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.
Bob...if you owned shares since the .20s and sold today for .41 you arent a day trader. One rule of law for a day trader is to not hold onto any stock past the close of business the day you bought it, unless something drastic happens. To hold a stock for weeks and months through many ups and downs is not something any day trader would do.
I have to laugh every time I hear someone say the buyers are lining up.
The fact is when the majority of the trades are executing off the bid that is not buyers lining up, thats MMs refilling their inventory. In other words there arent any retail buyers unless you see the trades executing off the ask.
The MM buys on the bid and sells to the public off the ask. Thats how they make their spread or profit. And as I pointed out yesterday NITE has been controlling the ASK for 2 days now solid and they have tried to stay on top of the bid for the past 2 days as well.
So how it works is NITE will bid say .40 for your shares, and then they sell them on the ask side for .405 and make .005 per share.
So if the majority of executions are occurring on the bid side, that means retailers are selling to the MMs for their bid price, not buyers lining up as is suggested. So it means theres a lot of selling going on right now by the retail investor, to the MM who will then use those shares to control the ask price later.
yes I am happy the stock is going up. As I pointed out earlier however, I have seen this same scenario play out with another company that I dont need to mention.
Holding all the patents and letting all the others run over the top of you is exactly what this other company did and now they are the small fish in a big pond. As I have stated here before I see the same things happening with NEOM, and while they are getting their ducks together every body and their brother are launching similiar programs. And even NEOM states in their filings their systems are antiquated compared to some of their peers, so a serious investor has to take those facts into consideration as well.
Its not all just a bowl of roses with NEOM, as some here would love everyone to believe. They have their issues that I hope get resolved in a positive manner. Until then I will remain skeptical as well as remain a shareholder.
As for my predictions on how high we could get to I had said in late 2004 on another board that I expected it to reach 1.00 a share in 12 to 18 months. It made a run close to that when it hit the .70s but then retreated. I still believe it will go to 1.00 a share, but not in the short time period some here are calling for. To make a seriou run to 1.00 a share a company with over 460 million shares outstanding needs repeated days of 5 million shares or more trading. The average daily volume should be in the 5 million range to make any kind of substantial run and hold it. There are companies out there with 60 million shares outstanding that trade 2 million shares a day consistently, so trading 2 million a day isnt nothing to get excited about when you have 467 million outstanding and growing.
"""""""This site was set up for dedicated serious investors without a personal agenda """"""""
so serious investors with legitimate concerns arent allowed to raise them here. Serious investors arent allowed to correct the misstatements here??????
Now thats funny. Why dont you just say this site is strictly for positive minded investors, who are willing to accept anything thats posted here as facts, and is not for those who attempt to correct those misstated facts.
KOKO I would be happy to supply my name in confidentiality to the moderators. Matter of fact I believe I had to submit my name to register here. And the company has a record as well of my name brewski since thats my email as well and I have emailed them several times, so its not hard to match the screen name here name to the stock holders report.
I thought he asked what OEM stood for not EOM and went back to check his post and it is OEM he asked about.
OEM is Original Equipment Manufacturer.........LOL....companies like volvo or ford for example are OEMs
LOL I have a GO next to my browser address bar thats been there since I started using IE browser years ago. I guess that means my microsoft browser is tied to NEOM as well since they both have a go window. LOL
Hangdog....perhaps you should do a little more DD. This technology you talk about is already being used by law inforcement and has nothing to do with NEOM patents. Do a little research on a company called VIISAGE or ticker symbol VISG. Its one company I brought to the attention of TFSM shareholders 3 years ago and has contracts with many law enforcement agencies as well as several federal agencies. My point being that much of what is claimed here that paperclick can do, is already being done using other technologies that dont infringe on NEOMs patents.
This is in response to your statement below.........
""""""""Add the feature about mug shots. Let's say you want to find out a driver you pull over is really Mr X. You can snap a photo of the person or click an image of the license and see if it is authentic""""""""""""
wouldnt the 20 day period the SEC has to respond be January 30th? Why 3 to 5 weeks from now?
The filing was Dec 29th so if you subtract out the two holidays since then the 20 days is up January 30th or less then 2 weeks from now.
you have to wonder how a trader like NITE can sit atop the ask all morning with ask size of 50 or 5000 shares and yet in 5 minutes we just traded 100,000 shares and they are still at the top controlling the ask.
