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.
"your rememberances of biophan history are inaccurate
and unrelated to whatever future biph may have."
Really? Which bit is that you disagree with, and that you claim is inaccurate?
That all the money raised from shareholders and from toxic finance went to Lanzafame, Weiner, TI, the Anstadts and Iriquois?
That the Myotech CSS/Myovad device languished on the shelf with none of the millions raised on the pretence of developing the product actually used for that purpose?
That it was unethical and illegal for the CEO of Biophan to sell technology that had been valued on BIPH's books at over $10 million for $250,000 to another newly minted private company of which he is President at the same time as taking BIPH "dark" to make it even less transparent than before?
That the role of MyoCardioCare Director tetrahedron/Max Bialystock/ Marc Bileski in pretending to be an ordinary investor rooting for BIPH's management and then emerging as a Director of MCC is also highly suspect?
Or that BIPH's management past and present are either incredibly incompetent or they deliberatley planned to rip the shareholders off?
Or was it one of the other statements I've made?
Do please tell.
If you would care to be more specific (and perhaps a little more polite but that's optional), I can point you in the direction of the evidence that substantiates what I say.
TIA.
"he sold to a company who requested his assistance in
breatheing life back into the mcc technology of which
he has quite a bit of background"
As far as I know, when Biophan first began to be involved with the Myotech CSS device all those years ago, the device was in reasonably good health. Then they raised millions and millions of dollars ostensibly to bring it into even better health, nay rude good health, and onto an expectant market. After all, that's what the "management" of Biophan promised to do with all that money they raised over the years, and when they eventually purchased the complete rights to the product.
However, instead they made sure that money went to themselves via outrageous salaries and six figure bonuses, to TI, to the Anstadts and to their toxic finance chums at Iriqouis.
Having made themselves and all their friends into millionaires, they then claimed poverty and demanded yet more MegaDilution. There are still some on some message boards (IV, since you ask) who blame the shareholders for the failure of BIPH's management to actually invest any money behind developing the Myotech CSS device and for the management's propensity to give any ready cash the company had to themselves and their cronies.
That people would seek understanding and forgiveness of Mr. Lanzafame's actions in selling the technology to MyoCardioCare for a knock-down price because BIPH needed the money reminds me nothing more than of the dude who murdered both his parents, then asked for clemency on the grounds he was an orphan.
Frankly the MCC (aka Myovad aka Myotech CSS aka Cash Cow for Weiner and his known associates such as Mr. Lanzafame and Iriqouis)wouldn't need "breatheing life back into" if Mr Lanzafame hadn't been involved in actively suffocating it for the past five years or more.
"he [John Lanzafame] is not part owner of mcc."
Forgive me for asking but how do you know that?
I find it difficult to believe that a newly minted private company with only four principals (Lanzafame, tetrahedron -aka Max Bialystock/Marc Bielski - Summar, and Terrizzi) would not be part owned by its President.
Of course, if Biophan had not elected to "go dark", we would have known because Mr. Lanzafame would have had to declare any such conflicts in its filings. Now there's no such compulsion, so we simply have no way of knowing if he is a part owner of MyoCardioCare or not.
And in spite of your protestation about "pyscho-conspiracy" we know from past history that not only are Weiner and Lanzafame apparently incredibly incompetent managers, they have both been less than honest and straightforward in the past.
Therefore in the absence of an affirmed document such as a 10K or 10Q denying such a conflict, I would apply Occam's razor.
I believe Lanzafame is indeed a part owner of MCC.
But even if he isn't, his action as Biophan CEO in selling the Myotech technology to a company of which he is President, for a price equal to less than 2% of its book value less than a year ago is not only a complete conflict of interest, it's in direct contravention of his fiduciary duty to Biophan shareholders.
I wonder at the length some folk go to to defend what to most reasonable people is indefensible. Perhaps these avid apologists haven't suffered the same grievous losses that I know many Biophan(and Natural Nano) shareholders have.
"WOW!! Can't wait for the next 10Q!!!!!"
You and me both. Each such filing gives rise to some of the most creative writing I have ever seen on these message boards - and I've seen some of the most skilful creators of Bombyx mori-woven purses from porcine hearing organs in action on boards devoted to such fine stocks as Biophan, Green Energy Resources, Viragen, Natural Nano and yes, First American Scientific Corporation.
Although I have noticed that of late, a plaintive note has crept into this heretofore unalloyed paradise for would-be millionaires.
I wonder why?
Here's a NEJM editorial detailing the progress that been made with real VADs over the past decade. Such a shame that the Myovad technology was only ever used to make millionaires out of Anstadt, Weiner, Lanzafame and their Iroqouis cronies and other known associates while the device itself languished on a shelf:
Published at www.nejm.org November 17, 2009 (10.1056/NEJMe0910394)
Rise of the Machines — Left Ventricular Assist Devices as Permanent Therapy for Advanced Heart Failure
James C. Fang, M.D.
Traditionally, the only definitive therapy for patients who have advanced, medically refractory heart failure was replacement of the heart with another human heart. However, transplantation is an inadequate option in light of the large number of potential candidates, the lack of donors, and the coexisting conditions that make most potential candidates ineligible for transplantation. In this context, ventricular assist devices, or heart pumps, become an attractive option for patients who have advanced heart failure.
