Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 12:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Mon, Nov 1 2010 3:01 pm
Subject: Email from Equiti-trend
Forward | Print | Individual message | Report this message | Find messages by this author
ASR Family:

While it seems evident that Howard Taylor did a great job in his
dealing with the shareholders, our workload has increased
significantly due to the fact that not only are we dealing now with
ASFX’s shareholder database of inquiries, but, we are also dealing
with the same concerns of our own database of investors that we have
introduced to ASFX. We appreciate everyone’s patience and are sure you
understand that there is a transition period when a change like this
occurs.

In response to the general inquiries relating to the uplisting,
current numbers (retail and quarterly), and Bayer, we share the
following:

1. The most recent update as in regard to the uplisting is that it is
progressively moving forward. Per ASFX’s counsel’s recommendation, we
are not allowed to share much beyond the general progress of the
process. Nonetheless, we are informed that progress has indeed taken
place. The only challenge is that the uplisting has taken more time
than anticipated, but, once again, rest assured that progress is being
made.

2. As it relates to retail numbers and quarterly figures, this
information is not available yet and any such information will be
disseminated as it is officially provided by ASFX.

3. Bayer Updates – the same applies in regards to updates in this
area whereas any such information will be disseminated as it is
officially provided by ASFX

Best regards,

Jose

Jose Calderon

Equiti-trend Advisors LLC

jcalde...@equititrend.com

Forward

It was stated by Howard Taylor in response to a query that was posed regarding International buisness (I think it was re International Business). Someone on here posted Taylor's reply. Probably 6 weeks ago.
He stated something akin to "We will be discussing that at our upcoming meeting in October"

Why have we not heard about the BIG BAYER meeting in October????????
WHY? Have I missed the BIG PR?????

Are we headed to having half a penny stock?

You know CFG, in this crazy world, if it were ever to actually start showing substantiated material progress, it would be an interesting play for an entity looking for the NOL carryforward to warehouse it within their entity. LOL

Sorry Do, I misunderstood the original question. All insolvency petitions MUST be filed with the US BAnkruptcy court in the District wherein the Company resides.

I'd rather hear from Roth as he is an officer. He can't dance around. Now is he answering the salient questions? Each of us can have his or her own opinion....I have mine

SEC Addresses: Headquarters and Regional Offices
The Securities and Exchange Commission has twelve offices across the country:

SEC Headquarters
100 F Street, NE
Washington, DC 20549
(202) 942-8088
contact form: https://tts.sec.gov/oiea/QuestionsAndComments.html
see also: Electronic Mailboxes at the Commission
Directions for Hand Deliveries & Pick-ups

New York Regional Office
George S. Canellos, Regional Director
3 World Financial Center, Suite 400
New York, NY 10281-1022
(212) 336-1100
e-mail: newyork@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: New York, New Jersey

Boston Regional Office
David Bergers, Regional Director
33 Arch Street, 23rd Floor
Boston, MA 02110-1424
(617) 573-8900
e-mail: boston@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island

Philadelphia Regional Office
Daniel M. Hawke, Regional Director
The Mellon Independence Center
701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106-1532
(215) 597-3100
e-mail: philadelphia@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, District of Columbia

Miami Regional Office
Eric I. Bustillo, Regional Director
801 Brickell Ave., Suite 1800
Miami, FL 33131
(305) 982-6300
e-mail: miami@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico

Atlanta Regional Office
Rhea Kemble Dignam, Regional Director
3475 Lenox Road, N.E., Suite 1000
Atlanta, GA 30326-1232
(404) 842-7600
e-mail: atlanta@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama

Chicago Regional Office
Merri Jo Gillette, Regional Director
175 W. Jackson Boulevard
Suite 900
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 353-7390
e-mail: chicago@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Wisconsin

Denver Regional Office
Donald Hoerl, Regional Director
1801 California Street, Suite 1500
Denver, CO 80202-2656
(303) 844-1000
e-mail: denver@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming

Fort Worth Regional Office
Rose L. Romero, Regional Director
Burnett Plaza, Suite 1900
801 Cherry Street, Unit 18
Fort Worth, TX 76102
(817) 978-3821
e-mail: dfw@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas (except for the exam program which is administered by the Denver Regional Office)

Salt Lake Regional Office
Kenneth D. Israel, Jr., Regional Director
15 W. South Temple Street
Suite 1800
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
(801) 524-5796
e-mail: saltlake@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Utah

Los Angeles Regional Office
Rosalind Tyson, Regional Director
5670 Wilshire Boulevard, 11th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90036-3648
(323) 965-3998
e-mail: losangeles@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Arizona, Hawaii, Guam, Nevada, Southern California (zip codes 93599 and below, except for 93200-93299)

San Francisco Regional Office
Marc J. Fagel, Regional Director
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 705-2500
e-mail: sanfrancisco@sec.gov
State jurisdiction: Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Montana, Idaho, Northern California (zip codes 93600 and up plus 93200-93299)

No I mean SEC office, now that being said many SEC offices are located in he local federal courthouse building.

Facebook does not count in the SEC, you can pretty much say anything and weasel your way around it.

State of incorporation has nothing to do with filing location. My first IPO was a company I incorporated in Delaware (most wall street bankers like Delaware as its laws and regs are well known, while nevada is looked at as a kind of wild west), anyhow we did all of our filings at the closest SEC office.

i wasnt aware of limits, i havent looked for websites. if you hav pvt msg option you can reach out and we can continue to research.. it would be interesting for you

see excerpt below, operative word is departmentS


a partner in the Litigation Departments of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP and Rosenman & Colin LLP. He was also a shareholder in the Litigation Department of Stevens & Lee, P.C.

i think its actually two separate firms and they both exist

I thrive on information, this has been interesting.

somewhere around 5% of the company give or take a point

between gols inc and people with the surname of goldin it look to be about 90 million shares or somewhere near $750,000 at .008.

not peanuts!

