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.
Yes, this is a court order in a separate civil legal matter involving a different company. But, the word "Restraining" is never used in this court order. It is simply a summary of the complaint and settlement terms. No criminal charges were ever filed that I can find.
No... The company, not a scam, had a net loss of $1,161,062 in fiscal 2014... which compares favorably to the companys net loss of $2,610,279 in fiscal 2013, which was an improvement of $1,449,217.
How is that a scam? Sounds like an accurate accounting of facts to me. For more publicly announced facts, please see below:
StreamTrack Reports 2014 Record Net Revenues and Milestones
The problem with STTK is not with their using shares to aquire funds to grow their business. The problem is the Shorters won't let the value of STTK's stock increase to get them the capital they need and deserve to grow their business.
In affect, they are in a "Catch 22" until they obtain profitability. They need additional financing to maintain and grow their business; yet each new set of debt offerings forces more convertible debt.
Hopefully, the next two 10-Qs will show they are getting out of this cycle... before they have to conduct a reverse split.
Wow... Look at that. another T-Trade showing 15.7 million in new but hidden buy orders.... just like yesterday. This time with a net of 30.8 million in total buy orders against 21.3 million in sell orders.
If it walks and quacks like a duck, it probably is.
With that in mind, I'm inclined to go with WeedMaster's intel and thoughts on this... that someone is secretly buying up a whole lot of cheap shares in front of the release of STTK's next 10-Q.
Millions? Now that's hilarious. According to the recent 8K filing, on January 6th, the company OS was increased by "225,414,444 shares of common stock upon conversion of previously disclosed convertible notes." Assuming the company could actually get all that revenue, with an average PPS of .0005, this amounts to $112,707.22. Hardly millions.
Deceit, deceit and more deceit...
This day is looking virtually identical to yesterday... all selling initially followed by late day buying at pretty much the same PPS. I wonder if we'll get a similar T-Trade after hours.
Ok... I need some education here. What do you mean by Open Market Exchanges? Also, do you know the answer to the second part of my original questions... i.e. was yesterday's dilution new sttk shares that haven't been identified in the 8K that came out on January 6th.. or do you think those shares were just hitting the exchanges?
If we were following strict Supply/ Demand capitalism rules here, it's the pent up buying pressure that should be moving... which has stayed pretty steady this morning and afternoon around 5 to 1. We'll see who gives in by the end of the day... or whether everyone just picks up their marbles and goes home.
Admiral... I assume you are suggesting the T-Trade yesterday was from dilution. Is that correct? And, if so, do you think it's from the pool of shares that were reported in the Form 8-K for STREAMTRACK, INC., dated 6-Jan-2015, for Unregistered Sale of Equity Securities?
Or. do you think this is a new batch of shares we haven't heard from the company on?
Thanks Admiral. That's actually really good information to know.
A T-Trade is an after hours accounting of trades that were not shown during the day. That particular T-Trade showed up as a Purchase on both IHUB's L2 and Trades tools.
I believe it was WeedMaster who said he complained to his broker about this and was told it was the MMs hiding some of their ( or their client's) purchases at .0005 in order to keep the price suppressed through the day, while they continued to buy the shares at an overly cheap rate... compared to what would have happened had the rest of the investor community seen the massive buying that was going on throughout the day.
How that can be legal, I have no idea. It sucks for sure!
And, looking at L2 today... I have to wonder if this isn't going on again today. For example, who is selling all these shares today at .0005? And, why would the MMs take all those sell orders without a counterbalancing set of purchase orders? They can't make any money unless they are able to sell those shares. They aren't going to buy them unless they think there will be a market for them.
And now, Buy Orders are outpacing Sell Orders by 5 to 1 on L2.
Can you say Cheap, Cheap, Cheap!
Trash and buy cheap... before STTK releases their next 10-Q, and once again demonstrating the company is positively progressing in increasing Ad revenues while decreasing costs.
The only question is does the company run out of Authorized Shares (AS) before they obtain profitability. In my opinion, that's all that really matters. Everything else is just a side show.
AIMO,
Buy orders are outpacing sell orders by 4 to 1 on L2. It's clear peeps want STTK shares... they just want them cheap before the next run.
The only Scam here is how the stock price is violently trashed and bought cheap before every 10-Q filing is release. It's getting pretty predictable.
Really??? Where's the proof?
Really??? Where's the proof?
Really??? Where's the proof?
Really??? Where's the proof?
Right on! Couldn't have said it better.
Really??? Where's the proof?
I can understand vndm/redwood dumping their shares, if they did... but, what I can't understand is someone purchasing them if they didn't think the stock was worth the price, even with the dilution that's been going on. Not with a net purchase of 57 million shares today. Makes no sense.
