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.
Hey IW, I've put that in the ibox
under a new header:
SpoozToolz and Modules Trading Examples
I'm sure there are other posts that can go under a header like this so I'll have to do some digging to find them. If anyone else can point me to some, please feel free to do so.
Repost of Admin Shelly's e-mail. Please do not take any deletions personally - especially if they are off-topic. The Admins and mods just want to keep the board as clean as possible for newcomers to easily read through posts. If we start talking about too many off-topic things, the board could become useless for people really wanting to read other's opinions of Spooz. We had a bunch of off-topic posts already this morning - not attacks on anyone - just off-topic and many off-topic posts over the last few days. The Admins have shown that they want the rules to be adhered to or people will get banned. All the mods and Admins have had their share of having to keep the board clean so please make our job a bit easier by posting respectfully.
Posted by: IH Admin [Shelly]
In reply to: None Date:10/9/2007 9:28:51 PM
Post #32241 of 32384
Folks, this board is to talk about the company - SPZI. Posts about other people and speculation on why they choose to post on this board (i.e. FUD, basher, pumper) are not discussion of the company - it's discussion of other posters and considered "off topic".
Messages about iHub, the rules, bans, the Mods, deletions are also "off topic" - not about SPZI. Any questions of this nature need to be asked by sending a private message to Matt or myself. All can send us private messages.
As long as people can follow the rules of the site, they are welcome to post on the board of their choice. Shareholder status, investment sentiment, trading/investing style (i.e. "long" or "flipper") are not requirements for posting on any stock board.
People can offer their opinion about the company, whether positive or negative, as long as their posts adhere to the Terms of Use. If you disagree with another poster's opinion, discuss the information, without focusing on their motives for posting on the board and/or attacking them for holding this opinion.
There have been two more bans here tonight. There are many of you that have had quite a few posts removed already this week. Please keep your posts about the company so there are no additions to the ban list.
If you have any questions about deletions or this post, please send me a private message.
Thanks Martingale, it's in the ibox now.
Along with stocrates e-mail.
Thanks guys!
Hi All,
Was out all day yesterday so glad to see a new board for 141! Going to be a rockin year!
Snow, I stand corrected.
Let me clairfy - What I was trying to say was that it is possible some sort of management fee to be awarded to 141, Capital (20-30%) and that 7% of the net profits of that would go to Spooz.
I don't see number 2 there saying anything to that effect. Can you point out the phrase you are refering too?
Jenny, Where did I put a time frame on the $5 projection?
Did I say this year? next year? If SWARM does turn into a hedge fund in 141, with only an estimated 180 million shares in the float, do you not think that $5 a share isn't even close? The numbers we currently have for SWARM were indeed from a beta but should we use a much smaller percentage number because we don't 'think' it will do that well, or do we use a number closer to what they actually posted? Sounds like a big assumption to think a smaller percentage one is correct over a larger one. We can only go on what has been given to us and given those numbers, there should be HUGE amounts of money flowing into 141's SWARM fund. And do you not think then that the share price will reflect that? Again, this is based on some of the numbers we already have as well as some best guessimates on share structure for 141.
The 7% is a bonus and a part of the management fee for a SWARM fund. That's all I see of it.
AIMO
Snow, you are correct in your assumptions.
I assume that they already have had their private placement of initial capital - hence how could they have started trading already. The initial capital is a small amount - maybe a million or so. This is only so SWARM can prove it's track record before going to the Expo to seek large public money - money that will go into a fund vs being privately placed as ownership in the company.
I agree that if SPZI has a 40% stake in 141 and then that gets diluted in order to raise more starting capital - that would be a bad thing. But I certainly see nothing that would lead me to believe that. I think that would hurt Paul's stake in the company even more than ours.
As far as the profits from the fund, don't all funds have some sort of management fee? I thought I read on the board at some point the a typical management fee for a hedge fund might be 20-30%. So if that is the case, 7% stated in the PR would go back to SPZI while the rest would pay 141 for the management.
AIMO
Snow, What is considered "enough money"? And why would the number of shares that Spooz owned affect how much an investment company wants to dump into SWARM? They're not investing the company 141, Capital, they are investing in SWARM. Who owns the company 141, Capital will have no bearing on whether they drop $10 million or $1 Billion into SWARM. They just have to like the SWARM 'hedge' fund that they're are buying in to.
Skunk, my answers are below:
1. For compliance reasons, Paul had to move SWARM out of Spooz and create a new company to do the public trading - 141 Capital. Now by doing this deal, Spooz owns 120 million shares of 141 Capital. Forget about the 7% right now - we're just going to talk about the 120 million shares. Now, 120 mil of what number? - that is the big question but let us assume the real number is around 40% putting the total of O/S for 141 Capital around 300 mil with only 180 mil in the float as Spooz owns 120 mil. If SWARM does pretty well - and I define pretty well as the stock price goes above $5 (with such a low float and high returns), Spooz's 'value' goes up by $600 million (5 x 120 million shares) - not taking into account any P/E ratio. That should translate to AT LEAST .50 on our share price. But I think you can see that as 141 Capital does well - Spooz will profit by this. This was the only way Paul could give us some benefits of SWARM. Now, would I have liked more than 7% of the profits transfered to us - sure - who wouldn't. But I believe that had to be a lower number or else the public money being dumped into this would have to ask themselves "Why is 7% of my profits going to this Spooz company?". Would you want a high percentage your profits from investment money going to another company? Paul kept that value low and gave us the ~40% shares in 141 instead.
2. 141 Futures is registared to Paul. 141 Capital is not:
http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?domain=141capital.com
I thought I read somewhere that 141, Capital is owned by Errol Stone. Paul might have some ownership in it but I don't know. I think Errol and Jamie are the big owners there.
Hope this helps and you followed my logic. This is just how I see this deal and at first - I agree - it didn't look good. After looking more and more at it, it is becoming much clearer the path that Paul took and this could have an amazing effect on our pps. Just think if 141,Capital pps goes to $25! If they are crating a hedge fund and get $1 billion+ into it by the end of next year, I think even the $25 pps is going to be low - and we will own 120 million shares of it!
AIMO and please correct any logical errors I have here.
GLTA
You are so right IW. You the man and I can think of a better person to come up with this great DD. You've laid it out for everyone to see. We should be able to do your bidding tomorrow and repost the FACTS!
Great job!
A few clarifications are in need here.
Since several of these past few day's discussions have originated from my posts, let me try to clarify a few things.
The number '50 million' was given out in a phone conversation I had with Paul as strictly a guessimate of what a SWARM equity trading license might actually go for. In no way should it be used as a number to rely upon for revenue projections. While the actual number and price of those licenses might trump $50mil by a large amount, we can not use those numbers for projections.
According to Paul, the license is perpetual and exclusive to 141 for the Futures and Derivatives market. Unless Paul clarifies otherwise, I can see why some might say this is a 'selling' of SWARM Futures and Div market vs a license. However, even if it was a 'sell', can't everyone see where the benefits of having this in one company - which Spooz will own a significant amount - benefits Spooz shareholders immensely? Spooz could either get license fees (and maybe partial profits) from multiple companies for the Futures and Divs SWARM license OR REQUIRE that all money that anyone wants to invest in SWARM Futures and Divs actually has to go through 141. Going through 141 and sending that stock soaring could in turn give a far greater benefit to us shareholders than from licensing alone since we own a 'significant' amount of 141. All this doesn't preclude the fact that the selling of the equity licenses can't happen. So we could get the best of both worlds - a license fee from multiple companies for equity trading and a increasing rate of return from the Futures and Div license to 141.
I know this is a bit convoluted but hopefully you followed my logic.
Paul said he could not release the share structure of 141 till the disclosure comes out, which will be in the next week or so. So while we know 120 million shares is ‘significant’, it probably doesn’t mean more than 50% so I think Allie’s guessimate of 40% is very close to the real number.
Hopefully this can clear up a couple questions and allow us to move on as PR's are expected soon. Let's keep the board civil and try not to comment on how 'bad' or 'good' the mods are doing. There is a fine line on what we delete and what we don't - it's not an easy job to do without getting bashed one way or the other. There are also many times where we don't delete messages but rather the admins of ihub do. We don't have control over those yet we get blamed for them. We try our best and aren't perfect.
JMHO and GLTA
Welcome Arigh. Things should get going real fast here and maybe we can buy the "Farm"! lol
Nice e-mail Gmenfan. Thanks for expressing the views of many on this board.
Ok - a direct e-mail from Paul.
He wanted me to post my exact questions with his exact answers. Here we go:
1. You mentioned in an e-mail about the start of the quite period and people wanting to "inject millions into our company". Can you now say who wanted the quite period and where the millions are coming from and going to?
Answer: I can not comment on this at this time.
2. Constant requests for this: When/if will SWARM results will be PR'ed. Many are quoting the shareholder meeting saying that SWARM results were suppose to be release monthly.
