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.
I'm still here holding my lottery tickets. Better shot at winning here than the powerball.
The logarithmic machines rule the market.
Waiting till the final hour of trading of the year to announce dilution seems a bit sneeky to me.
I would have preferred they received the jelly of the month club membership and instead return some value to the suffering shareholders. Gonna have to call cousin Eddy to do his thing.
Will do Shark. I thought if I hid my head in the sand for a month it would all go away but I see that is not the case.
Pump stopper deserves nothing but a lump of coal from Santa.
Thanks for posting
Now what!? What a rigged game.
Now what!? What a rigged game.
Success of the shareholders?
When they use the language "for operating expenses" that is a code word for "keep my paycheck coming."
My point was we have a solid story with no need to hype it up. That's all. Sales of units should provide all the catalyst we need to go higher. A little concerned about the public offering but we'll see how it all unfolds.
We walk, skip the talk.
Lock the thieves up and throw away the key.
Wish I had enough money to short squeeze the slime balls at SA till they had nothing left.
I think the one thing you can be sure of is that the management always protects their own pockets before the retail shareholders. We will be the last ones to benefit from any success that may come. That's just how these micro cap entities roll.
What's with the low volume? Can anyone explain. Have all the shares been purchased?
Go home! You can't play with us here. You weren't invited!
Excellent article. My only other thought is; " What company would buy bigger facilities to ramp up their operation if they were not serious about growth?" People who are out to deceive do not buy bigger and better facilities. Thank you for your excellent effort.
In case you are wondering; I talked to DLA leadership personnel.
I have it on good authority that the DLA is committed to marking with DNA and planning to expand in the future. That's all I can say. Pump Stopper is a thief and a liar.
WE ARE NOT THE FIRST. WE NEED TO TAKE ACTION AS WELL.
NEW YORK, June 15, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- root9B Technologies, Inc. (OTCMKTS: RTNB), a leading cybersecurity, regulatory and risk mitigation company, responded today to false statements and allegations made by the financial blogger known as "The Pump Stopper."
The Pump Stopper is an anonymous author who issued a report about root9B Technologies that is rife with inaccuracies and factual mistakes, including the suggestion that insiders are selling stock. The company believes the sole purpose of this report is to benefit the anonymous author who, in a disclaimer, states he has a short position in shares of root9B Technologies.
root9B Technologies has taken action based on these allegations. This afternoon, the company has asked Harvey Pitt, former Chairman of the Securities & Exchange Commission and an independent director of root9B Technologies, to review the issue and recommend appropriate responses to the allegations.
root9B Technologies issued the following statement in response to the anonymous author's allegations:
"root9B Technologies is appalled and incensed by the baseless anonymous blog attacks posted today by a short seller that seek to cast aspersions on both the Company's business operations as well as the integrity of its senior management team and Board. Our Company is at the forefront of important cybersecurity developments and solutions, among other innovative business solutions, and has been recognized internationally for its unique ability in detecting and thwarting, in advance, a cyber attack against the Nation's top financial institutions. The personal attacks on our personnel are wholly unwarranted, and appear designed to advance the anonymous blogger's short strategy, rather than provide a serious analysis of our Company's operations and capacity for future success.
"The Board today asked one of its independent directors, former SEC Chairman Harvey L. Pitt (who has never purchased or sold a single share of Company stock, despite allegations to the contrary in the blog post), to review the allegations contained in the blog posting and to recommend appropriate responses for the Company to these allegations. It is expected that Mr. Pitt will report his findings to the Board, and to appropriate regulatory authorities at the completion of his review."
If everyone would buy instead of sell when a SA short attack comes out we could kill them. Short squeeze the life out of them. Face the snake and cut its head off.
I want to meet them in a bar. Cowards
Although they did say the amount of cotton they marked.
All the things mentioned in the article were things we worked through years ago. Only thing relevant is cotton and he lied about that.
Agree. He needs to come out and say it was a bunch of lies. Otherwise come clean and face your shareholders with the truth.
My bad. The investigation is the other way around.
My bad. The investigation is the other way around.
Just read an article on my cnbc app. The APDN lawyers are already going after the guy.
Just read the SA article. It's very weak and talks about stuff that happened years ago. (Patrick Cox, Agora, Creed etc.) He basically says APDN has its genesis in nothing but shady characters. He also says they have no sales and are gaining no market share in any of the sectors they are involved in. I found it to be poorly written and can clearly see the author's intent. He mentions nothing of recent successes of the company. I am amazed so many have fallen for this scam of an article.
If the company has been involved in a paid stock promotion within the last year I will be greatly disappointed.
Defamation
For other uses, see Libel (disambiguation), Slander (disambiguation), Racial vilification, or Defamation (film); for the Catholic sin, see Detraction. For Wikipedia's own policy about defamation, see Wikipedia:Libel.
Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation as well as other various kinds of defamation that retaliate against groundless criticism.
Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and have been made to someone other than the person defamed.[1] Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel.[2]
False light laws protect against statements which are not technically false but misleading.[3]
In some civil law jurisdictions, defamation is treated as a crime rather than a civil wrong.[4] The United Nations Commission on Human Rights ruled in 2012 that the criminalization of libel violates freedom of expression and is inconsistent with Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.[5]
A person who defames another may be called a "defamer", "famacide", "libeler" or "slanderer".
Defamation
For other uses, see Libel (disambiguation), Slander (disambiguation), Racial vilification, or Defamation (film); for the Catholic sin, see Detraction. For Wikipedia's own policy about defamation, see Wikipedia:Libel.
Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation as well as other various kinds of defamation that retaliate against groundless criticism.
Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and have been made to someone other than the person defamed.[1] Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel.[2]
False light laws protect against statements which are not technically false but misleading.[3]
In some civil law jurisdictions, defamation is treated as a crime rather than a civil wrong.[4] The United Nations Commission on Human Rights ruled in 2012 that the criminalization of libel violates freedom of expression and is inconsistent with Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.[5]
A person who defames another may be called a "defamer", "famacide", "libeler" or "slanderer".
It's also illegal if the information is false. That's why the company needs to respond immediately. Their silence will condemn them otherwise.
Time will tell if it's illegal. Most get away with it even if it is illegal. Seeking alpha did the same thing to QCOR a few years back. Took it from 90 to 19 in three days. Then the same thieves took it back to 90. I don't know how these slime slithering people sleep at night. Disgusting way to make a living.
Agree. Need to respond immediately.
We all know the management is over compensated.
When your board is paid as much as they are they open themselves up to these kinds of attacks. My question is: Did they pay a pumper? I think the article is wrong when it says others dominate cotton. We know that is a false statement. They just need to come out and blast this guy with the facts and reveal their sound financial position. If they respond in a proper manner this could be a good buying opportunity. If they can reiterate their time line for profitability that would really help. Wonder what Maxim is doing about this ? Their reputation is on the line as well.
If the company is guilty they will not reply. If this is a fallacious article they will refute it immediately. That is the only responsible thing to do. Time to lawyer up.