REMEMBER THIS POST FROM SOMEONE, who according to some here, dont know squat about doing DD, and according to some here is nothing more then a basher with alterior motives...LOL
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=8869529
it was stated on this board in several posts that the SEC wanted to take a closer look to see if the QP was violated. Several posts not just 1. And I may be mistaken but I thought you were one of the ones made that staement, since its been you since day 1 trying to discredit every post I make. I will go back and see if I can find the posts, but regardless your statement that it was never said here is false.
And practice what you preach please. You tell me stop twisting things around, didnt you twist my last post, when you made the statement that I said I didnt believe MOBOT was a MATERIAL event. Wasnt that twisting my words to another poster, whom you were not even a part of.
Now let me go find those posts that claimed that the SEC had concerns over the QP and the release of MOBOT.
there you go twisting things again.........what I said was that it was closer to a violation, but not a violation. So then if it wasnt a violation as I made clear, then it is MATERIAL or legitimate.
The reason I said its closer to a violation, was because it could cause the PPS to rise based on the fact that it was an acquisition of another company. Those kind of releases require a little more scrutiny before releasing, and as you and many others here pointed out, the SEC even raised their eyebrows and requested further info to see if a violation had occurred.
As I recall you and Success where the ones introduced the language into the discussion about forward looking statements yesterday, and then gloated when I didnt respond to either of you.
As for my statement that new partners are in essence financial in nature, does not mean they are a violation of SEC rules. Theres a difference between forward looking statements, and MATERIAL STATEMENTS even though MATERIAL STATEMENTS OR PRESS RELEASES are inherently financial. They are allowed to release those partnership agreements, even though the investment world understands that those agreements should lead to future revenue growth. However if they said something like...."this will increase our revenue by 10 million dollars annually" or phrases similiar to that then it would be a violation. Just releasing the agreement however is not a violation.
However, you and I and every investor knows that the more sales partners you have, the more revenue that will lead to.
Matter of fact the release of the MOBOT acquisition was far more closer to a violation then the announcement of new partners. And even the MOBOT announcement as far as I know didnt cross the threshhold of being a violation and that was an acquisition, not a partner.
I am down on the stock, as I pointed out when I first started posting here. Thats why I still hold the shares. Thats also why as I posted here a couple weeks ago I bought additional shares to swing trade and lower my PPS some.
But even if I wasnt down on the stock, doesnt mean as a shareholder I have to agree with all the unfounded hype that is posted here. Unlike many here, I dont worry what my opinion will do to my investment, because unlike many here, I know enough about the market to know my opinion isnt going to move this stock one way or the other. Therefore I rather keep my opinions honest and I stick to facts to refute whats said here. You cant lose if you stick to the facts, although you can become very unpopular.
man you people sure can twist things.
I have always stated that MATERIAL PRESS RELEASES CAN BE RELEASED DURING A QP. Where in my post did I state that NEOM violated the QP rules.
Geesh, matter of fact my arguement is exactly the opposite. It was said by JP that we will know when the QP is over cause the company would release a lot of MATERIAL PRESS RELEASES.
I challenged that by saying why are they waiting to release them when they are allowed to release them now.
Please get your facts straight before making accusations, or implying malice on the part of another poster.
I believe that the moderators should be removing posts like yours that make such clearly false claims over what a poster said. Go find for us anywhere that I state NEOM has violated the SEC rules. I will be patiently waiting.
I didnt answer that question yesterday because by the time I got to your post I was out of posts I am allowed for the day. Believe me I wanted to answer you.
As for any press releases that contain forward looking statements of a financial nature every one of the partnerships they issued press releases on are in their very essence of a financial nature. You dont sign on new partners and not expect it to increase revenue do you?
By the way why dont you put my post in the context it was meant to be. It was stated that there havent been a lot of material press releases in the QP and my point was there have been a significant number. I didnt specify whether they were fincial or otherwise did I? I believe 4 in the month of December alone is a significant number, so my point was that the poster claiming there wasnt a lot of press releases was not being accurate. Go back and read SUCCESS post which you have the number to in my post and see what I was responding to. had nothing to do with forward looking, financial or otherwise.
now thats a good one. you ask a question and think you have the right to dictate how I should respond. Dont flatter yourself. If you want to know the answer go back and reread my posts and its in there several times. As someone who has been posting here every day that I can recall you should already know the answer, so I wonder what the motives of your question truly are?
contrary to many believes, BB stocks are not unregulated. They still have certain criteria to meet to remain listed on the BB. If they dont meet that criteria they are then moved to the pink sheets which are totally unregulated and have no reporting requirements what so ever. BB stocks have to file reports.
