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.
Millions242, I don't know how the docket system works but I think that if there were any objections to the sale, that would have to be reported. Docket 245 did mention the hearing date if I'm not mistaken. If there were no objections, I'm hoping that docket 245 continues on as the last word necessary for the courts. Go soupq
Wow, sorry about that. Never snapped to that till you told me. I was in Mexico all day and didn't even look at it until I got back and posted that stupid comment. Definitely my bad. Go soupq
Volume and pps up a bit again today. Haven't heard anything new so I'm not sure why but I hope it's a good sign. Go soupq
Millions242, l agree. SIOUPQ certainly has every bit the potential to be another on that list. I haven't done the math but just to get to half of what it was trading before should be around 5000% from today's prices.
That's what I can't figure out about today's traders either. The majority of the 00s and 000s are kinda duds but the OTC is where you start. If you just stop and take the time to read up on them it's really not that hard to pick out the ones that are just not going to make it. At the same time you would make you say hey, wait a minute like SOUPQ did me. No,it doesn't always work out but it's about the potential. The thing I absolutely love about SOUPQ is I know that this whole bankruptcy mess is the only thing that has any chance to keep it from going ballistic. Those are the kind you have to gamble on if you want to make those kinds of returns though.
There's nothing wrong with day trading either. If I had to label myself I guess I would have to say I'm a day trader more than anything. But again, you have to read up on them. Traders don't do that today. Not too many get past the message board. Even though I love to to sneak in and snatch some of some pumpers money on their weeeees and booooooms, my real money has always come from those I waited on. The only stock I ever lost my rear on is the only one I ever bought on someone's word. I lost 20k in GLEC and it was my own brother that talked me in to it. Kinda funny. I kept that stock for about 10 out of spite and sold it just a couple months ago for a whopping 79 dollars and then turned around and added to my position right in front of him out of spite because I can't even get him to read up on soupq. He still has 30k invested in GLEC and hates them with everything he's got.
Very glad to hear that the trustee is doing well but does anyone know if there were any objections to the sale going through on the 22cnd. I didn't see any new dockets on the Epiq website. I'm in high hopes that that means there wasn't. Go soupq
Posts 21221 thru 21235. Go soupq
Yes freakin sir on one hell of a good post WaffelzSr.
If you remember, that email stuff stirred up a huge uproar with a bunch of lawsuits and threats that got completely out of hand. I posted about that with my opinion that I stick to today that the judge had to step in and allow the 9/28 pr out to calm things down and I honestly still believe today that all that mess was the only reason we ever got that proves and when this is all over I wonder if we will get to see what kind of spanking the judge gave JH for that whole ordeal. And by the way, don't feel bad, this is my first q stock too. Go soupq
They're not done Millions242. Look at the volume today and the pps. 1500 x .0022 = 3.30. If that was a real heart felt sale and that person trades through TD Ameritrade as I do then that person paid TD Ameritrade 3.65 out of the deal. What else could be the motive for that other than the feeble attempt to scare someone into selling because it closed red. The way I see it is that their shares are so precious to them that they weren't even willing to part with enough shares to at least make the sale seem legitimate. Spumoni, I'm sorry I didn't catch that when I was responding to you about people willing to buy. I think the real way to look at is that no one is running out to sell. Go soupq
One hundred percent agreed Millions242. I believe they are willing to use there own money for working capitol if need be until they can get us trading on their merits and not the qs. I don't think the plan was to convert a hedge fund into a soup kitchen. It's all about the money and those shares even at todays prices look like a lot easier way to get a return on their investment than a soup company that has just been drug through the dirt. They are doing great things for the betterment of the company but even so, that could take quite a while. If WC was worried about a quick return, then you would have seen those form 4s. Go soupq
Thanks for the different angle WaffelzSr, I can't for the life of me figure out the ins and outs of a reverse merger for some reason so I don't ever step into that area. As far as being private for now, and with the NDA, I have to wonder if the two of us are basically saying the same thing with a different twist. Go soupq
Sorry, I knew I should have covered that.
If you read the asset purchase agreement you will see that the judge put a non disclosure order in there until all transactions are complete. That would also explain the confusion of why the q has not been openly removed even though the company was brought out of chapter 11 bankruptcy. There are small hints that it has if you play a little hide and seek. Look at top right corner of the SEC filings above and you will find that it is not there anymore and soupq can also be brought up without adding the q which doesn't work on any other q stock I have tried that on and I have tried it on every q stock that has been on the BB board since this question has arised. Also if you look at the the new website compared to the old it looks unfinished. I have hopes that the transaction due to happen on the 22cnd will be enough to relieve the case of the non disclosure agreement but that decision is up to the judge. Go even more soupq
Thank you once again Millions242.