Id this is true, why aren't you taking them to court? After all, you did the Private Placement. And, SRFF facilitated the deal, if I understood you correctly. If you were both scammed, you need to report their activities to the SEC.
The T-trade shows up on IHub as a 27,059,800 Buy Order.
I'm reading my info of the IHub "Trades" Feature.
Actually, that was only one buy order at .0007 to start the day off. The rest of the day traded pretty much flat at .0006, with the sellers in control until roughly 3 PM this afternoon.
After that, the Buyers took control and ended the day with ~25 million STTK shares purchased against ~21 million sold. Then an after hours T-Trade came is for another ~27 million STTK shares purchased, for a total of 52,180,524 STTK shares purchased today.
Watching all the negative dialog today, and watching the massive end of day purchases, I have to assume someone wanted to buy an awful lot of cheap shares today.
I wonder why... if this company is as bad as some would have us believe?
PROOF... filed with the SEC... demonstrating that certain posters don't know what they're talking about!
Question... Does the Annual Report claim Hill took over LUXD in 2012... or just the startup of STTK?
Admiral... I'm probably a bit dense on this subject. But, are you saying STTK will initiate a reverse merger back with LUXD or another Shell?
I understand the next 10-Q should be out by the 15th of this month... but, I haven't looked it up myself. I know it should come out sometime this month.
Nothing's running until the next 10-Q, if then. In the meantime, all the Bulls and Bears are just pre-positioning for the next bit of company news/ filings.
AIMO,
As I recall, the original reverse split was on the acquisition of the company from the previous owners.
Sounds like you and your Lawyer need to have a conversation with Hill then. It also sounds like you re claiming Sichenzia Ross Friedman Ference LLP (SRFF) got screwed too. What are they going to do about that?
That's exactly what he told us right here on this board. I don't understand the game he's playing.
Admiral, again I'm confused. A few weeks ago, you claimed to be a major "private" investor in STTK. Are you now saying that the information about Hill and Gravit's previous judgment was not disclosed to you at the time of the private placement?
Admiral... I'm confused by your recent posts, as you were very pro-STTK just a few days ago.
If Hill fails to follow through with his requirements on probation, then yes, I agree he could find himself in additional legal hot water. I can't say whether he failed in any of his reporting requirements, as I have nothing to do with Hill or the company... besides the purchase of some of their stock.
I have no idea whether Hill honored his commitment in the requirement to deliver copies of the FTC judgment - which I believe you are referencing, per the terms of the settlement agreement copied below. Since the Judgment was entered in 2009, I would assume we are past the dates of those reporting requirements. If they never informed SRFF about the previous Judgment, then Hill is likely in trouble. However, I also find it hard to believe a company such as SRFF would not perform their own Due Diligence and therefore fail to know about the FTC's Judgment.
Total BS. Michael Hill was not convicted of any crime. He settled a civil lawsuit brought forward by the FTC accusing him and two others of deceptive business practices. The FTC cannot bring criminal charges. If they felt there was criminal action, they would have sent the information on to the DOJ to execute a Criminal Complaint. That never happened.
In fact, Michael Hill never admitted criminal or any other type of wrongdoing, as shown in the quote below, copied from the complaint you reference.
We went through this earlier today. The two Officers, Hill and Gravitz, settled a "Deceptive Claims" Civil complaint by the FTC. There was no criminal complaint, and the settlement did not require admission of wrong doing. They simply had to pay a fine and promise to stop the practices that the FTC was concerned about.
Sorry... I don't buy it. Show me one action by the SEC, FTC, DOJ or other law enforcement agency that has initiated one complaint or legal proceeding against STTK?
The word "Fraud" is never used once in the document you link to.
There was instead a "Complaint" by the FTC for "Deceptive Practices". The case was settled without a Criminal Complaint being lodged, nor was there an admission of guilt.
I don't defend the practices they employed... but they weren't criminal, and they paid a huge price for their former practices. Moreover, they agreed to no longer continue those practices.
But, again, none of this applies to STTK or RadioLoyalty.
Right on! There have been attempts, imo, to denigrate the value of this stock with discussions on topics that have nothing to do with this company, or it's intrinsic value.
The case was initiated for "Deceptive Practices", and settled by the FTC and the Defendants - Hills and Gravitz. No criminal charges were ever pressed that I can find.
The FTC can only initiate Civilian Complaints, not Criminal Complaints. If the FTC had felt Hill and Gravitz' actions were criminal in nature, they would have forwarded the charges on to the DOJ for further action. I can find no indication that the FTC ever initiated such actions.
Instead, the Defendants (Hill and Gravitz) accepted the FTC's settlement terms, including an agreement to not engage in such practices going forward.
FTC Settlements Bar Deceptive Online Marketing of "Free" Internet Auction Kits
Also from the Complaint: