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.
That’s fine, but doens’t quiet answer my question, does it?
Yes, but a few days ago, these where your expectations after I posted that I was wondering if GERS would start filing again, since Atis did buy a majority share.
“My fingernails will be five inches longer before senile Kevin remembers where he put the blank 10-K, 10-Q, and 8-K forms to send to the SEC but that's OK. Our Federal prisons take good care of an inmate's medical needs..”
So I thought you where saying, you did’t expect any filing by GERS soon?
Expecting that much, that soon?
How fast do your fingernails grow?
8 don't you know 'Globe Newswire' is a private board. the news posted there isn't received by most readers on this board. Mexus should call all (potentially) investors personally to inform them about things like this. It's way to much to ask, to find news like this by themselves.
'Nine Inch Nails' are nice to pass time anyway.
I don’t care about these numbers too much, but I wonder if that change in ownership, will change the filing and sharing information policy.
The end of Q2 is near. Maybe in 45 day’s Attis or GERS might publish some more info on results by GERS?
Yes, I couln’t agree more. They have that duty and should have filed the 8K on EA and also on the FLux deal. And they should have filed all 10Qs.
So we agree all info is missing, and there is no way we can tell if BTZO was involved in the deal where Attis bought 80% of Flux and a majority share of GERS or not.
It was public because 12 retech made it public. They did file an 8K. That doesn’t mean BTZO doesn’t need to file.
BTZO never made anything public on that deal.
We don’t have tornado’s here... I believe is was a hurrycane anyway, but we don’t have them too. Maybe it just works from over here LOL
But what about emotion apparel. He sold them, they where owned by BTZO, but where is the filing? Or isn’t that a material event?
The flap of a butterfly's wings can create a tornado at the other side of the ocean
So l was off by a week..not like MXSG off by years...lol
Stock price should 02 next week then .01 with no news for another month..what a joke..
Also wouldn’t he need to file about selling Emotion Apparel?
Wouldn’t you think he needed to file an 8K after selling 80% of flix and with that Greenshift like Attis did?
Or wouldn’t he need to file the quarter and full year results?
Now why can he skip those filings, but not a filing concerning BTZO?
Would it piss him off that you’ve written his name wrong, or would he just think that you don’t even know his name?
But that’s the strange thing... there are a lot of companies named connected to the flux jvo deal, like GERS, Genarex and Noveda. All where under the old flux. But the new flux jvo doesn’t name BTZO.
I did post this on the GERS board, but I think it is also of interest for BTZO investors, since it seems more and more like BTZO isn't part of the deal.
However I must note, that maybe (who knows) there it is a positive thing that BTZO isn't in that list. Can it be because KK has other plans with BTZO? Why else keep the ticker alive if there is no revenue?
But I also love to reed other thoughts.
This is my GERS board post:
"Attis Completes Strategic Investment in Noveda Technologies"
"The transaction was completed as part of the Company’s recent acquisition of an 80% stake in FLUX Carbon LLC (“JVCo”), and includes a license to use Noveda’s technologies."
https://investingnews.com/daily/tech-investing/blockchain-investing/attis-completes-strategic-investment-in-noveda-technologies/
It seems like Flux is holding more companies owned by KK
I think these are the companies involved with Flux Corbon LLC ("JVCo")
Events of Default that have occurred and are continuing under Section 8.1(c) of the Credit Agreement due to the failure of the Companies to comply with the requirements of Sections 5.15 and 6.7 of the Credit Agreement, including, without limitation, Events of Default arising out of the acquisitions of or investments in CleanTech Corporation, FLUX Carbon LLC, Noveda Technologies, Inc., Genarex FD LLC, and any issuance of preferred Capital Stock in connection therewith.
"Attis Completes Strategic Investment in Noveda Technologies"
"The transaction was completed as part of the Company’s recent acquisition of an 80% stake in FLUX Carbon LLC (“JVCo”), and includes a license to use Noveda’s technologies."
https://investingnews.com/daily/tech-investing/blockchain-investing/attis-completes-strategic-investment-in-noveda-technologies/
It seems like Flux is holding more companies owned by KK
I think these are the companies involved with Flux Corbon LLC ("JVCo")
Events of Default that have occurred and are continuing under Section 8.1(c) of the Credit Agreement due to the failure of the Companies to comply with the requirements of Sections 5.15 and 6.7 of the Credit Agreement, including, without limitation, Events of Default arising out of the acquisitions of or investments in CleanTech Corporation, FLUX Carbon LLC, Noveda Technologies, Inc., Genarex FD LLC, and any issuance of preferred Capital Stock in connection therewith.
Yes, That's why I've added the 8K too.