Rather than replacing the human heart completely, ventricular assist devices serve in a true "assistance" capacity by supplementing the cardiac output of the native but weakened heart. The native heart is generally left in place, to serve as both a biologic conduit to fill the ventricular assist device and as a backup "pump." First-generation devices are pulsatile-displacement pumps that provide blood flow in a fashion analogous to that in the native heart. Such pumps are limited by size and durability, since pulsatility necessitates the mechanical wear of the ventricular assist device. Continuous-flow pumps have small rotating impellers that propel blood forward with surprisingly little hematologic trauma and can do so with greater durability and a smaller size (about the size of a D battery) than pulsatile-flow devices, since there is only a single moving part. Newer pumps use bearing-free designs to minimize device wear. Power delivery still requires percutaneous, rather than transcutaneous, energy sources.
The concept of using a ventricular assist device as a permanent solution for end-stage heart failure was tested almost a decade ago. In the landmark Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure (REMATCH) randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000607 [ClinicalTrials.gov] ),1 pulsatile-flow left ventricular assist devices dramatically reduced mortality, by 48%, in 129 patients who had severe heart failure and were not eligible for transplantation. Ventricular assist devices were subsequently approved for "destination therapy" by the Food and Drug Administration, in 2002, in large part because of the dramatic results of the REMATCH trial. Yet, the 1-year survival rate was still suboptimal in the patients who underwent placement of a ventricular assist device (52%, vs. 25% of the medically treated patients) and at 2 years (23% vs. 8%).
The study by Slaughter and colleagues2 in this issue of the Journal (NCT00121485 [ClinicalTrials.gov] ) represents another important step in the use of left ventricular assist devices for refractory heart failure. A second-generation ventricular assist device, a continuous axial-flow pump, was used in the trial and was part of the original program that studied its use as a bridge to transplantation.3 A total of 200 patients who had advanced heart failure and were ineligible for transplantation were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive either the continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (134 patients) or the pulsatile-flow left ventricular assist device (66 patients). The primary end point was survival, at 2 years, free from disabling stroke and reoperation for device repair or replacement. Patients who had been assigned to receive the continuous-flow device fared better than those assigned to receive the pulsatile-flow device, with 46% and 11%, respectively, reaching the composite primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 to 0.54; P<0.001). This finding was driven largely by the reduced need for device replacement in the continuous-flow group. One third of the pulsatile-flow pumps required replacement over the 2-year study period (similar to the fraction in the REMATCH trial) as compared with only 10% of the continuous-flow pumps. The actuarial survival rate was significantly increased with the continuous-flow device (58%) as compared with the pulsatile-flow device (24%) (P=0.008). The quality of life was improved to a similar degree in the two treatment groups. Adverse events — including sepsis, right heart failure, and repeat hospitalization — were less common with the continuous-flow pump.
What kind of patient was randomly assigned to a treatment group in the study by Slaughter and colleagues? As in the REMATCH trial, the patients were ill. High rates of inotropic support (79%) and low rates of use of angiotensin-converting–enzyme inhibitors (33%), angiotensin II–receptor antagonists (8%), and beta-blockers (55%) indicate the presence of severe disease. However, patients were selected carefully, with a mean destination therapy risk score4 of 10, corresponding to a low-to-medium risk (predictive of a probability of survival to hospital discharge of more than 70%). Although transplantation ineligibility is often subjective, the most common reason cited was advanced age (although the patients were about 5 years younger than those in the REMATCH cohort).
Several limitations in the trial by Slaughter and colleagues are worth noting. The number of patients who had undergone screening to permit the enrollment of the 200 patients who ultimately participated in the trial was not reported. It was not possible to make the investigators and patients unaware of the treatment assignments, since one device is more audible than the other, despite the similarity of their external components. This lack of blinding may have influenced the reporting of the adverse events, which generally showed a trend in favor of the continuous-flow pump. Finally, the postoperative mortality was not reported in either treatment group.
Stroke remains a major challenge with both pumps. The rate of disabling stroke (12%) did not differ significantly between the continuous-flow group and the pulsatile-flow group, despite the use of triple-drug antithrombotic therapy (warfarin, aspirin, and dipyridamole) in the continuous-flow group as compared with aspirin alone in the pulsatile-flow group. Although the rate of any stroke favored the continuous-flow device over the pulsatile-flow device (0.13 vs. 0.22 events per patient-year), this reduction was not significant (P=0.21). Rehospitalization was common, with almost all patients in both groups requiring at least one admission over the course of the trial, although patients with a continuous-flow device were hospitalized less than were patients with a pulsatile-flow device (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.93; P=0.02). The functional capacity was similarly improved in both groups, as evidenced by a near-doubling of the 6-minute walk distance, improvement in symptoms corresponding to a reduction by one or two NYHA functional classes, and robust increases in quality-of-life scores.
What is truly remarkable is the significant improvement in the probability of survival associated with the continuous-flow device . The mean survival in the current study (2 years) is double that in the REMATCH trial (1 year). If one considers that the mean survival among patients receiving inotropic support alone is 6 months, the use of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices appears to have quadrupled the survival of these patients in the past decade.
How do we integrate the results of this study into clinical practice today? The first priority would be to make sure patients and physicians are aware that ventricular assist device therapy is available, effective, and safe for well-selected patients. Second, we should not delay referral until surgical morbidity and mortality become prohibitive. Lessons from clinical experience and published reports5,6 support the notion that the optimal time for referral is most likely before the development of major complications from heart failure. Any patient in whom intravenous inotropic support is required should be considered a candidate for destination therapy. Third, the evaluation and care of these patients requires special expertise. Identifying the optimal timing for implantation in an individual patient's course of progressive heart failure is an art and a science. The American Board of Internal Medicine's subspecialty of Advanced Heart Failure and Transplantation Cardiology and the Joint Commission's certification for destination therapy were created with this in mind.