KOKO did you post about the subject after his clarification came out????????I figured as much, but you dont want others to have their final say as well?????Typical. If you want to tell me to knock it off I suggest you go through last nights posts and anyone who had comments after his clarification came out, you need to tell them as well to knock off their comments. GEESH
I really get a kick out of posts like this one.
The vast majority of these message boards are exactly alike. There is a group of longs who feel they control the board, and that the board is for their views alone, no matter how skewed and twisted those views are. Any time someone comes along who doesnt agree with their particular views that person is labled a basher and the war begins.
Take this board for instance. Theres over 300 posts a day, and 90 percent of them are either non material to NEOM, or posts that are pumping NEOM. Then the longs come out and say we have to protect the new investor from the bashers here. HEY LONGS, dont the new investors need protection from the 290 pumping posts a day that contain false information as well. This is an investment forum where the new investor should be hearing both sides is it not?
Since when is any public message board only for the longs to state mistruths etc.
Those of you claiming that I am a basher, have not been able to prove one thing I have said here as wrong. Matter of fact its been the other way around, but the ones who cry basher here the loudest, are the very same posters that havent added anything of value to the discussions, and are the very same posters that have not addressed any of the issues being raised, and are the same posters that merely respond using personal attacks. I like to think of them as the cheerleaders of the group.
Lets get one myth clear. A message board is not a place a smart investor goes to do their DD. So these claims that one has to address a SO CALLED BASHER so new investors dont get wrong idea is pure hogwash. I have owned this stock for 2 years now and just appeared here a little over a month ago, so surely I didnt rely on this message board for my DD as many smart investors never would. The message board is just another tool after you have invested to see if things slipped by your radar that someone else may have caught.
However on this board its ridiculed with myths and speculation, about google deals, microsoft deal, anything that deals with mobile whether its related to NEOM or not etc. Thats not DD as some here would portray it to be. Its a group of longs posting their opinions, speculations and myths. But dont let another investor come along and challenge all this false or misleading information, because then they are a basher with alterior motives. Well longs what are your alterior motives, when you attemtp to stifle the opposing views and begin your name calling????????Especially when as I said the bulk of whats posted here daily is pure garbage and has nothing to do with NEOM, but is presented as DD for NEOM. Matter of fact many of the posts will begin with the letters DD and then the article being posted talks about WIMAX in KOREA or whatever, which has nothing to do with NEOM.
As I said when I started this post I havent seen a message board yet thats any different, the longs believe that they belong to them, the longs believe that anything goes as far as postings as long as its a positive spin on the stock, the longs will claim that the so called basher is gonna hurt their investment etc. The truth of the matter is, if the stock and company are worth a darn, the share price will go up regardless of whats said by posters on a message board. The reason for that is if the stock is worth a darn INSTITUTIONS will be buying it and raising the price and they dont spend their time on the message boards to decide whether its a good investment or not. The truth is, when I here posters here as one said yesterday that to say something negative about the company is hurting your own investment, thats HOGWASH.
Just imagine how our country would be, if one group claimed control of the government, and the opposing side never got heard and there were no real debates on the issues. Thats what the longs want you to believe is supposed to happen on the message boards, and any one who dissagrees with that is merely a basher. But notice they dont tell you what their motives are. Yes their motive is to raise the stock price to put more profuit in their pocket. And I dont blame them since thats what trading stocks is all about, but it dont mean that anyone who has issues with the company dont want to see their investment rise either. I for 1 would love to see the stock skyrocket before april 15th tax day, but that dont mean I am willing to sit there and listen to all the twisted supposed facts, and not challenge them.
You know longs, if you want your messages all slanted and misleading on the positive, there are such things as private message boards that you set up yourself and control access to. Then you can put on your rosy colored glasses, fantacize all you want, with post after post of mistruths etc and be in hog heaven. Just remember the information highway is a two way street. You cant make the claim that a so called basher is up to no good, when in fact you are doing the same thing as the so called basher on the other side of the debate.
Then wouldnt it be proper to state his response here something like this...........I submitted 18 questions to management, and they answered most of those questions, but informed me they couldnt answer some of them due to the quiet period.
