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.
LOL, where do you even get this stuff.....
Its better than that for us. According to the rules, the insiders have to wait 6 months before they can sell AFTER they convert. And then, they can only sell 1% of the actual outstanding shares of the company every 3 months. So if ANY of the insiders convert, they have to wait 6 months to sell. Then they have to file a Form 144 before they sell, and they can only sell 1% of then then outstanding shares and thats over a 3 months period. No worries here!
Typical OTC horror show. Exactly what the company intended, weeding out the crap.......
There would be no company left because if you read the letter, they can't raise any money. So your bashing is helping the company short term, keep it up, because I get the plan.
Its only a start, it doesn't matter what the price is today, it will in the future though. I guess this is doing exactly what the company wanted. Look at them all run.
Let us know what you hear. It doesn't matter much to me how much the insiders own. The more they do the more they will try to make better deals which will be better for me. As long as they did this for a bigger purpose, I am fine with that. Unlike you, I have been with this company since it was private and I have seen how careful they are. I am curious to hear why because maybe that will help me understand and maybe telegraph where they are going. But an increase in percentage of ownership, that's fine. The reverse leaves me in the same exact position as before. Only difference, if you are right, they could own more. I couldn't care about that because they haven't sold and according to Cheeky, they won't be selling. If they had been selling over the last couple of months I would be very aggravated. But because they haven't, I'm fine with this. I am sure I have a lot more than you do in this, and I am a doctor and I know how much money is, and will be spent for this kind of technology. I couldn't care less how much they own as long as it's articulated why.
I will wait for the update. If you end up being right, good, so what. If the reasons are what Cheeky posted, that's even better.
If Cheeky is right, then we are ALL GOOD. If the friendly shareholders hold the preferred and won't convert, then its a brilliant plan - and wanting to raise legitimate money the right way, is a very good plan. Looks like the current debt holders join our ranks and that severely prevents dilution when they do convert. I couldn't care less what the preferred convert into, because I'm not a shorter or day trader. They started and supported this company for years, they deserve it. Since this started trading there have been no significant insider sales, and in the last 6 months, nothing, No 144's, no Form 4's showing less holdings, nothing. Just the opposite. More accumulations, taking debt off the books, friendly hands..........how can anyone not like this.
I get it now, and I like it. I think this is being responsible to all shareholders and puts the company in a position to attract real equity capital and non of this debt conversion death knell BS.
Now, all I care about is what are the listing requirements for NASDAQ. Hopefully thats were they want to take this. Does anyone know what they are.?
That's one of the issues. Obviously management isn't making a short term play. It appears they are going long and deep. And maybe this will ring a bell.
It makes me sick that there's some out there that would rather destroy than build
I mean really, the more this got momentum the more the Attacks piled on...just got more relentless as time went on...you know who you are...
It does cut both ways. I say wait and see. Or sell.
Only people who do not understand the legal mechanics of a reverse split, oh, and shorters as well, think it's bad. The result of a reverse is exactly the same as far as value of our holdings are concerned. I don't see anything wrong with this especially if they want to move the company along. This does not smell like a stock play. Quite the opposite. But I am going to wait for the update. If you condo crusaders want to hurt the rest of us, it's a free market. If you actually have money in this I would wait to find out its reasons like the rest of us.
It makes me sick that there's some out there that would rather destroy than build
I mean really, the more this got momentum the more the Attacks piled on...just got more relentless as time went on...you know who you are...
I think there is a lot of shock over this but there seems to be a tremendous amount of support for this company especially because what it does and the industry it serves. If you're new here I suggest we give this a chance and see what the CEO has to say next week and why this was done especially so soon. I think there is a lot more support but at these levels I can see that the company is not being taken seriously. I know as an Individual investor I can buy and sell this stock, but my brokerage firm can't with stocks under $1.00.
I've been through a few reverse splits. Yea, I am going to get cut down on how much stock I am holding but in this case the value of my remaining stock is 200% higher. Unless people start selling after the split I'm good. So say I own 1,000,000 shares at .01. After the split I will own 5000 shares at $2.00. The huge benefit for me is that the float goes from say 40m shares down to 200,000. And then it will be ..... Good luck finding shares to buy. Flippers may flip and investors may hold. But either way, I'm good for now.
You forgot the other half of the formula. Those 2500 shares are automatically priced 200% higher the day it's effective!!!!
Unexpected, yes. Wow. Understandable, yes. Lorraine is very bright and she must have a plan to make a move like this now. If the float is going to be less than 300,000 shares, then good luck finding stock, let alone buying it. I've been with the company for a long time and while this surprised me, I completely get it. So whatever I have will be diluted by 200% and its value will go up 200%. If stock is going to be hard to come by, then that's good for me. I'm the furthest thing from a flipper so the short swings don't bother me. I can only hope that my idea of the bigger picture is the same as managements.