Philosophically, some view the use of a mechanical pump for heart failure as conceding the biologic battle; for others, it is a practical decision to refer a patient for left ventricular assist device therapy when contemporary therapies have been exhausted. Although the selection of patients, device durability and cost, and other considerations remain challenges in this rapidly evolving field, there is little doubt that left ventricular assist devices are viable and important options for patients with medically refractory advanced heart failure.
Financial and other disclosures provided by the author are available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.
Source Information
From the Harrington–McLaughlin Heart and Vascular Institute, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, and the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Case Western Reserve University — both in Cleveland.
This article (10.1056/NEJMe0910394) was published on November 17, 2009, at NEJM.org.
"it makes me angry to see anybody ripped off."
It seems our friend over at RB, uphillride, doesn't share our distaste for the exploits of the crooks running Biophan:
" By: uphillride
16 Nov 2009, 05:00 PM EST Msg. 105486 of 105487
"Since no one else has done it yet, I filed a formal complaint with the SEC regarding the sale of the intellectual property to the CEO."
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43520683
Pssst ... wshaw14 .... maybe thats because it never happened... can you say circular file? :o)"
Here's my reply:
"What a strange denial of the reality:
"maybe thats because it never happened"
"The company sold the technology associated with its innovative circulatory support system, the Myotech CSS, to MyoCardioCare. As a condition of the sale, Biophan received a 20 percent interest in MyoCardioCare in addition to a cash purchase price of $250,000, and is allowing Lanzafame to manage the technology's transition to the new company as its interim president."
Can't wait to see what sophistry uphillride employs to suggest that the sale of a technology valued on Biophan's own books less than a year ago at more than $10 million, and for which shareholders paid between $12 and 17 million, depending on whose figures you believe, for $250,000 and a mess of pottage to another company helmed by its own CEO is not a violation of several securities laws, including the obligation, nay fiduciary duty, of a Company's Officers to protect the interests of its common shareholders.
Making the decision to sell yourself that asset, which Mr. Lanzafame most assuredly did, (with the connivance of notorious BIPH and NNAN apologist tetrahedron, aka Dr. Max Bialystock, or Marc Bielski or some such) is certainly unethical, immoral, and according to some lawyers to whom I have spoken,illegal too.
I wonder what Messrs Lanzafame and Weiner would have to do to offend or upset uphillride? It seems nothing they do is indefensible in his book.
I can only speculate as to why that might be."
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=BIPH&read=105487
"New to this stock
Anything to this?"
Let's just say that all of the many multi-million dollar contracts announced by this company have a couple of things in common:
1) They always involve anonymous companies. The location -country - will be specified but there are never enough details to allow independent verification that the other party acknowledges the announced deal - in fact there's never enough detail to determine that the other party actually exists. There's a good reason for that. See 2) below
2) Not one of these PR'ed contracts has ever actually materialized. Never.
Add to that the facts that this company reneged on a deal with the Port of Ogdensburg (and as far as we know several others) recently:
http://www.allbusiness.com/energy-utilities/utilities-industry-electric-power/12675360-1.html
Oh, and GRGR is being sued by a leading wood supplier for non-payment of bills ( the shipment was abandoned at another port on the East Coast):
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-nysdce/case_no-1:2009cv08758/case_id-353441/
The company is also being investigated by various Attorneys General for fraudulent trading in carbon credits, and is widely suspected of fraud in many circles:
http://www.hotstocked.com/article/1684/big-money-in-horizon-of-green-energy-resources.html
http://grgrstock.wordpress.com/
To top it all, the "accounts" that Mr. Murray, the CEO of this fine enterprise files voluntarily with Pink Sheets are clearly fraudulent.
So, all in all, I would accompany this latest PR with the contents of several salt mines.
"Why use one vs. the other?"
Smoke and mirrors.
Or else very very good reasons that can't quite be articulated, even by the most avid apologist of FASC. Even if repetition of seemingly reassuring bromides should do the job.
"Company must be holding enough supply...no news of shortage..."
They can't even pay for the stuff they've ordered in the past:
"NE Timberland Investments, LLC v. Green Energy Resources, Inc.
Plaintiff: NE Timberland Investments, LLC
Defendant: Green Energy Resources, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2009cv08758
Filed: October 15, 2009
Court: New York Southern District Court
Office: Foley Square Office [ Court Info ]
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: Judge Barbara S. Jones
Nature of Suit: Contract - Other Contract
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jurisdiction: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: None
Amount Demanded: $158,000.00"
It's a con, christoba, a con pure and simple. Surprised you haven't figured that out yet.
The number of shares out there currently according to the last 10Q is as follows:
" As of June 30, 2009, the Company had 69,682,045 shares of common stock issued and outstanding and 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock outstanding."
But also please note that
"There were 1,018,152,755 [yes- over a billion] and 63,659,404 potentially dilutive shares underlying convertible debt, outstanding options and warrants which would have been considered in the calculation for June 30, 2009 and 2008"
and most worryingly of all that:
"As of June 30, 2009 the Company was authorized to issue up to 5,000,000,000 shares of common stock and 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock."
The clique of companies involved with NNAN, BIPH and the other toxic Rochester-based con tricks have shown previously that they're not afraid to use the authorized float for dilution when "necessary" - that is, when a new yacht or mansion is required by one of the principals.