As many of you claim how well versed and intelligent the guy is, you would think he wouldnt make statements here that can be inferred to mean something other then the facts. When you state as i pointed out yesterday...I met with management before the meeting and they answered the questions I submitted, but some of the ANSWERS will remain private.....that statement leaves a lot to speculation.
Twist things all you want. He said he got a quick reply to the 18 questions, and that he was keeping some of the answers private.
here is his exact words, and by the way I find it ironic that you are doing so much speaking on his behalf on the subject, inst6ead of letting him speak for himself.........
QUOTE FROM JPs POST"""""""""I received a quick reply, but there are a few answers which are to remain private."""""""""""""
This is my last post of the day since I reached my limit. I imagine I will have a lot of catching up to do tommorrow.
first of all they were all public questions being asked here by the public shareholders, thats how the list of 18 came about. So why then does one of the shareholders at the meeting, suggest he privately addressed the questions, and will hold some of the ANSWERS private. Yes he used the word ANSWERS as though he did get responses from the questions.
And if he did in fact get ANSWERS like he implying, dont the members here have a right to know them answers, since the questions originated here. Especially when this person is being called everything to a GOD. give me a break.
Success.....how do you know what he is referring to if you werent there in person with him. He stated in his post the VAST MAJORITY are answered in the PP if you connect the dots, but that due to the QP they were limited as to even those answers.
So the VAST MAJORITY is not ALL the QUESTION. And he also states that A FEW HE WILL KEEP PRIVATE. So one can assume that the few being kept private are the ones not included IN THE VAST MAJORITY.........HMMMMMMMMMMMM
Yes I saved copy of the post in case it dissappears from here, so I will be quoting from it off my desk top.
I am injecting my opinion into what was said here. JP stated that management said there would be a lot of material news released as soon as the QP is over.
MY point is why wait until the QP is over to release a LOT OF MATERIAL NEWS. Yes JP said they will be releaseing a LOT as soon as the QP is over If they have material news why isnt it coming out as it occurs, except for the BSDS merger which we know cant be released until its final.
For them to state to JP that we will know when the QP is over because of a large amount of news being released, makes me believe they are sitting on news. Thats my take on it.
now I agree that one does cross the line, by making libous claims of criminal activity by TS. The message board is an entirely different thing. I too believe there has been pump and dumps done on these message boards by individual investors. Its a part of human nature to prey on the weakness of others, so it dont suprise me when it comes to some individuals. So he may be right about the message boards because even you have to admit that at least one person has tried it out there some where so thats not a false statement. The TS one though is more specific and therefore without proof is libous.
thats what an investigation is usually used to determine right?
I for one would not attend a meeting, then publicly post on a message board that I got answers but will be keeping them private, unless there was cause for me to keep them private. The cause could be something as simple as I dont feel the other posters have a right to know, but there has to be a reason. And if that were my cause I just wouldnt be telling them I had gotten answers to begin with. Especially when such a statement comes from one of the board GURUs who is well educated.
JP made the statement that the 18 questions were answered to him, and that some of them answers have to remain private. It wasnt ZACKs that made the statement, Zacks merely asked JP to clarify what he said. So JP started the rumor that he had inside information he has to keep private. Go reread his post.
14 material press releases since April 5th 2005, thats quite a few. And no thats not counting the quarterly report releases or the annual report releases etc.
And now all of a sudden we here they cant issue MATERIAL RELEASES until after the QP and then there will be a bunch. Thats just 2 funny.
The heaviest releases were in OCT, NOV and DEC, the heart of the QP, so whats different now? 4 releases in Dec alone, so this quiet period excuse is well worn out.
LOL.........I thought the post is much more focused on NEOM then many of the off topic speculative posts I have seen here lately. At least this post and TS have had a direct impact on NEOM in the past, unlike many of these microsoft and google claims I read about here daily.
The only difference is here someone is pointing out how TS may be a pump and dump artist and did so with NEOM. Thats NEOM, the subject of this discussion board.
Didnt you just tell me the other day a post about GTE was on topic because GTE was mentioned in another post refrencing bashers. I believe there was around 10 GTE posts that day that had nothing to do with NEOM what so ever.
""""""""""I don't think he can divulge some things he was told on the side.""""""""""
Thats the point, one shareholder is not supposed to be told things on the side, that have not already been disclosed to the public. This has nothing to do with QP either. Thats considered insider information if he was told certain things on the side, that are not already public, and asked to keep them private.