That opens the door to maybe the best way to explain why the common stock was protected here. Each and every one of those transactions clearly says 10 percent owner. The accidental fact that there 10 transactions there is not saying that they add up to 100 percent ownership by any means. If that were the case that percentage number would have increased with each purchase of common stock. The key word is owner and the percentage is irrelevant to this fact.
The asset purchase agreement has to be looked at as both things that is. We all know that it is a sale of the assets but has anyone ever realized that it is also one owner simply buying out another owners portion of ownership because that is what really happened here and why the ticker has been unaffected by that sale. The company has never changed ownership. Some of the owners were simply removed through the asset purchase agreement. You will not find anywhere in the asset purchase agreement where it states that by purchasing the assets that the purchaser would forfeit their portion of ownership.
Now for both the chapter 7 and percentage of common stock issues. I am not the judge or a lawyer so I owe the board the admission that I only have an opinion on that subject. Since 51 percent ownership of the common stock was never proven by WC IMHO they were able show the judge that they did not have the final decision on any of the factors that caused the financial despair of the company and therefore should not have to be liable for those matters. If that theory is correct it would explain why there is some debt that they were not being required to pay and yes, that would put that debt on the remaining owners. Of course those remaining would have to go in to chapter 7 because they sold any way make the money to pay that debt. In the first paragraph of the chapter 7 petition it IMO relieves Soupman inc of the liability of that debt and in the other paragraphs individualizes the petitioners as the responsible parties of that debt.
Go Go Go soupq
Back in mid August the hype of the soupq stock was that that a 750 million dollar hedge fund with arguably 51 percent of the common stock was going to do a hostile takeover. To me that was a big turn off as far as a long term investment. Since the pps was so dirt cheap and had stayed steady for a while I decided to throw a decent chunk of change at it in hopes to make 20 or 30 percent if someone was able to pump that as good news. I had no idea that days later that they were going to be challenged on there position percentage and send the pps to upwards of .065 for a hod where I sold to give me a nearly a 700 percent return on my investment. That was pure luck and I admit that. Had that not happened and that takeover had gone through before someone could pump it a bit I honestly believe that I could have lost my investment to one of the scenarios that I am arguing against now.
The asset purchase agreement was what got my attention as far as a long term investment. It made me look at Wealth Colony, their stock position, and their intentions in a whole different light. When I looked at soupq as a short term quick money maker I thought of WC as a big bully with a lot of money to use and enough shares as a weapon to come in and snatch up everything Soupman had for next to nothing leaving the company and shareholders with nothing and them with an established brand to profit from. Had Karson not challenged them I don't believe there is anyone here long or short that doesn't believe that that wasn't exactly what would have happened here.
WC's intentions are simple and no different than ours. That is to hopefully profit from their investment in Soupman Inc. The other and IMO most important thing we have in common with WC is our position in the soupq stock. Karson may have saved us from WC but at the same time he saved us from himself. The company's assets were up for sale to the highest bidder and that sale is the only thing he was trying to protect. Not the company and more importantly, not us. We were set to be screwed either way. Then came the judge in the case with 6 very important words as far as I'm concerned. "In the best interest of shareholders". Those words mean so much to me because of who the largest shareholder we know of is and that's Wealth Colony.
Now the reason I am comfortable with my investment is because I quit looking at WC as a big bad hedge fund with a bunch of money that swooped in and bought Soupman in order to keep a legacy alive and their products on the store shelves and started looking at them as the biggest shareholder with enough money to swoop in and protect our investment.
Good night, God bless, and good luck to all. Go soupq
Thank you Bruce for that gm DD. That is something to consider here as well. I think we're good here but you never know. Is there any other similar traits of gm and soupman other than bankruptcy. Could they have avoided share cancellation through a purchase agreement of some sort?
As all longs here know, there has been a vicious rumor floating around here about commons being cancelled that IMHO has driven the pps down and shadowed all positive news articles that new management has put out since they took over. Out of respect for our company and our investments I have put together a list of other q stocks that will show that although it is possible in any stock, q or otherwise, that it is very unlikely that it will happen. I would ask that anyone reading this would also check on my accureacy because this is your money and unlike some here I am human and can be wrong.
All the q stocks I am referring to are from the time frame from when soup got its q until now. My source of information is the finra daily lists.
In the given time frame, wmtmq,cbriq,hpcq,and novcq are the tickers that had their q removed.
Wmtm is a chapter 7 stock that is still trading with 0 volume and yes, is scheduled to be cancelled tomorrow morning.