I would also bet a large wodge of folding cash that the mysterious figures behind Longview are not entirely unrelated to the folk behind Platinum, who have morphed from toxic financier to cointrolling shareholder in NNAN, hence leaving a vacuum behind for the role of provider of toxic finance.
If that is so, then as we know Platinum is already linked to TI (Technology Innovations LLC) we can be reasonably sure so is Longview.
This is exactly the sort of thing that SEC is supposed to sort out, in order to protect retail investors from the kind of snow job that these companies are perpetrating. Shame they've been asleep at the wheel for so many years now.
The confusion here is that you take the fact that Mr. Murray claims that GRGR have completed a $300 million dollar with an (as usual) anonymous US Domestic company and equate that with "GRGR already have completed a 10 year supply contract for a US domestic company worth $300 mil".
GRGR have done no such thing, but in fact Mr. Murray has lied when claiming they have.
While if this was the first time you had encountered the fact that Mr. Murray's claims are utterly divorced from reality and indeed far distant from the truth, you could be forgiven for your naiveté.
However, as you are something of a cognoscente when it comes to the affairs of the fraudulent outfit known as Green Energy Resources, we must look elsewhere for the origin of your apparent enthusiasm.
In any event, let's hope no one else is tempted to "invest" in GRGR because of their false PRs or the repetition of those PRs on MBs such as this one.
That would be a real shame.
I've looked and looked at this latest PR from NNAN, and I have to say it doesn't say anything new at all.
Unless of course you believe that previously NNAN were working hard to stop themselves using "NaturalNano Technology to commercialize products that will directly financially benefit our company."
And as for an acquisition ("We are aggressively looking for an acquisition") , given the parlous state of NNAN's finances, it's difficult for me to imagine how they might finance that.
Unless of course, Platinum or Longview (I wonder if by any chance they're related?)want to use that as a figleaf to justify some more toxic financing so that they can short NNAN stock while diluting it yet more.
"Eventually all woodchips supplies are going to be tracked through GRGR utcs software system..."
Actually I doubt any woodchip supplies will ever be tracked through GRGR's utcs software system, which I suspect is as much a figment of Mr. Murray's rich, fertile and totally dishonest imagination as all the other phantasms "revealed" in Green Energy Resource's Press Releases.
It's astonishing to me that anyone could promulgate the announcements of this company without at least acknowledging that not only they have yet to deliver on one single promise, but that they have been caught in outright lies on many different occasions.
"Whoa!! Energy from alfalfa/beet mass and palm oil sludge!!
I think this is going to take off, and at this price - WOW!!"
I think you must have forgotten the board rules, which expressly prohibit "to da moon" type pumping.
You'll find that TRCPA is a stickler for the rules, and rightly so.
"Thank you DEGREE!! SHUT HIM DOWN!"
I see the enemies of the Constitution of the USA, specifically the First Amendment are here.
It's a common phenomenon with pump and dump stocks. The traders like to stifle any opposing view when they're hyping, and the same when they're dumping.
They just hate reasoned debate and legitimate questions raised by long term considered posters like renmanaz.
I can only speculate why, and it doesn't necessarily suggest that HDVY is the copper-bottomed investment some folk would like you to believe it is.
I for one will continue to support the ideals of the Founding Fathers and hope other right-minded people will do the same.
"Anyone remember Santana's lion? I remember going "Oh wow!" a few times while staring at that (if you know what I mean "
If you remember it, you probably never stared at it properly, if you know what I mean
However, that does provide a plausible biological mechanism for the loyal, some might say irrational, devotion shown to FASC by some posters on this MB. The effects are perhaps longer lasting than any of us thought they might be at the time.
I think most folk know that this latest PR is simply more big fat juicy illegal lies, the kind that Joe has been spewing out for years now.
He's a crook, and a thief, and I'd be happy to repeat that in any court where he challenges me. He never will, because the truth is a perfect defense.
Be interesting to see what the Ogdensburg folk make of being called liars by Mr. Murray, though.
I'm guessing they won't be best pleased. Given that Green Energy Resources is already being investigated for its attempts to trade bogus carbon credits, I'm surprised Mr.Murray is being this careless.
Just because SEC can't be bothered to do anything doesn't mean every other State and Federal agency is as lackadaisical.
"we can't have misrepresentation and blatant lies now can we"
Indeed we shouldn't, so I trust your post will be deleted on precisely those grounds.
If you re-read my post when it's re-instated, you will note that there is no lie or misrepresentation there.
I fail to undertsand why drawing attention to the fact that the "coverage" of HDVY came from an outfit that is paid by many clients for its coverage, and in its own disclaimer staes its content is primarily for "entertainment purposes" attracts such opprobrium.
Not a broker, not an analyst, just a penny stock tout.
You may not like that, but it's the truth.
And while they may not be currently paid by HDVY, perhaps they hope to be in the future. I know of other unpaid HDVY supporters who fall into that category.
"We have coverage"
Or maybe that should be;
"We paid for coverage- again."
"Companies profiled by Skymark Research may pay consideration in cash and/or stock or other securities to Skymark Research for the electronic dissemination of company information. In some cases Skymark Research may be retained as consultants to featured public companies for various services, including the electronic dissemination of information concerning the profiled company, and/or services pertaining to cultivating market awareness."
"IT ALSO OCCURS NATURALLY"
No need to shout.
The whole point is that it occurs naturally.
When accounts are "unnatural", for example fraudulent, then the chances are that they will not obey Benford's law, unless the fraudster is both aware of Benford's law, and very clever.