I havent checked but its on page 15 where all of the relevant parties are listed.

found it Footnote (1) AT BOTTOM OF PAGE 15

I cannot find it in the S1-a but when I googled their names this popped up

SEC Info - American Scientific Resources Inc - S-1/A - On 8/13/10
(1) Alexander and Mira Goldin have voting and investment power over the securities of the Company owned by the selling stockholder. ...
www.secinfo.com/d12TC3.r1anf.htm

Dr P. I appreciate and respect your thoughtful sentiments. With all due respect; firstly, I have openly discussed my bones without meat analogy long before his unfortunate loss. Secondly, I was in no way referencing his situation and while I have no personal knowledge of him or his loss, I empathize and offer my condolences. Lastly, he saw fit to reference that unfortunate event in trying to justify a stated mission that was clearly beyond his purview and authority.

I don't know about a death, but I have stated before that a field full of bones with no meat on them is a graveyard. I hope that the company is sensitive to the unrest and concern that in my opinion, appears to be widening. They can put all of this to rest with definitive, official and on the record comments. Like I said before, facebook doesn't count before the SEC.

an excerpt from the Moderator's role as per the handbook;

In short, the role of the Moderator is to help foster an environment that promotes and encourages posting of ALL opinions and information about companies, regardless of the bullish or bearish sentiment of the posts,

Good point, please note that in my postings other than the one directed at Winnotlose, I use the words insolvency or illiquid.

CFG, In my experience, the regulators will not outright stop an a listing as a result of a "going concern" opinion. Their focus is on complete and thourough disclosure. However they can, and often do put the subject company through a series of hoops that can seem endless, often citing issues that may have not been addressed in prior rounds of comments. Sometimes its confined to one side of the SEC reviewers (legal or accounting) sometimes they seem to take turns. Whether this is a bureaucratic CYA effort or a genuine attempt at investor protection I can't opine. Keep in mind that a "going concern" opinion is commonly issued to start ups and developmental stage companies. Often as a self innoculation by the Audit firm. I will say that I this is the first "Substantial Going Concern" opinion I have seen. That is simply a statement of fact, not an inference or implication. Then again this is only the second time I have invested in a pink.

actually I don't get the point. She is allowed to state her opinions and or concerns. She raises a valid concern. Other may differ, as I do. But its her priviledge. If she opines as such, so be it. This is a forum for discourse and diverse opinions, not a company cheerleading site.

CFG, its clear that the company monitors this and other venues like it. one can safely assume that they see the chatter re Bankruptcy and solvency. In my humble opinion, they would be well served to file their Q on time and acknowledge therein the rumors and counter those rumors with fact. That being said I just do not see such a petition happening. There are other ways out of this situation. Perhaps some would not be to managements liking, but so be it.

Win, let me get this straight, are you saying that you will censor debate regarding bankruptcy? I would like a clear and direct answer please. While I have openly stated herein that an insolvency petition was not in the company's best interest, I fully respect Christy FG's right to raise the issue. It is not some whacked out interplanetary theory. The company is in fact illiquid, the auditor's issuance of a "substatial going concern" opinion is not trivial. there is a shroud of official silence (Facebook dont count before the SEC), and the public disclosures merit inquiries.
Such unilateral and discretionary censorship by you or any other moderator is way beyond your purview...way beyond. That was just clearly stated by Dan.

Win, Its my humble opinion that transparency is at the crux of an informed shareholder universe. Without accurate and substantiated information everyone is operating in the dark. We should welcome rational skepticism, we should disavow invective and and derision. If we don't accept diverse views we are impeding the free flow of information.

fair enough

There seems to be concern beyond the few on here, Share price is at 3 mos low, and volume is trending up.

If its the $3 million PO financing, that is highly securitized, and the company sees none of it for operations. It goes straight to the manufacturer and its securitized by the A/R. If the sales are not revenue producing or sufficiently profitable to insure repayment of it, the line cannot be accessed. This means that there has to be enough spread so that the lender is covered against deductions or offsets.

May I ask where the $3 million investment by a third party is reflected? All I knew of was a contingent $3 million Purchase Order Financing arrangement that is highly securitized

A reverse split is not necessarily a bad thing.

Don't misinterpret the lack of CONTRACTS issue. There are rarely contracts between retailers and vendors other than coop advertising contracts.

The only contract is the most recent PO, and that is always cancellable. I read a lot of chatter about contracts on here. There is no such thing. Now Bayer etc., may have purchase contracts, but I can assure you that in dealing with a small, illiquid entity, they have covered themselves well and should they cancel with cause there would be little chance for redress.

CFG and Dog, While I hope its not the case, If there something material that is known to the Company in the pending litigation, that could potentially have a material adverse effect on the company, they would have to disclose it in any official Press Release. So if the company is remaining unusually quiet in the midst of apparently good news on the sales front, there may be a reason.

I hope not as I now am the proud owner of some of their equity.

nice to see reason and logic

In any case they are apparently making inroads on the sales front. That is always a good thing. Sales can cure many ills. That can make many things easier.

It will really heighten the need for carefull and judicious management of the various balls they have in the air.

Assume 45 days AR unless its a pay on scan, at what point does the PO financing expense begin?

Is the manufacturing cost paid up front or does the existence of the PO line of credit obviate that?

There are various scenarios. Best case they get terms supported by the Line, worst case they have to front the cost of goods via the line. In the case of the latter the clock is ticking for quite a while. I have to believe that neither extreme is likely.