Dont forget they signed the LOI to purchase BSDS in 2003. Thats 2 full years and then some, and many here want to put the blame on the SEC for holding this deal up. It hasnt been the SEC that held the deal up, it was NEOMs management. Even this latest supposed hold up by the SEC was created by NEOM management releasing MOBOT news, if you want to believe thats what the hold up really is. I personally doubt thats the reason for the hold up, but thats my opinion and I am sticking to it.
Success.....maybe you are misinterpreting things a bit as well.
In JPs report as you quoted, he states the company said that there will be lots of MATERIAL NEWS released after the quiet period and thats how you will know its over. Isnt it a fact that they dont need to wait till after the QP to release MATERIAL NEWS??????????????HMMMMMMMMM.
As for your claim of the SEC term for MATERIAL NEWS being strictly defined, isnt it just the opposite. I thought I read something to the effect there is no definition to material news, but that its understood whats acceptable and whats not.
As for PVC's concerns about the statement made by JP that some things that were discussed with him will have to remain private, I share the same concerns as PVC. There is not anything that might of been discussed with JP privately that by law cant be disclosed publicly, and as a matter of fact if he was told things privaqtely, they are required by law to tell all the shareholders the same information, AT THE SAME TIME. So I wonder about the statement that was made here, which you claimed had been corrected, about some posters here having a personnel or professional connection to management. I am still waiting for you or another poster to point out which posts that correction was made in. Every time I hear this brought up it kind of reminds me of how Martha Stewart had inside conections and went to jail over it.
The rest of his post I saw as his opinions about color codes etc, so nothing new there either.
On another issue, I saw one poster here this morning commenting on how some here think JP was obligated to provide them his notes from the meeting, and where they got that notion puzzled this poster. JP put the OBLIGATION on himself. It wasnt the poster that put the obligation on him. When he stated here repeatedly he would post his notes and gave actual time frames, he created the OBLIGATION. The posters here requesting he honor that obligation were just holding him to what he obligated himself to perform.
KOKO, I did in fact discuss that the 2 Fritz brothers owned over 10 million shares each, in several earlier posts.
The reason I didnt discuss them in these recent posts is because their holdings are not in question. What is in question is the claims here that the CFO and CEO own millions of shares and the FACT is THEY DO NOT. All they OWN are OPTIONS to buy millions of shares.
The CEO and CFO have none of their money invested in this company at this time and thats what I am CLARIFYING.
Also KOKO y6ou are making a big deal about the other directors owning large shares. We did address this aand as a moderator you should know that was discussed.
However the CEO and CFO not owning any shares is a significant point to point out. You mention Copus owning 182,186 shares. This too was addressed in one of my previous points, where I pointed out those were a sign on bonus when he was hired. You must of been away the day of that discussion huh?
The FACT remains the two TOP offiucers of the company own no shares.
You can talk about the FRITZ all you want, but as I said and was responded to, they got their shares for nothing basically, and what they did pay they have recovered in the shares they sold to date.
KOKO you cant even get your quotes right, I did not make the statement that not many officers own a company, I made exactly the opposite statement. The part you credited me with saying, was a quote in my post, from another poster. LOOK at the front and back of it and it has a row of quote marks, to make it clear I am quoting another poster, and responding to that statement they made. Matter of fact it was HANGDOG who used that phrase in post number 49826, and I agree with you, as I said in my response to him, his claim that very few insiders own their stock is HOGWASH. So go tell HANGDOG he dont know what he is talking about because its his quote you are trying to give me credit for.
Then you state that the insiders own 63 million shares of the 106 million shares they have registered as beneficial owners. You then state that is 20 percent of the companies outstanding stock. The 63 million shares is only around 13 percent of the 466 million shares outstanding. It takes 93 million shares to equal 20 percent.
And KOKO it was you that claimed you were posting facts and then stated the CEO oewned 20 million shares of stock, and now you are attacking me for correcting your mis statement, now that you realize how wrong that statement was of your SUPPOSED FACTS.
The FACT is my original statement was ACCURATE and FACTUAL, and you and SUCCESS and others tried to discredit it, using options numbers as shares of common stock, which they are not.
oh and let me expand on what I said in a previous post. I stated that at best the CEO had $450.00 of his own money invested in the company if he paid .30 a share for the 1500 shares of common stock he presently owns. Let me modify that to say, that if he exercised his options at .01 a share like the 6 million Dodge has, he has a whopping $15.00 invested in the company.