There's no reason to suspect Mr. Murray of either being cognizant of Benford's law, or possessing an excessively large IQ.
Which is presumably why his filings, among other glaringly obvious flaws (try comparing one set of "accounts" with those for the next period, and see where it gets you), also fall foul of Benford's law.
I'm not sure what your point is. If you're saying that Benford's law is not helpful in detecting financial fraud, then Federal and State courts as well as every financial forensic expert would disagree with you.
In this day and age, when it's clear that SEC couldn't deal with even the fairly obvious multi-billion dollar fraud that was perpetrated by Bernie Madoff, here at the low-end rent of the stock exchange, we need to look after ourselves. Benford's Law helps to determine that GRGR is indeed a fraud.
But then, you only need to look at the past history of unfulfilled, utterly fantastic and fictional PRs to see that fact.
"What does Benford's law have to do with it?"
Everything.
"Just another way to manipulate data."
Dead wrong.
It's actually a tool based on a simple but immutable mathematical principle which provides a simple quick way of indicating whether or not company accounts are fraudulent:
"Mark Nigrini showed that Benford's law could be used as an indicator of accounting and expenses fraud. Evidence based on Benford's law is legally admissible in criminal cases at the federal, state, and local levels"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford's_law
The application of this forensic tool could save folk a great deal of money on this and other stocks.
I see from the stock price that the old maxim:
"There's a sucker born every minute"
is as true today as it was when it was first coined.
I hardly think an in vitro test of doubtful scientific validity, and certainly devoid of any clinical significance is reason to buy this stock, subject of countless similar pumps in the past, all of them coming ultimately to nothing, just as this one will.
It might help Mr. Wernett's cronies and employers at toxic hedge fund Platinum screw a few more dollars by playing this stock from both ends once more, though.
So not everybody will end up losing.
Just those that actually believe any of this stuff that these companies pump out to gull the gullible.
" i do know if their financials posted on pinksheets are accurate"
These so-called financials are unaudited and indeed inconsistent from period to period. They also fail to past muster when subjected to forensic accounting tools such as Benford's Law.
Coupled with the fact that Mr. Murray's previous PRs have been entirely and completely fictitious,
(including one prime candidate for a fiction prize where it was claimed that GRGR was sending an icebreaker to the frozen wastes of benighted Northern Sweden to rescue the natives from imminent starvation and loss of power, I kid you not)
I think the safe default assumption is that the "financials" are as much a tissue of lies as the PRs.
"i will continue to buy for now"
It is, of course, your money and you must do with it as you wish.
I do think it's a shame, however, that you choose to buy shares in a clear scam, and to give succour and support to the criminal Joseph Murray at the same time.
" i do know if their financials posted on pinksheets are accurate"
These so-called financials are unaudited and indeed inconsistent from period to period. They also fail to past muster when subjected to forensic accounting tools such as Benford's Law.
Coupled with the fact that Mr. Murray's previous PRs have been entirely and completely fictitious,
(including one prime candidate for a fiction prize where it was claimed that GRGR was sending an icebreaker to the frozen wastes of benighted Northern Sweden to rescue the natives from imminent starvation and loss of power, I kid you not)
I think the safe default assumption is that the "financials" are as much a tissue of lies as the PRs.
"i will continue to buy for now"
It is, of course, your money and you must do with it as you wish.
I do think it's a shame, however, that you choose to buy shares in a clear scam, and to give succour and support to the criminal Joseph Murray at the same time.
The MCC3000
is yet another name for the Myovad/Myotech CSS device:
http://www.myocardiocare.com/technology
And here's a little slip from MyoCardioCare President and part-owner, the deeply conflicted John Lanzafame:
"In my twenty years in the medical device field, developing new devices and technologies, I have never had the opportunity to work on a device with the potential of the MCC300"
Well, actually, Mr. Lanzafame, you've had just exactly that opportunity for the past five years when you've been working with Biophan, latterly as CEO.
But instead of of taking that opportunity, you gave away all the money that you gained under the false pretense of developing the Myovad to yourself and a bunch of your and Mr. Weiner's cronies, including your chums at Iroquois. In the process you turned the stock price from dollars to just over a cent.
Nice job.
And what are we to make of another of MCC's Directors and part owner, Dr. Marc Bielski, aka tetrahedron?
On this message board as well as the IV, Yahoo! and RB MBs he used to vociferously defend the management of Biophan, to recommend that MegaDilution should proceed (even though there were several valid options, including a share buyback, and no necessity for it anyway) while posting quite libellously and incorrectly that I had a hidden agenda and at one point even accusing me of being part of a criminal conspiracy.
If there was any criminal conspiracy here (and the actions of both Michael Weiner and John Lanzafame were certainly illegal) then it would seem Br. Bielski/tetrahedron was party to it.
Shame the SEC is so busy and that Biophan shareholders seem unwilling to hold their employees to account for their malfeasance.
Green Energy Resources is undoubtedly a scam, and Mr. Joseph Murray is certainly a serial offender against various pieces of legislation, including, I suspect, RICO.
Quite apart from the bogus contracts, it's also become clear that GRGR's carbon credit business is another fraud, currently being investigated by a couple of Attorneys General.
And this from yesterday's press:
"Chips supplier defaults on contract with OBPA
By MAX R. MITCHELL
TIMES STAFF WRITER
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2009
OGDENSBURG — A storage agreement between the Ogdensburg Bridge and Port Authority and a New York-based wood chips supplier that was finalized five months ago has fallen through over a breach of contract, OBPA officials said.