Well I happen to know them and have been with them for a while now. Lorraine put up her own money and has not been paid in years, so to expect her to continue to work and not receive compensation is unrealistic. So to me, it's reasonable, after 5 years, to be granted a discount to market to convert the debt the company owes to her, into stock, rather than wait until the company has material funding and take the cash. To me, that shows a lot of confidence.
You also failed to mention (as you have failed to do in your other posts) in her last venture that they had additional funding lined up but was pulled, not because of her or that company, it was October 2008 and ALL FUNDING DRIED UP. You don't get inside those big companies if you don't have technology that they want. So you can try to draw negative attention solely due to your own playing games, that is, unless you are a psychiatrist, then as MD to MD, you and I should have an offline conversation.
You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but you need to share the whole record. By not doing so, it looks like you have a vendetta. You know that.
Failed. Right. I call introducing a new technology into a market, with $14m in sales its first year, and partners like MasterLock, Honeywell, etc.... A total failure. Lol. I can't wait to see what this team has in store for this market. A real businessman would say his piece and sit back and watch. YD is on a personal vendetta. Quite obvious and pathetic as well.
Yea. Think you better let Apple and Samsung know that their management has failed them also by using failed technology as well. What a joke.
Very good and very true post Bilboo.
I know you do say that tongue-in-cheek, but I've been here since its been private, and I have had my own successful practice and have assisted with medical device companies in the past, so I am cautiously optimistic, but I certainly wouldn't only point to facts that could be interpreted negatively if I weren't biased. We will see.
I expect a lot of egg on your face. Guess we will just wait and see.
Agreed. The DELUSION continues.
It is about $175,000 based on filings including 8k's. That's it.
And we see your delusion as well.
I know, but even above this board, from its own press release......
SmartMetric, Inc. (OTCQB: SMME), a developer
of patented biometric products,
Like I said, a lot of misleading statements IMHO. They could say developer of biometrics products, or developer of patented communications systems for financial transactions, but the above statement is false, based upon the research and filings. SMME is NOT a developer of Patented biometric products.......unless they are referring to other companies patented biometric products.
StocksRockStar is a PERFECT example of why you need to lock up your medications!
Also the SAFEDOSE PCA product. If you want to see why the company is developing these innovative products, you need to understand the huge problem.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/557394_6
PCA by proxy
This is not a small problem. A review of the United States Pharmacopeia (USP) errors database indicated that 6069 PCA errors had been reported, with 460 events resulting in fatality or some level of harm to the patients. Of these errors, 12 cases were attributed to PCA by proxy, with 1 of these cases reported as fatal; in that case, the nurse was the agent to activate the button for the patient.
The American Society for Pain Management Nursing developed a nurse-activated PCA position statement in an effort to help control the use of PCA by agents other than patients. The statement outlines the format for using this technique by implementing specific orders and parameters for use. Both the ISMP and USP recommend development of specific criteria for any situation in which nurse-activated PCA is being used.
This is why the MYDOSE product is needed.
http://www.nj.com/healthfit/index.ssf/2015/10/eeuw_nurse_in_trouble_for_using_just_one_syringe_a.html
http://consumer.healthday.com/infectious-disease-information-21/hepatitis-news-373/hepatitis-c-infections-in-hospitals-show-need-for-tight-infection-control-practices-696940.html
Nuts:
Please don't even go there. It shows your complete blind faith and lack of any understanding of the biometrics market. I googled Colin a long time a ago, and it shows a few patents - NONE of which points to anything remotely biometrics. He latched onto a technology which people like you think is a technology breakthrough, but has been around for DECADES. His/her claims to be an expert in this field in his/her 10K filing is a falsehood.
The biometrics industry is actually quite small, and yes....unfortunately for you, I do know all the players and have for many years, since 1998, so you can try to minimize my knowledge, experience and understanding of this industry, obviously to which you AND Colin/Chaya do not have.
I have shared with this board concerns about issues publicly put out in press releases with no actual backup in ANY of the required filings. Why, because foolishly, my broker put me into this, not big, but enough to garner my interest. Imagine my chagrin when I dug deeper.
Not a SINGLE QUESTION of mine has been answered in months. Talk about arrogance, propping up a company, run by a person taking credit for something they haven't done in the industry, all on hopes and dreams with gullible stock people like yourself.
I am waiting for the end of the month, if we make it past tomorrow.......and just for the future.....before you start throwing names around like Bill O'Reilly, make sure those you say that to don't actually know him, and are friendly with him. And same goes for Sean and Kelly. Its a very small world out there, which goes back to my original point.
Can someone actually PROVE this to me, because I have been in this business for almost 20 years, and I NEVER heard of this guy, and I know everyone.
From the 10K
"SmartMetric's founder, C. Hendrick is the originator and inventor of various miniature biometric activated devices"
In fact. no one in this industry that I know, ever heard of Colin or Chaya Hendrick. NADA - NO ONE.