Us retail investors have thousands invested of our hard earned dollars, and according to the records I can find the CEO and CFO have little to nothing invested. And I am willing to bet the CEOs shares were exercised at .01 a share back over a year ago when he actually bought those shares. Everyone then was getting .01 options.
Steeler......go find me post number 49967 which I believe was my post number responding to KOKO's post number 49939, where he attacked my character. I was out for a couple hours and when I read his post I responded to his implying that because I corrected errors on this board he was implying I was pretending to be someone I wasnt, with alterior motives. That post is gone from the board now. And it was gone within minutes of my posting it yesterday because I checked.
By the way KOKO, I would suggest that you remove the link in your header containing the false and misleading information. If you want to show how many options they own, thats fine, but title it options and not COMMON STOCK. In the one representing COMMON STOCK a zero should be next to Dodges name and 1500 shares next to Jensens name.
KOKO....You cant be for real.
First of all you insinuate or imply that you back up your SUPPOSED FACTS with links whereas I dont. Maybe youbetter go back and check my post where I posted the link to the NASDAQ website which shows how many shares of COMMON STOCK Dodge and Jensen actually own.
Second I am appalled that you wait till I have used my last post allowed to post such a post containing ZERO facts, knowing I cant respond in a timely manner.
Third I was appalled that you made an accusation about my character yesterday, and when I responded to that post my reply was deleted, and I find it ironic that the moderator can make accusations of a personal nature, and then the same monitors sit there and delete the individuals response.
Fourth lets look at your supposed facts. You posted the links for both Dodge and Jensens filings. What does it say on those filings?
I will tell you what it says. It says that the CEO owns DERIVITIVES for 20 million shares. In other words he dont own the shares he owns the right to buy them. Same thing with Dodge. He owns the right to buy shares. Then you say the CEO just filed to buy another 2 million shares of common stock. What he filed is a required filing, when ever the company issues options for shares of the company stock that were not PUBLIC shares. This filing in no way is an offer to buy the 2 million shar5es by the CEO. Its a required filing under the SEC rules, whether he ever buys the shares or not. If the CEO and the CFO owned the shares already the form would say SHARES OF SECURITIES BENEFICIALLY OWNED and it would not say DERIVITIVES BENEFICIALLY OWNED. TABLE I of the form is used to report common stock purchased(notice it says NON DERIVITIVES) and TABLE II is for OPTIONS or DERIVITIVES. Why dont you go look at some of the other FORM $s that have been filed to see the difference between someone buying COMMON stock as opposed to someone being granted options to buy stock at a later date. I will provide the link to one at the bottom of this post so you can see how TABLE I and TABLE II are for different purposes. Here is the definition of a DERIVITIVE. Notice it says based on some future event?
"""""""In finance, a derivative security is a contract that specifies the rights and obligations between the issuer of the security and the holder to receive or deliver future cash flows (or exchange of other securities or assets) based on some future event. """"""""""
Lastly your claim that the CEO intends to buy 2 million shares and thats why he filed is false. He filed because he has to, and he has until the year 2015 to decide whether to buy those 2 million shares or not to buy them. There is nothing in that filing that indicates at all he intends to buy those shares any time soon.
So please stick to the facts when you want to challenge someone elses credibility. I am sure this post will probably be deleted as well because it contains facts that PROVE YOU ARE WRONG.
Now here is the link I promised. Notice how DODGE on the second link owned ZERO shares of common stock after he sold his 600,000 shares on APRIL 15 of 2005. Now look at TABLE II of the second link and you will see that when DODGE sold all his shares of COMMON STOCK, he had options to purchase an additional 6.5 million at .01 a share. There has been no filing since then showing he has bought a single share. Same with the CEO in the 3rd link I have provided. Matter of fact you have to go all the way back to FEB 2005 to see the last filing by the CEO and at that time he had 18 million options and was being granted another 4 million with 25 percent vested imediately(1 million) and the rest vesting on the each anniversary date. So lets keep the facts straight, you claim he owned 20 million shares of COMMON STOCK and filed to buy 2 million more. Before the filing he owned 18 million OPTIONS and the 2 million from the latest filing is added to that to make it 20 million total. Read the title of the column with the 20 million number in it. Deos it not say benificially owned FOLLOWING THIS REPORTED TRANSACTION> Following means after last time I checked my dictionary.
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?FilingID=3696095&Type=HTML
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?FilingID=3608600&Type=HTML
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?FilingID=3456954&Type=HTML