Still you cannot make everything up out of it. But since FLUX Carbon Corporation (“FCC”) did own 80% of BTZO (see this statement from the 10K of BTZO
Our majority shareholder, FLUX Carbon Corporation (“FCC”), an entity owned by our chief executive officer, Kevin Kreisler, controls 80% of the Company’s voting power
Yeah, I guess you can do that as many times as you wish. GL
These are the links with the info
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/05/31/1514744/0/en/Attis-Industries-Acquires-Clean-Technology-Licensing-Business.html
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=12793101-1285-21948&type=sect&TabIndex=2&companyid=11718&ppu=%252fdefault.aspx%253fcik%253d949721
Enough to choose from:
https://www.abbreviations.com/VAT
Oh, and I think it’s sure he didn’t buy GERS stock from BTZO so that they could make their own deal, because they did aquire GERS by buying 80% Flux. Not by buying directly from GERS. They just did talk with GERS.
And it would be very strange if Flux would buy GERS from BTZO, if they already own the majority of 64% by owning 80% of BTZO.
A fair question. Nobody knows, maybe they didn't get any money for it. It isn't reported. And as long as nothing is reported by any company, we will never know the implications.
The only luck we got for GERS is that GERS is named in the court documents. But we might never profit if GERS doesn't report.
Now the problem with BTZO is a bit larger. Not only do they not report, but they aren't named anywhere by any companies filings or in any court documents. So the question is, when do we get to know anything, if there is no direct relation?
Could they just go black all of a sudden?
As I've said before on this board, it's possible for Greenshift to use 2017 revenues, which still haven't been reported to the SEC in the form of 10-Qs or the 2017 10-K, to buy enough of its' own stock from Bitzio to give itself legal control over its' own ability to make deals with Attis or anyyone else.
If all the Series G shares held by Bitzio were converted and exceeded the number of authorized common shares, there would be no contingent factors or events that a third party could bring up that would prevent Mr. Kreisler from causing the Company to authorize the additional shares. There would be no need to go to anyone outside the Company for approval since Mr. Kreisler, through FCC, controls the Company's majority shareholder."
But you know GERS has a deal with Attis through Flux Carbon right? Don’t you think in someway the name of bitzio should have popped up in that deal?
I think ivpro ran of with it
They can do so anyway:
"The majority of the Company's outstanding shares of Series G Preferred Stock are owned by Bitzio, Inc. The majority shareholder of Bitzio, Inc., is FLUX Carbon Corporation ("FCC"), an entity owned by Kevin Kreisler, the chairman of the Company. If all the Series G shares held by Bitzio were converted and exceeded the number of authorized common shares, there would be no contingent factors or events that a third party could bring up that would prevent Mr. Kreisler from causing the Company to authorize the additional shares. There would be no need to go to anyone outside the Company for approval since Mr. Kreisler, through FCC, controls the Company's majority shareholder."
This says enough about who has all the power.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=136378403
Already found the answer my self... yes they need to do so
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/10q.asp
Are you sure they need to file to the sec each quarter?
Great, I'm still holding too. Not adding however.
Still holding on Harry? At least this one can be bought and sold on Ameritrade without any issues.
Those required filings haven’t been there, have they?
What Nobody12378 says is, not only the 8k is missing, but all recent required filings are missing. In his words: "There have been no required filings of any kind". That’s why he isn’t surprised to see there is no 8k. Remember this was a reply to mandeindet's question "Are you surprised there was not a 8k filing announcing ATIS transaction". Nobody12378 says, he wasn’t expecting one.
I think that if he meant that they didn't need to file anything he would have said:
"There have been no filings required of any kind"
instead of
"There have been no required filings of any kind"
But that's just my way of looking at it, with my lack of knowledge of English grammar as a Dutchman.
If that was true, then they would need to change the names on the court documents too. Plus it would harm their case. Because it might make it seem like selling patents is GERS industry, not selling the technology
So I don’t think that will be the case.
Nice to see the ask rise again. Not that it matters much, but it is an indication.
Added the board to my list too. Not much talking about GERS I see.
I think/hope you're right. But about
If it was a fraud why be so subtle? Why not state something like a one-time dividend is coming to common shareholders if the writer wanted to create hype?
Not that I say it isn't him, but how can we be sure it is Kevin?
The post says "Anonymous said... " I know he writes Kevin underneath it not Kevin Kreisler by the way), and I expect concerning the Skunks history, that these posts are being checked. So that if the Skunk doesn't think it is him, he would delete them.
But since we don't know who the Skunk is, and Kevin didn't either (maybe he does now) and since these posts all are a bit unofficial, there isn't anyway to tell for sure, is there?
I hope he is, who he says he is, and I think so too. But something tells me not to be too trusting.
Harty, Could it be there was still an old sell order active, that you had placed but wasn’t completely cancelled yet?