Green Energy Resources has defaulted on a contract with the authority signed in June by not providing required insurance and credit agreements, Executive Director Wade A. Davis told the OBPA board at its Tuesday meeting.
Green Energy Resources officials did not return phone calls seeking comment Tuesday.
The agreement was to handle and store the materials from June 3 until Dec. 3, but Joseph C. Murray, president of Green Energy Resources, said in the past that he hoped the project could bring at least 10 jobs and about $20 million to growers and truckers in the area.
"We're disappointed to see they didn't follow their contractual obligations," Mr. Davis said. He said this was the first agreement to default since he came to the authority in 2005.
Tensions between the authority and the wood chips supplier began in July, when the company asked the authority to purchase a piece of equipment for unloading cargo trailers that typically costs $100,000 to $300,000.
In August, after almost 530 tons of wood chips had arrived at the port, Mr. Davis sent a letter to the company asking for the public liability and property damage insurances and credit agreements that were required in the contract.
The chips were being stored at the port and Green Energy officials intended to ship them to biomass power plants and wood pellet manufacturers in northern Europe.
However, after not receiving the documents and discussing the issue with the authority attorney, Mr. Davis sent a letter to Mr. Murray last month stating the authority's intention to terminate the contract.
A subsequent letter asked the company to take away the materials, Mr. Davis said, but after the company refused, the OBPA decided to absorb the costs of removing the chips, which remain at the port.
Mr. Davis estimated the total cost to the authority for the failed project at about $800. He said the authority does not plan to sue the wood chip supplier at this time.
"We'll talk to counsel and see what's appropriate," he said. "This had potential to create jobs in the north country, but we wish them well."
Not all OBPA officials shared Mr. Davis's feelings Tuesday. Board member Mary M. Farley and President Frederick J. Carter agreed to notify other ports about their experience with the company.
"We should let other ports in the state know who this guy is," Mrs. Farley said. "It would have been nice if we had known if something like this happened somewhere else.""
http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20091007/NEWS05/310079949
With a tip of the hat to joebologne over at the Yahoo! MB.
"Not sure about what your hopes are here, although I get the distinct feeling that they are definitely not for increased sales."
I will gladly clarify what my hopes here on the FASC message board are for you.
I post on many boards, and often get asked the question "why are you here if you don't own the stock?".
My reply is always the same.
One of my various hobbies is to study scam stocks, and to do a reasonable amount of due diligence on the stronger candidates.
I use several tools, including a study of the various message boards, and the denizens of those MBs. My attention was drawn to FASC because it garners "support" from some of the regular promoters of scam stocks, and because like some of the other confirmed scams such as VRA, BIPH, NNAN, GRGR, ITRP, and PRWP it has a long and solid history of rewarding its "management" and founders extremely well, especially when contrasted to the fate of the private retail shareholders who tend to become increasingly impoverished.
That process of gradual impoverishment is invariably accompanied by some one urging Mom and Pop investors to buy and hold, lower their average purchase price on the progressive lows and to hang on for tomorrow, which will always be wonderful.
Wonderful, that is, until the "management" of such companies have drained the gravy train dry, and move on to a new enterprise.
As a CPA you will doubtless be familar with some of the other useful tools such as Benford's law, which I'm sure you will agree is a beautifully simple way of catching out crooks. For example, a cursory application of Benford's Law to Green Energy Resources' SEC "filings" reveals instantly that it is a fraudulent company.
If you're interested, I can let you in on some of the other useful ways of investigating such likely scams. Just let me know.
So to answer your implied question, my hope is merely to derive personal satisfaction from my forensic searches. The fact that I have received thanks from many private investors for bringing things to their attention that have caused them to do further DD of their own and save in some cases tens of thousands of dollars is merely a welcome collateral effect.
Do let me know if I can clarify whether or not any of your other "distinct feelings" are accurate or not.
"Therefore, although you still remain an utter devotee of sarcasm"
As I hoped I'd made clear, I don't understand sarcasm, at least (there I go again, all confused - didn't mean to be sarcastic, but apparently I was, just by writing "at least")not as defined by techisbest.
And you're right, I did miss the fact that the forfeited deposit was classed as Other Income, although as a CPA I'm sure you will agree that it could quite legitimately be classified as Revenue.
In any event, my original statement that Revenues missed the lower end of projections by 29%, and the top end by 60% is absolutely correct by FASC's own definitions.
Again:
Last year's 10 K:"Based upon three recent sales for next quarter, we anticipate revenue of $ 1,000,000 to $2,000,000 next fiscal year."
This year's 10 K:
"Total Revenue $714,862"
Not Partial Revenue. or even Revenue excluding Other Income, but Total Revenue.
You can't alter the facts even though you rather discourteously remarked:
"your actual factual abilities appear to require some catching up.
But by FASC's own definition of Revenue they missed their previous forecast by precisely the amount I said.
Sorry about that.
I think you'll also find that there are others whom were expecting a great deal more from this last 10 K than it delivered.
That unfulfilled hope has been the constant story of FASC for years now.
"define for me as you see it, your definition of gross
overstatement as it applies to your statement"
Bless your heart, happy to oblige.
The forecast in the previous 10 K was:
"Based upon three recent sales for next quarter, we anticipate revenue of $ 1,000,000 to $2,000,000 next fiscal year."
The actual revenue was $714,862, including an appreciable amount from a retained deposit from a cancelled sale.
So, they were 29% below their lower estimate, and achieved less than 40% of their top end estimate.
In most businesses, heads would roll if a public forecast (upon which they presumably based their investment plans, judging from their unexpected loss) was wrong by that amount.
