dsusa.co/
The company received a Wells Notice and has been named as a co-defendant by the SEC. The company has been given a "Skull and Crossbones" by OTCMarkets. That is NOT good.
They are currently doing NOTHING ..... BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO MANAGEMENT, NO EMPLOYEES AND NO OPERATIONS OF ANY SORT!
CAVEAT EMPTOR!
PURE BULLSHIT!!!!
DSUS is a dead company. The CEO and BOD resigned en masse late last year without naming any successors. They claimed they and shareholders were swindled.
http://www.otcmarkets.com/otciq/ajax/showNewsReleaseDocumentById.pdf?id=17810
They replaced the company website with the following notice: "DSUSA are no longer trading".
http://www.dsusa.co/
The company received a Wells Notice and has been named as a co-defendant by the SEC. The company has been given a "Skull and Crossbones" by OTCMarkets. That is NOT good.
They are currently doing NOTHING ..... BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO MANAGEMENT, NO EMPLOYEES AND NO OPERATIONS OF ANY SORT!
CAVEAT EMPTOR!
Yes, it would have been soooo much fun watching the cobwebs grow.
Absolutely pitiful chart, and it ain't gonna get better.
Not a peep out of this company since 2014. Looks like they just up and absconded with investor's money.
Even Joel has thrown in the towel. Too late to save his butt though.
No Assets of ANY sort. Just another scam.
BULLSHIT!!!!
Why do you feel that the, "To the moon", one liners aren't just as inciting to posters who know it's just a pump and dump as the, "This POS going to trip zeros", is to those who don't?
To discriminate due to positive or negative sentiment goes against what makes iHub a great site for open debate. Discrimination base on sentiment is what you seem to be proposing. Posting "positive" one liners is OK but "negative" one liners should be forbidden with no review or recourse.
I mostly post on boards of obvious scams, "miners" that don't mine anything except investor's wallets, companies with unworkable business models, companies run by crooks and con artists. For every poster pointing out why a particular stock is a bad investment, there are often ten or more "carnival barkers" trying to get you to plunk down your dime to see the "GREAT EGRESS", with only one or two pointing out that the "GREAT EGRESS" is really just the big back door.
On paid pump days, the BS positive one liners abound. Literally pages of them. Are they really any better than the post that says, "This POS is going to trip zeros."?
You're good in my book too, Renee. I marked you years ago as you provide good information. I strive to provide good, accurate information in my posts and seldom use one liners, except for the occasional, "BULLSHIT", when calling out an egregious piece of misinformation when it should be obvious or I am pressed for time.
But I digress.
What I mean to say is, "This POS is going DOWN!", is just as valid an opinion as, "This little gem is going TO THE MOON!"
In fact, the latter would be more offensive to me on most of the boards I post on, as like I said, I mainly post about bad investments/companies.
To be fair then you'd have to remove all of the, "To the moon" and "This little gem is gonna FLY!", one liners too.
If you eliminate those, that would eliminate most of the "noise" on the boards but a lot of IRPs would probably leave.
Or are we looking to protect only ONE SIDED opinion?
More about the Nikitin's previous businesses, Blue Chip Energy and Advanced Solar Photonics....
From the US Solar Institute.....
Orlando-based ASP Solar Panel Fraud
We have some recent developments in the ongoing saga with Blue Chip Energy (a.k.a Advanced Solar Photonics (ASP)) [owned and run by the Nikitins].
The company knowingly put these fraudulent panels on the market, thinking no one would notice. They were wrong.
But how big was the scam? How extensive is the damage?
Well, conservative estimates place the number of defrauded customers in the hundreds – in just Florida alone. Blue Chip Energy sold megawatts of solar panels.
Florida customers who bought Blue Chip Energy panels may soon discover that the accompanying warranties are void. The company is on the verge of going out of business, the factory is closed, dark and almost abandoned. It was only a matter of time before the all of this companies fraudulent activities were discovered. [The company subsequently went out of business leaving customers, employees, suppliers, creditors and investors on the hook for millions]
No company = no warranty.
This is the kind of people who are running Fonon and want you to invest your money.
The history of dishonesty of the principals is a millstone.
As the old saying goes, "A leopard can't change it's spots."
The Nikitins and "Baba Louie" Schlegel, the fart, have extensive histories of scamming and screwing investors in the past. Despite the Nikitin's attempt at obfuscating their past by using all the different spellings of their first names to make searches more difficult, there is just too much history to overcome.
The problem is the streaming ads that appear at the bottom sometimes. They automatically direct the page view to be centered on them. Unless the iHub geeks fix this, the only thing you can do is close the ad as soon as it appears. Once the ad is closed, everything should work properly again.
PRs put out by con artists are pretty much worthless. That's how the market sees it too, the $20 paint job at the end notwithstanding.
The Nikitin's Blue Chip Energy, LLC and Advanced Solar Photonics released similar PRs. They were repeated by some of the same sites.
The Nikitins have a history of using these PRs to inflate their reputation while defrauding investors, creditors and customers. Oh yeah, J. Louis Schlegel IV has a similar history of false and misleading PRs for other stock selling scams like Spare Backup, Mabwe Minerals, et al.
Excerpt from The Orlando Sentinel
"That information is wrong", is clearly about the information without regard to where it originated and is non-confrontational.