Answer: They will never be reported by Spooz due to compliance restraints. Firstly, Spooz is an unregistered entity and while it may publish internal results, it can not do so to facilitate, supplement or participate, in any way, with the solicitation of public trading capital. Since 141 Capital will solicit public trading capital using the same trading system Spooz traded with internally, we believe this to be a conflict of interest and may, therefore, confuse the National Futures Association (not a good idea). What our shareholders need to understand it that we had three options regarding SWARM: 1) shelve it forever; 2) sell it outright; 3) license the software to another entity. The first option, given SWARM’s preliminary trading results is simply not good business. The second option is also very unattractive because selling trading systems for significant sums of money necessitates a detailed look under the hood. So, you have 50 potential buyers, everyone looks but no one buys. To your amazement there are suddenly 25 systems that trade identically to SWARM. Is this likely? No, the reality is that there would indeed be 25 systems that trade identically to SWARM, but since Spooz insisted upon execution of a well written NDA before providing the prospective buyer a look see, we would never find out about them.
Someone might suggest that we simply trade SWARM internally with Spooz’s own capital, in other words, leave the trading division as is and in tact. We have learned a few things over the last few months about why this is not feasible in a company the size of Spooz. Here’s why. The trader feels he is the most important person on the planet because he is evaluated by every trade. Professional traders in a prop environment are very tightly wound, instant gratification people. When it comes to help with the technological aspects of trading, they are also very impatient and insistent. The developer views himself as a artist and intellectually superior to the trader. Since he/she has been employed to develop software (SpoozToolz), he/she becomes resentful of being placed in a position where he/she feels subservient to a trader’s needs. You can see how this might cause confusion. Is Spooz a trading solutions company? Is spooz a proprietary trading operation? If Spooz is both, will the risks associated with SWARM returns affect software sales? Confusion reins! Focus is so important that shelving SWARM entirely is a more attractive solution than diluting our efforts to complete the Spooz mission. In my opinion, we came up with the best, the only, workable solution. We are blessed because this solution also provided us with the means to enhance shareholder value. Viola … thought through to its only logical conclusion, this is what is commonly termed a “no brainer.”
3. Will the license for SWARM to 141 Capital expire? If yes, can it be renewed under different terms?
Answer: It is perpetual.
4. Is there any talk of creating a hedge fund with SWARM (I guess in 141, Capital now)?
Answer: I can not comment on this at this time.
5. Do you think Spooz is still on track to meet the $3 Million revenue projection this year?
Answer: We are working on any number of deals that could potentially cause this to happen, but a comment from me regarding projections some months old could be construed to be misleading, therefore, I will not comment at this time.
I have sent an e-mail to Paul to see if he can answer a few additional questions coming up today. I will post them if/when I get a response.
New shuttle up in ibox.
Hi Gmenfan,
We didn't talk about a buyback but I believe its not in the works as of right now. I believe Paul believes that he can make all of us rich - even with the share count at 1.5bil.
I will post the new shuttle tonight when I get home.
Ok. Responses from Paul:
(Sorry it took so long - fielding PMs too!)
These will be paraphrased as I suck at fast note taking! lol)
1. Was Swarm owned by Spooz, Inc or 141 Futures:
Swarm is owned 100% by Spooz, Inc.
2. Was SWARM licenced exclusively to 141 Capital:
Only for Futures and Derivatives. SWARM can be licensed out for anything else for a great amount of money at any time (the number given out as a possibility was $50mil). They needed to license SWARM out for compliance reasons - as I understand it.
3. What percentage of 141 Capital is 120 mil shares?
Significant. Not a small number. While he couldn't give out the exact number, this is in no way a sell out to Spooz shareholders. The way he explained it, and again I'm trying to reiterate what he said the best I can, is that going the route of licensing SWARM to 141 is worse for him personally but will be better for Spooz shareholders. There should be several PR's out very soon - like in the next week or 2 describing more in detail the licensing agreement with 141 and how it will greatly benefit Spooz,Inc shareholders - including some revenue for the company (SPZI that is). I did not ask about if there will be an IPO for 141 Capital but he did say that there will be shares sold on the common market so I assume there would be at some point.
Right now they are smirking at the drop in price as they know as things become clearer, the pps won't be a issue. Now that the quite period has ended, there is a whole bunch of news to be let out.
The good times are just starting folks. I have absolutely no doubt, based on little things Paul has said, that they have our best interests in mind and things will only get better for us. Wish I had more power right now.
Hope this helps. There was a lot of info and as I'm a techie at heart, it's very hard for me to follow when he starts talking business and SEC stuff. If I think of anything I missed, I will post more.
GLTA
Just got off the phone with Paul!
Let me try and put together a post to explain everything he gave me. Lots of info and trying to piece it all together. Spent about 15 mins on the phone with him.