So, how can he make a blatantly false representation in an SEC filed document? Any takers?
Actually gelc, according to the modified and updated Mayan calendar, the world is supple to end tomorrow, October 9, 2015, so we may never get to the end of the month to find out.
BKRT on the box now too!
Its the point that all the vendors bought into it, and thats what SMME should be looking at to distinguish the product from the Zwipe product.
From company's 8K in June:
As previously stated, on February 25, 2015, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with Coventry Enterprises, LLC, whereby Coventry agreed to invest up to $100,000 in exchange for our issuance of two convertible promissory notes ("Note I" and "Note II') each in the original principal amount of $50,000.00. We received funding from Coventry under Note 1 for $50,000, but did not receive funding for Note II. We have exercised our ability to redeem Note I for 125% of the principal amount plus all accrued interest. In addition, on February 25, 2015 we entered into an Equity Purchase Agreement with Coventry Enterprises, LLC. We have sent notice to the investor terminating this Agreement effective June 19, 2015.
Looks like Coventry has been paid off and the company has terminated its dilutive equity line a few months ago.
It looks like it wants to run, then they set up the brick walls. They want to keep this low and shake out as much as stock as they can at these levels. Typical OTC.
LOL, see what I mean. Showing 10K but sold over 200K in about 3 seconds. Show us what you got.
I hope this works, but my experience tells me to be cautious. I woke up thinking what these cards, per unit, will cost because I do know the cost of the components. The electronics shipping and packaging should cost approx. $38 since finger sensor prices, in bulk, range between $4.00 and $14.00 depending on the technology manufacturer. The processing chip is around $8.00, battery, about $2.00, sandwich board about $2.00, misc. components another $1.50, so hard costs should come in around $17.50 then double that for asian or indian labor, about $35.00, then packaging and shipping, another $3.00 per card.
Now, to get favorable pricing like that, they need to order these components on bulk, and with these components you don't get favorable price breaks until you hit about 100K.
The way I see it, the only way this card would be worth $38.00 to a card issuer (vs. a typical chip smart card at $2.50 in bulk) is if Chaya was smart enough to be able to load in all your different credit cards onto this product. I think then the market (banks and credit issuers) will see the value of buying this card for use - unless its programming can be done in a way to take advantage of the EVM portals, and let consumers add to the card their other credit card numbers. Thats what is makes systems like ApplePay so successful.
Hopefully if she hasn't thought about it, the above may help to bring to this company a competitive advantage. No charge.
I am glad that you follow me on other boards. The difference between MJMJ and RXSF is that MJMJ has real employees, actually generates some income, has real customers and audited financials.
According to its 10Q's, RXSF does have employees, has generated income, has real customers and has audited financials. Maybe not at levels you would like to see, but the MJMJ is a few years older in the markets than RXSF, but certainly your statements are misleading. It also just announced a new big international customer. It also has big name distribution. In fact, I don't see any big names working with MJMJ as I do with RXSF. Certainly no NYSE companies.
I think CHEEKY has been able to highlight real advancement by the company that doesn't require any explanation.
Let me put this into a perspective you can understand by using......let's say.....your own words from another board:
The CEO....
Has no control over PPS in the OTC. The market makers determine the PPS. The PPS is determined by a complex liquidity seeking algorithm. Furthermore, the company makes no money from the money traded in the stock. The company cannot even sell stock directly in the OTC. No bank will risk a loan to an OTC because they are usually poorly capitalized. So they go to loan sharks and make convertible debt deals. Once the convertible debt deal is done, the CEO has a new set of partners and it gets ugly from there unless the cash flow allows them to pay off the debt before share conversion time.
Those are your words from the MJMJ board. Not mine. So now your motives are very clear here. You can't possibly understand how this works on one board, then come here and present half of the facts from the companies filings to make a point so opposite of the one you seem to understand.
Obviously what you, and a few others don't understand, is how long it takes to establish a sales platform without any money. This company doesn't use cannabis as a way to attract clients and investors..........in fact, to me, this company uses its products to protect family from illicit drugs, including cannabis, so there is a huge disconnect here since everyone is going crazy about a recreational drug, when the fact is that recreational drugs cause about 100 deaths a day.
So you are an advocate of a company that uses pot recreationally, yet you try to discredit a company that makes a product to protect society from those and similar drugs. There are so many misguided investors putting money into companies that promote illicit drug use, rather than into a company that has products designed to protect people from them. Unbelievable.
Yea, this is typical sell on news, it happened last time as well. MM playing this one badly, day traders taking profits on build up, and forces that do NOT want to see this back in the .05 range.
I must be missing something, where at all does the 464 patent reference "biometrics"? It says it does in the K, but I can't find in the patent itself.
ROFLMAO - LAMBORGHINI? Yea right!
I guess its all about awareness and whether shareholders have stock with them. These have been the same old MM's playing the same old game. IMHO, this should be trading pennies difference, not 100ths of pennies difference.