"You are wrong", is clearly about the other poster and is confrontational.
Both say the information is wrong but the first is non-accusatory while the second one is The difference is in the manner in which it is presented. The first "attacks the message" (OK), the second "attacks the messenger" (NOT OK).
Your example, "You are wrong, didn't you read the filings...", is a poor example because it IS accusatory, confrontational and about the other poster.
The proper way to get the point across without making it about the other poster is to say something like, "That information is wrong. Here is what the filing says..." If you don't want to go to the trouble of quoting the filing you could provide a link.
If you don't want to do that, you could just say, "That is not what the filing says."
Personally, I like to take the time to back up my statements with hard facts when I have the time. If your best argument is meerely to attack the other poster for not reading or some such, it only shows you don't have much in the way of facts on your side.
A much better analogy than basketball, which is at least a fair game.
Throw in that the promoters are working hard to get people to bet on a mystery "champion" being touted as undefeated and near invincible when in reality it is an ordinary farm chicken, and a hen at that.
Not if you could only PM from a post which you, personally deleted and the PM was required to be limited to discussion of what was wrong with the post. It would make being a mod easier and the image of the site would be fairer. I understand the frustration of having a message deleted with no explanation other than "Off-topic" and not knowing what made it off topic.
Yes, I think it would cut down on the Admin work load, make users more aware of the rules and ultimately cut down on the complaints. The rules are good the way they are, they just need to be understood better in my opinion.
Yes, as a free user and a mod on several boards it would be very helpful if I could PM a poster from his deleted post in order to point out what he did wrong.
I would be happy to provide an explanation for removed posts. It would serve to help make the poster aware of the rules. They could make it only active for a free user from a post deleted by that user and attach a penalty for any misuse.
I had several posts deleted by Admin for simply using the word "You" in the general sense, not applying to anyone specifically. A couple of times they overturned themselves after explanation and re-reading the post but not always. I solved the issue by substituting the word "one" when referring to the general sense.
So, what would the discussion gain by the following exchange?
"Why are you here?"
"Why do you ask that question?"
"Do you own any shares?"
"Why do you want to know that? Would the answer change any of the facts I have presented?"
I see this as "noise", not useful information. It think it would be better to ensure that people understand the rules completely. If you read the TOS like a "newbie", you'll see that it doesn't really give enough detail. It should at least contain a link to "Why posts are deleted".
I think most read the TOS but don't know what really constitutes "Off topic" posting. That needs to be explained better, not relaxed.
And if my reply to the question is, "Why do you ask that question?"
Is that civil and allowed or is that off topic? Because that would be my answer.
Again, how are those questions, "Why are you here?" and "Are you a shareholder?", about the company or its stock or are they about the other poster?
If you allow posts about other posters, where is the new line drawn? Can there be any?
One of the posts I had removed by Admin early on (before reading the Handbook "cover to cover") was an answer to that exact question, "Why are you here?"
I was told my answer was off topic because it didn't discuss the company or stock, rather my motivation for posting. I think you were the one that removed it.
It is fine to talk about "manipulation" of a stock. People do it all the time. It is NOT OK to accuse other posters of manipulation (unless one can supply legal proof). The, "Why are you here?" and, "Are you a shareholder?", questions are intended to do just that.
The thought process is that if you are not a shareholder but are posting negative sentiments, you must be a "basher" here to manipulate the stock downwards. The next question is, "If you own no stock, why waste your time posting here?" The line of questioning is designed to minimize and/or trivialize negative posters.
The, "Why are you here?", question is definitely off topic as it is not about the company or stock or anything related to it. It is merely a means to open an endless argument about the other poster's character/motives.
What does, "Pumpers are here!", lend to the discussion of the stock? It only serves to call into question the character of anyone who is positive about the stock. While it might not mention anyone specifically, anyone posting positive sentiments would be tarred with the same brush.
If I ask, "Are you out of your mind for even considering this?", it is a civil question and you have the choice whether to reply or not, right?
Shelly, Please don't do that. Allowing ANY name calling, even just "bashers" and "pumpers" will only make things worse not better.
I have occasionally had posts removed "unfairly" by Admin, usually because my meaning was misunderstood. I'd rather have that happen once in a while than see the constant basher/pumper feud and all that that would entail.
One suggestion I would make to you is to be more specific in the deletion rules in the Terms of Service, especially what constitutes "Off topic" and "Personal attack". In the TOS, they aren't much different than other sites but in application, they are indeed quite different. I don't think the majority of new users read the user handbook "cover to cover" before they jump in.
As has been stated previously, there are NO patents assigned to Drone Services USA. If there ever was a patent application, it has been amended to reflect a different assignee. This can easily be confirmed by all using the USPTO Patent Search Tool, here.....
USPTO Patent Search Tool
The ONLY things assigned to DSUS are two worthless TradeMarks for the names, "ProSearch" and "ProDropper", which can also be confirmed here....
USPTO Trademark Search Tool
Despite the wishful thinking, there is NOTHING OF VALUE left in the worthless, dirty PVEC/DSUS shell.
Based on management's prior history, this is just another scam aimed at enriching insiders at investor expense.
The Nikitins, "Baba Louie" Schlegel and others involved have a long history of scam operations.
CAVEAT EMPTOR!