While you seem to be possessed of an almost infinite amount of patience when it comes to the unfullfilled promises of FASC's "management", I doubt that everybody else will share your attitude.
Indeed, I already detect signs of restlessness among the few renmaining devotees, and many of the previous faithful became disenchanted years ago.
While your steadfastness may in most circumstances be an admirable quality, I should perhaps remind you that traditionally it's only the Captain who goes down with his ship.
And I believe you have said categorically that FASC is not your ship.
And here's last year's 10K:
"Trends
Sales efforts are beginning to bring results with one machine being sold per quarter on average. Based upon three recent sales for next quarter, we anticipate revenue of $ 1,000,000 to $2,000,000 next fiscal year."
This turned out to be a gross overestimate.
Any reason we should believe them this time round?
They haven't made an accurate forecast yet.
Surely there comes a time when these guys should be held accountable to you long-suffering shareholders?
You wrote:
" it takes at least a year for something to come through the pipline"
I'm lead to believe by techisbest that the use of the words "at least" invariably precede sarcasm, at least(?) when used on the FASC MB.
Can you please confirm that your intent was indeed satirical? I'm afraid I haven't quite got the hang of this convention, obvious though it seems to loyal FASC supporter, techisbest:
"You're a jerk
if you don't recognize a sentence beginning with the words "At least" as sarcastic." "
Now granted your sentence didn't begin with the words "at least", but this seems a subtle distinction to me.
For the sake of good order on the FASC MB, I'd be grateful if you or indeed techisbest himself could clarify this important matter for me, so that I can clearly "get" what is intentional sarcasm, and what is merely unrealistic and very optimistic wishful thinking.
Thanks so much for your help with this!
Given the straws that FASC supporters have grasped at in the past, and their incessant and unceasing, but unsuccessful, attempts to turn low grade sulfuric acid into lemonade, you can scarcely blame anybody not professing the FASC faith for not recognizing sarcasm when it's allegedly employed.
Perhaps you could help us out in future, by labeling your comments.
So for example if part of your post is intentionally sarcastic, put in upper case
"SARCASM ALERT: What follows is not actually the belief of the poster!"
If on the other hand you are forecasting an improbably favorable outcome for any of FASC's endeavors that you'd like fellow posters to believe (hook, line and sinker, as it were), perhaps this would help:
"UNREALITY ALERT: What follows, however unlikely it seems in view of the history of FASC and the track record of its "management" and its technology, is what I would like you to earnestly believe"
Thanks so much for your help with this.
I must have misread all those previous posts from TRCPA and the other FASC devotees, because I could have sworn they confidently predicted a profit.
But instead, I see a loss and a going concern warning:
"Net losses for the current year were $484,562 compared to a loss of $586,547 last year.....
The Company’s auditors have issued a going concern report meaning we will need to increase sales or raise outside capital in order to continue in existence."
No doubt we will be told that the 10Q, due shortly, will show a much better picture.
And no doubt that will also be an unrealistically optimistic (if that's the word I'm looking for) assessment.
The company MyoCardioCare was set up specifically to "buy" the Myotech CSS device (without a by-your-leave to the long-suffering retail shareholders, for example asking them if they were happy to sell a technology which they had paid close to $17 million to own for a mere $250k and a 20% share of any future revenues).
The MyoCardioCare website is owned by, and registered to, John Lanzafame, and was set up before the shareholders were notified that the fine CEO of their equally fine company was selling their key asset to a company to be headed by none other than himself, and with one Director, Dr. Bielski, who used to post on this very message board as tetrahedron, urging folk to buy and hold BIPH shares at much higher levels than they are at currently, and who also urged you all to allow MegaDilution for unspecified purposes.
Conveniently enough, Biophan went "dark" by delisting itself from any recognized exchange, thus relieving themselves of the tiresome and tedious bureaucracy of SEC filings, at precisely the same time as your fine CEO sold himself and his associates the Myotech CSS device.
Those SEC filings would have required Mr. Lanzafame to declare his conflict of interest if he is indeed an owner of any part of MyoCardioCare.
Under the circumstances, however, I think we can safely assume that both Mr. Lanzafame and Dr. Bielski (or is it in fact legendary Broadway producer Max Bialystock?) both own part of MyoCardioCare. I think we can also safely assume they will find a way of siphoning off any spare cash that Biophan still has left if they haven't done so already.
You have to say, in terms of execution and effectiveness, it was a beautiful plan. They took an idea, and then used it to transfer North of $17 million dollars from your pockets to theirs in just a few short years.
If it wasn't both immoral and illegal, you'd have to admire them for their chutzpah.
And there are still people prepared to defend them. Wonder why?
No doubt all those sales of the legendary KDS machine have necessitated the late filing. Can't be easy working through the aoounts of a complex entity like FASC.
Surely a hugely positive sign, and not at all like all those other penny stocks where the NT 10K presages pink sheet status and eventual bankruptcy.
Are you seriously suggesting that this company is anything other than a vehicle for Joseph Murray's personal enrichment, or that Green Energy Resources' Press Releases are not among the prime candidates for the next Nobel Prize for Fiction?
As for the float, there are several figures bandied around, from Mr. Murray's interesting but entirely fabricated (and unaudited) "filings" - try Benford's Law on them some time - through Pink Sheets and Yahoo!, and yet a different number from the online brokerage data sets.
I'd be prepared to bet that all those numbers are significant underestimates of the real number of shares issued, which seems to increase every time Mr. Murray needs some ready cash.
