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.
Failed plans are not always an indication of fraud.
Failed plans do not a scandal make.
Sounds like "all the evidence" is simply a missed phone call with Precious Mayes.
I had the opportunity to speak with Precious several times about the EDWY opportunity.
I have absolutely no doubt that everything was in order.
Not so fast. There's absolutely no evidence of any ESCU wrongdoing. The independent audit proved that.
No one did anything wrong. That's the fact of the matter.
The company's S1 filings show that Kimmons never received payment for $728K. He was issued restricted shares in lieu of cash. Those shares were subsequently relinquished in April of 2015 when the new team came in.
The idea that he benefitted is a myth.
Irrelevant and a myth. Totally untrue.
ESCU's trading has not been suspended.
Again, this is all irrelevant. Kimmons is not an officer or director of ESCU and holds no shares. He is not involved in ESCU whatsoever.
The person referred to is not an officer, director or shareholder of ESCU.
There is no relationship with this company.
I suggest you speak with ESCU. They will be glad to answer your questions.
The potential of their opportunity far exceeds what you are describing.
Per the ESCU team, all funding so far has come from their own pockets. They have been paying the accountants and attorneys involved in the S1a filings.
The SEC has been in dialogue with them both online and via phone to move things forward. It looks like they are very close to reaching the goal.
Then the company will close an initial round of funding via the S1a and hedge funds. It will move to a higher exchange and proceed with getting the chill removed by the DTC. It will also become fully reporting. The slate will be completely clean.
It's great because they are doing everything by the book and they are putting their own money on the line.
FYI ESCU has been in dialogue with the SEC. They will soon be resubmitting their S1a. They are getting very close.
Once the SEC approves the S1a we will be the next sequence of events unfold.
Looking good!
What toxic financing?
No it's not. A DTC chill is not a trading suspension.
A $4 million bid? Really?
All of this is ridiculous.
Irrelevant. The Kimmons are long gone.
Kimmons has not been involved with the company for 3 years. He owns no stock.
The new ESCU team is paying for everything out of their own pocket and are spending a lot of time on the S1 filing.
The S1 filing process now seems to be reaching its goal.
It's a whole new ball game.
As stated before gaining approval from the SEC for an S1 filing requires an average of 3 to 5 submissions.
ESCU received a refined list of questions from the SEC on Friday which they are now addressing. ESCU says they intend to refile this week if possible.
There's nothing unusual with what's going on. These days the process is more involved than it used to be.
ESCU resubmitted its S1 a couple of weeks ago and is waiting to hear from the SEC. This is ESCU's fourth submission.
It's my understanding that it takes 3 to 5 submissions to obtain approval from the SEC.
Hopefully the company will hear from the SEC before the end of the week.
Kimmons is long gone except in a few noggins.
Or ... you could call him and ask him.
Why would a CEO be required to answer random questions from strangers on a stock message board who refuse to give their real names?
I can't think of a single reason.
S1 filings are living documents. I'm sure ESCU will make all of the necessary adjustments to comply with SEC disclosure requirements.
Not to worry.
It is taking an average of 3 to 5 S1 submissions to secure SEC approval.
Looks like ESCU is on target with that standard.
You do know that the primary purpose of filing an S1 is to secure capital, right?
When they get the capital they can pursue their business plan.
Per the ESCU audit this issue is without merit.
Why on earth would anyone expect ESCU to have case studies when it's a brand new venture raising capital to build its first product???
Nope. Quraeshi simply consulted to eDoorways. And that was only for a short time.
He was never an employee.
Not according to ESCU. Their tech goes beyond what's mentioned in the patent. And they're certainly not going to share all of their secrets in the S1.
Define what you mean by "case studies" for ESCU's products? What would one look like?
Look up the definition of a DTCC chill.
A chill is not a trading suspension.
Never was, never will be.
Irrelevant and immaterial. No bearing on today's opportunity.
Correct. New company. Entirely new group of people. New vision.
Again, there is no trading suspension for ESCU.
All of this has been answered by the ESCU audit.
All of this is incorrect and irrelevant as stated in previous posts.
There is no DTC 'trading suspension"
There is no requirement for him to file an 8K.
No, it's not speculation. I called ESCU and they confirmed he returned the shares. Kimmons gave them permission to make the disclosure.
The facts are in my friend.
Whatever. What part of this message is failing to register?
Kimmons set us up with an exciting new opportunity, ESCU, turned in all of his shareholdings (April, 2015) and walked away having done right by his shareholders.
Now he's doing other things unrelated to ESCU.
That may be hard to accept. Irrespective, it's reality.