BTW: He will answer no more e-mails today! He has hundreds of them with many saying not so nice things. I will explain more in my next post.
No Stratey, Paul communicated through MNM because he e-mailed him. Of course Paul will answer questions to any shareholder that e-mails him - MNM was just the first to post his response. The PR gives the general idea of the news but there is always more detail to be had with news like this. This is just one way of doing it. How can he answer all questions from all shareholders through a single PR? It needs to be on a first-ask first-answer basis and e-mail provides that route. Paul could choose not to answer any e-mails like some other companies but we know Paul is not like that.
We all wish PRs gave every single detail out necessary to understand the implications of it - it just doesn't happen. At least we get some answers this way.
Another brainstorming idea - What if Kauderer International Partners is actually putting up some of the initial SWARM capital for 141 Capital? They are an investment firm after all.
Just another opinion to get the mind working!
Snow, please don't go that far as to say 'steal'.
We truly don't know all the reasons for this deal yet and all of us are trying to get answers and/or figure things out. Keep in mind the stakes (shares) that Paul and gang have in Spooz, Inc. They will greatly benefit from SPZI pps rising as they will from 141 so what would be the point of them shorting SPZI for 141?
'Steal' is a strong word to use without any proof. This looks very promising so let's just do some digging to find answers before jumping to conclusions.
Very true Songbirdia. I definitely think that was a smart move on Paul's part. I was just seeing another benefit of moving to 141. More capital = more profit from SWARM. Again, I think it will really help to know the share structure on 141 as that will greatly affect the attitude of Spooz shareholders toward the 'usage' of SWARM in 141.
The only thought I have is that the IPO from 141 Capital will generate the initial capital to invest in SWARM. Without raising the A/S of Spooz (which Paul said wouldn't happen), Spooz wouldn't have the capital to really invest in SWARM till a lot of revenues come in from STv2. So this is a way to get more capital for running SWARM.
Just my thoughts but I think an e-mail to Paul is needed to clarify all this. I'm sure future communications from Paul will help us all to understand the direction he has taken us.
AIMO
The way I see it is that they needed to get 141 Capital set up - hence the quite period - before the release of the SWARM numbers. The SWARM numbers will probably be outstanding and they wanted to 'milk' those numbers for as much as they can before the IPO of 141 Capital.
The SWARM numbers will not only benefit us through Spooz, Inc but also benefit 141 Capital in their IPO.
The real question is the share structure of 141 Capital and just how much we (Spooz shareholders) actually own of 141 for the use of SWARM. Since we floated the bill for the development of SWARM, I would hope it would be greater that 30-40%. I definitely think Paul has us shareholders in mind but it would be great to see that share structure.
Either way - this news is unexpected but a great addition to our ownership in Spooz.
AIMO
Ok guys and girls,
I'm a huge space and science buff and all this talk of the Shuttle being co-ed is turning me on! lol Looking for the ride of my life with Spooz.
Thanks for posting coolmark. I wish it would have been from Paul or Darryl but it's all good.
GLTA
Welcome to the club Wing! Glad to have you on board here to help out. You are probably on the board more than most of us so it just makes sense for you to be a mod.
Now you get to see all the deleted stuff! lol
Done. New pic in Ibox.
Thanks for the edit!
Done. Link is right below the ad pictures.
Whoo Hoo! Demo is up finally. A bit slow right now as everyone it trying to download it. lol
Spooz Demo button down on this page too:
http://www.spooztoolz.com/category.aspx?categoryID=49
Other pages still have the old demo link but this is pointing to a new place. Maybe we get to see the new demo soon!
SpoozToolz website down. Update time?
Ok. Here is the new link to the Shareholder meeting agenda.
The IP address changed so I needed to post this again.
It's only a powerpoint slideshow on paper. Not too much info but at least it's something. The second page is in color as there is a graph that made it a bit easier to read instead of greyscale. You will need to zoom in in order to read the small print on some of the slides.
Just cut and paste the link below into Internet Explorer. Wipe out everything in the address bar of IE and put this in:
ftp://68.54.118.73
Ok. I can see this going downhill real fast so let's put it behind us real quick. Please don't turn this into a Creationism vs. Evolution debate/promotion board. We all have our opinions as to how we got here but let's leave religion in PM only instead of on the board.
TY
hmm, ok. ticker is up. I did do that before Defire but it didn't work. Now it does. Thanks.
Sorry guys, I can't get the ticker working in the ibox. We will just have to count down ourselves. lol
Yep, it didn't work. Will have to be a updated gif of one for it to work I think.