This will only end one way -and anybody who buys and holds GRGR "stock" will be among the losers.
For those of you wondering where the poster Tetrahedron went, I think I may know where he is.
Tet professed to be medically qualified, to have practised at M D Anderson and to be a holistic medical practitioner (another word for someone who makes money from the rich worried well, in my view).
Here is the profile of one of brand spanking new Lanzafame helmed company MyoCardioCare's brand spanking new Directors:
"Marc J. Bielski, MD — Director
Dr. Bielski has a strong background in the sciences and research, including emerging technologies. After graduating from New York's University of Rochester, he participated in stem cell research in cancer immunology and immunotherapy at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. Upon completing numerous projects, including several publications, he attended the University of Texas Health Science Center School of Medicine at San Antonio.
After moving to New York City, Dr. Bielski became a general, holistic physician working in practice with other holistic practitioners, and later in his own practice within a holistic medical clinic. His areas of expertise include gastrointestinal illnesses and various types of chronic pain. His interests in research, especially bringing cutting-edge, medical technologies to market, have focused his attention towards emerging technologies rather than out-patient care.
Dr. Bielski has written numerous articles and manuscripts. He has lectured on holistic medicine and other health-related topics, and has made guest appearances on numerous syndicated radio shows."
If my evidence-based hunch is right, I guess one legitimate question is did tetrahedron stop posting because he became an insider, or was he an insider all along, when he urged folk to buy and to hold BIPH stock at much higher prices than its current pps?
Another legitimate question is how much is he compensated by Mr. Lanzafame and for how long has he been compensated?
Interesting stuff, I'm sure you'll agree.
From www.myocardiocare.com:
"MyoCardioCare purchases innovative heart pump technology
09/08/2009
MyoCardioCare, Inc. (MCC), a privately owned company, recently purchased an innovative heart pump technology from Biophan Technologies, Inc. The company plans to complete the final stages of the device’s development. As a condition of the sale, Biophan retained a 20 percent equity interest in MyoCardioCare.
“This device has unique capabilities that will fill an important unmet need in the acute resuscitation market,” said John Lanzafame, president. “We look forward to bringing this life-saving device to the market.”
The novel design of the device, the MCC3000, employs a single-use, pneumatically-powered, flexible, polymer cup that rhythmically compresses and expands the heart, restoring and maintaining circulation. This technology is able to support the patient, and provide a bridge to surgery, transplant or other forms of treatment. It is designed to have lower risk of complications than other circulatory support technologies, which have high incidences of blood clots, infections and other issues.
Originally pioneered in the 1990s, early prototypes of this technology were used on several patients at Duke University, and provided full circulatory support for 2 to 83 days. Innovations made since then have overcome some limitations that prevented its successful commercialization.
The device can be installed and activated in less than five minutes, providing a new option for patients in cardiac arrest. No other circulatory support technology can be applied this quickly.
“We believe that this device will provide a much needed option for cardiac arrest patients, who are poorly served by existing circulatory support devices,” Lanzafame said. “In addition to the speed of installation and its lower risk design, it is the only technology that provides full systolic and diastolic support to both ventricles.”
In addition to acute resuscitation, the device has several potential future applications, including patient support during emergency transport and providing a new vehicle for therapeutic and drug delivery technologies.
More information is available on the MyoCardioCare homepage at www.myocardiocare.com."
Here's the bit I find intriguing:
"The company plans to complete the final stages of the device’s development."
This spin-off, helmed by disaster-prone John Lnazafame who paid more than $17 million for the Myotech CSS, but never spent a penny on clinical studies that could have advanced the certification of this device with FDA, and ended up selling the product to his new company for $250,000 and a mess of pottage, is all of a sudden going to "bring this device to the market"
Personally I find this implausible on many different counts.
I suspect it's a story of which we'll hear a good deal more, however, as Lanzafame, Terrizzi and their fellow directors (including one psychiatrist who specializes in "holistic medicine" and a dog shelter lover) attempt to raise finance to support their new venture.
I doubt anyone who "invested" in Biophan or Natural Nano, another disaster of which Lanzafame was a Director, will be keen to repeat their mistake, however.
But maybe I'm wrong, and PT Barnum had a point - maybe you can fool some people all of the time.
SEC for one, it would appear.
I wonder if this reversal of all the previously announced lies
(they were all complete fiction, just like the "accounts" that Mr. Murray has filed with pinksheets.com in the past and those that he may or may not file in the future)
has anything to do with the enterprising and responsible poster over at Yahoo! who purchased one of Green Energy Resources' bogus carbon credits and then promptly reported GRGR for fraud to his State AG?
Apparently Mr. Murray attempted to return the money rather than fall for this particular trap, but I fear the truth may already be out there, and that Joseph Murray will have to bear the consequences of his dishonest actions.
And about time too, say those of us who suppport order in the financial markets and the rule of law, even if it does inconvenience certain fraudsters and their criminal associates who promote their stock on message boards such as Investors' Village.
Who knows, perhaps they'll go after Biophan, Natural Nano, Accentia, Health Discovery, Pro Pharmaceuticals and some other prime fraud candidates next.
We can but hope.
"Board has suddenly taken characteristics of RB!"
Nah, don't see it. In my view this MB continues to have an overly rosy view of this rather recidivist stock, with a very low tolerance for views that suggest that First American Scientific Corporation might be, as they say on the streets, "not all that".
I quite agree with you that the kind of realistic assessments about FASC's real prospects found on the RB Message Board would certainly be beneficial here, however.