Cbri is also a chapter 7 stock that lost it's q and is still trading at .01 with no mention of being cancelled. (That would be the one I was asked to list)
Hpcq is chapter 11 stock that changed its name to vegl and is trading quite nice. (This one looks like a good comparison to soupq)
Novc is another chapter 11 stock that is trading well after the q was removed. (May also be comparable to soupq)
In the same time frame, icnvq,snreq,hampq,wltgq,nrgxq,usfcq,crmiq,mztaq,dliaq,and icpwq were all cancelled. Out of those 9 stocks all but icpwq have resumed trading.
Icpwq is planning to cancel commons and are planning to pay shareholders .1128 in settlement. (That would be the other stock I was asked to list)
In whole, out of the 14 q stocks in our time frame, only one (wmtm) meets the criteria of the rumors that IMHO are holding our investment and Gallants efforts back. As an honest investor I have a problem with that. All investments are a gamble enough without a bunch of made up out right lies being thrown in the mix. 1 out of 14 examples is in no way good enough odds to boldly say we are going to be cancelled.
GLTA and go soupq
That's a step in the right direction but it's still trading. The goal here is to give you a chance to support your theories that commons will be cancelled. Are you making that up or do you have proof. If you're not or can't provide what you're being asked to then just pick one of the two answers above. Go soupq
And another attempt to use a completely false statement to try to divert attention away from the issue. In real life the asset purchase agreement is the only reason old management had to convert to chapter 7. They sold substantially everything they had in it for less money than they owed.
You actually quoted what you are being asked and went on to quote a portion of the bankruptcy petition like that is even remotely related to what you have been asked for.
In your defense, you asked me to provide you with just one chapter 7 stock from any time frame that lost it's q and is still trading. I'm glad you did that because it got me looking last night and I will post my findings to the board as soon as I'm done with my morning coffee. Go soupq
Excuses excuses. It doesn't matter how we got to the issue at hand.is what does matter is that you still haven't provided what you have been asked for to resolve your end of it. Where is that one stock that was brought out of chapter 11 bankruptcy through an asset purchase agreement and went on to have commons cancelled as a result of that purchase. That's the issue. Provided us that comparison and I will aplaud you for that.
The reason I am pushing this issue so hard is because since this started most everything you have popped off with in the last 3 days has turned out to be wrong when I took the time to simply check on it. Now where's our comparison. Go soupq
This was he said about the same chapter 7 stocks just yesterday. WOW. Go soupq
Great read, again. Not even what you called the secs far fetched theory mentioned anything whatsoever about commons being cancelled yet you say it's your proof.
How's it coming with that comparison. Do you have us a stock that was brought out of chapter 11 bankruptcy through an asset purchase agreement and went on to have commons cancelled as a result of that purchase? It's taking you so long I almost wish you had never brought up the whole comparison thing in the first place. If that info you just posted that has no mention of commons being cancelled is what you were basing your commons will be cancelled slogan on then while you're at it you can maybe underline where it says that for us. Go soupq
Hey there General Grievous,
Q is still there but the trustee has a hearing on the 22cnd of this month. If you go to the epiq website (link is at the top of this page) you can punch in our case number in the search box (17-11313) and it will bring up all 245 dockets on the case. IMO anything that trades is not worthless but to form your own opinion that site has all the available court information free to the public eye. Good luck to you in whatever direction you decide to go with soupq. My decision is to wait it out but please know that I don't have access to any more information than anyone else and my decision is based solely on my own interpretation of the information available to everyone. Hope that was helpful. Go soupq
Still waiting. Dodge it all you want. Where is your pick of one chapter 7 stock that was brought out of chapter 11 bankruptcy through an asset purchase agreement as soupq was and went on to have commons as a result of that purchase as you say soupq will. Since we have some waiting time on our hands you can expect this request in a reply to every post you make until you come up with it or admit to everyone on this board that you are just taking a wild uneducated guess and really have absolutely no documentation to support your far fetched theory that commons will be cancelled. See, since you're not doing things your way and Manning up it's time you did things our way and put up or shut up. I'm giving you every chance to prove my theory that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about wrong. You won't take it though because you can't due to being wrong. Here's the real truth. There is no evidence out there to the public eye that supports any of your theories that soupq commons will be cancelled as you're said almost every day you've posted so we're waiting for that one comparison. I'm not even throwing in a chidish haha or man up. I'm just giving you the chance to get yourself out of the corner you backed yourself in to with your false unsupported information. If there is anything out there that proves you right or the comparison I'm asking for I would absolutely want to see it and would be happy to thank you for getting it out there. Go soupq
No it appears you didn't man up from being wrong again. We will get to that new topic when you quit trying to dodge the one you started yourself this morning. You started the show with comparisons to other stocks this morning and every comparisons you made has turned out to be false when I took the time to check on them. Since "man up" is your thing I was trying to be cool as a fellow shareholder and give you some small chance to save your credability and at least admit that you were wrong just like you expect everyone else to. It's your turn now. You find us one chapter 7 stock that was brought out of chapter 11 through an asset purchase agreement that had their commons cancelled as a result of that purchase. That would be a great comparison. Now let me teach you how to man up. I'm not looking for a chapter 7 stock that has lost it's q and is still trading because you are right that I would likely not find one. Now go fetch my request. Go soupq
Haha what, you just tried to dodge being exposed at being wrong again. You keep saying that commons will be cancelled because they are in chapter 7 bankruptcy and I referred to the finra lists to find that that has only happened once in the past year and all the others are still trading. Stick to the topic you started. You've also told alot of posters to man up in the past. Can you for once show us how that's done. Go soupq
This one and any other chapter 7 stock trading is giving shareholders everything any other stock is giving shareholders that doesn't pay dividends. Simply the ability to trade on the open market. Our conversation wasn't about that though now was it. You say commons will be cancelled because they are in chapter 7 and I am supplying a list of the chapter 7 stocks in over a year that didn't get cancelled so your repeated statement doesn't mislead people from the truth which is that ALL BUT ONE of the stocks that have been in chapter 7 in the past year are still trading. I see no need to go further back in time than that. Please explain yourself if you have some real credible information to support your statements. Go soupq
Millions242 that dollar to me isn't out of the question at all. As a matter of fact, when the NDA allows SEC reporting again and with the prs already out, this could easily be one of those that hits that dollar within a couple days. The company has what it takes to be worth at least that much just by not being bankrupt and in operation. Once we are trading on what new management is doing to bring the company up instead of what old management did to bring it down there should be a pps correction to reflect that. Remember, the guys that couldn't run the company worth a #$*& had it trading at 2.86. Going 5 years out, well, Campbell's trades in the 40 dollar range and Progreso's parent General Mills trades in the 50 dollar range. Those are two Giants I know but why couldn't 5 years of positive growth get us to half of that. Go soupq
Oh it's coming. I'm working on the list of all the q stocks in chapter 7 in that timeframe that didn't get haulted. meanwhile you can be working on your way to explain that one. Go soupq
Then let's go back to comparing other stocks to soupq as you do.
Since June 15,2017 (the day soup became soupq on the finra symbol name change list) only 4 stocks have lost their q. They we're wmtmq, cbriq, hpcq, and novcq. Out of those four only 1 changed their trading symbol away from the previous and that was hpcq that changed to vegl.
Now the scary part, the q stocks that got haulted in that same time period. Better sit down folks because that number is a whopping 1 and that would be icpwq. Go soupq
Thanks a millions242. Wasn't trying to throw you under the Bruce.
Your awesome did leads me to believe that if there was ever the chance that we would be cancelled, it would have been done around Sept. 9,2017. Meanwhile, the reason there is no volume anymore is because the owners of the shares are doing there best to hold out to the end and won't sell. This is what long means. Wait. Good things are on the horizon. Go soupq
Million242, I have what is likely a stupid question that maybe I should know but don't. If the old bunch is now referred to as Soup Liquidation LLC., Is Soupman Lending LLC. referring to Gallant since all the money seems to come from them. Sorry for my ignorance. Go soupq
Great read Millions. Also, in docket 245 it sure seems that the trustee is very eager to get the company liability transferred over and out this all to rest so the estate doesn't have to pay next months insurance bill. Go soupq
Yeah, that's 14.99 more than we needed to make that reply a temper tantrum because it's still trading. Go soupq
I meant the gavel. The dockets came up fine. Can't download it yet. Go soupq
Thanks for the link. Nope, not showing up just yet. The site is also updating so I'll check back. With eliq considering it inactive, I am curious to know what it says. Go soupq
Epiq doesn't offer any navigation on their inactive case listings and I don't have Pacer. Do you have access to the document that got filed yesterday you mentioned earlier. Go soupq
You know it. I'm not budging either. Man I get the feeling the wait is over though. Go soupq
Thanks Millions 242. It only becomes more obvious we are good with every trading day. A more realistic concern would be Gallant trading soupman inc. under a new ticker but with the amount of shares they own in the soupq ticker I just can't see anything that could justify that happening. I'm really getting the feeling something is gonna give here in the next few days though. We have run out of reasons not to. Go soupq
Nope, better check again.
http://dm.epiq11.com/#/case/SPN/dockets
Go ahead and select inactive cases and wow, comes up at the top of the list. If you would rather, leave it on active cases and look for it and lol. Go soupq
That case no longer shows up in the active cases with that court. The ticker is still trading with the same outstanding shares and float. I just can't see the impact that the soup liquidation LLC chapter 7 bankruptcy case had on this ticker. Go soupq
That would be a Pacer account.