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.
According to the transfer agent the AS has been 1 Bil for a long time. When the 10-k was released I asked if the 200 mil was a typo that was missing a zero but hopefully it is just that parts of the 10-k were copied and pasted from an older one for format and the proofreader missed the error.
That's not true. I have money invested in another penny stock that not only filed an 8-k about the authorization to increase in AS, they announced the written 51% authorization that bypassed a proxy vote and the intended immediate increase in the AS and OS and how the additional OS would be used.
They followed this up with an 8-k announcing that the the increases had occurred and how much additional capital the private sale of restricted shares raised and how many of the new shares were sold.
Each 8-k was accompanied by a letter to the shareholders.
When companies trickle their unused AS into tho OS you can bet the new shares also being trickled into the market to benefit the insiders.
Yes. My reply was to your response to me regarding my post refuting the MDHI pump and dump claims expressed repeatedly by another poster and questioning the relevance of a link posted repeatedly to an article that has nothing to do with MDHI or anyone associated with MDHI when that article is about the prosecution of an unrelated repeat pump and dumper offender.
THis was Robert-1's response to my request for proof of a P&D's
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=9494901-1102-4170&type=sect&dcn=0001096906-13-001453
Here is my reply:
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=9494901-1102-4170&type=sect&dcn=0001096906-13-001453
ANd finally, your reply to me:
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=9494901-1102-4170&type=sect&dcn=0001096906-13-001453
No offence was intended as I first tried to explain what I was addressing about MDHI because your response led me to believe you missed what I was saying and then commented on the additional things about MDHI in your reply to me.
I think we both agree that the only thing posting the audited 2012 numbers accomplish is to show us that MDHI is working to get current. If the numbers are close to the un-audited ones so much the better.
The only thing that will begin to settle anything about MDHI is the release of the fiscal 2013 audits.
I don't even want to see a PR. Just SEC filings because they are filed under oath.
Companies do increase the AS and OS to raise capital. It's just not done in the manner that SAFC is increasing its OS.
The increase was done in one lump sum on 8-26-13 and filed in an 8-k with the SEC on Sept 5. That is exactly what I explained is the process taken when a company is legitimately expanding the AS or the OS to raise capital by raising the OS and selling the new shares either privately or by selling the new shares to the general public.
I find it difficult to believe the clear difference between what SAFC is doing and what the other company did is not being seen.
First thing, the specific claim repeatedly made that I have been disputing has been that MDHI under Ronnie's stewardship over the last two years has repeatedly perpetrated pump and dumps. This is factually incorrect. No evidence that a single P&D by MDHI has occurred in the lasts 3 years has been presented because it does not exist.
In other words, any claim of repeated pump and dumps by MDHI under Ronnie is a lie.
The article in the link that is repeatedly posted as addressing MDHI is specifically about individuals that have been arrested for repeat pump and dump related fraud. It therefore is unrelated to MDHI in any way.
As to the dilution, the OS is less important to share price than the float. Without accounting for the shares the management team actually controls as proven by their ability to make structural changes to MDHI without calling for a proxy vote, there are at least 816 mil shares that are not part of MDHI's float. That is the new 600 million from the new shares which are restricted and the 27% minimum the company bylaws require the management team to own. That leaves a maximum float of 584 mil shares. While that is more than MDHI started with it is still a pretty low float.
With respect to the companies finances and growth since getting into Costco, none of us know how that has progressed over the last 8+ months. As you and others are so fond of pointing out, MDHI has not released any specific updated financial information in that time. However, we do know from multiple SEC filings that positive operational cash flow has been achieved. We have to wait until the financials for fiscal 2013 are released to know how significant the positive operational cash flow is and if operational profit has begun.
Hopefully the 2012 numbers will be out this week and we will see the un-audited numbers were accurate which can give us all some additional confidence in MDHI's most recent statements.
Unfortunately, that is not how stuff like this works. When a publicly traded company needs to raise its OS to raise capital for any reason--pay debt, operating capital, employee compensation,--it does not trickle new shares out on a weekly basis without notifying the shareholders.
A legitimate increase in the AS or OS should be a sufficient amount to last more than a few days or a week and should announced in an 8-k. A couple of random people updating the information on a message board is shady even if the information is accurate.
By the way, the last update we saw was only last Thursday and the OS has already increased another 4 million shares.
"There are currently 215,575,378 shares outstanding. The company is authorized to issue 1,000,000,000 common shares."
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=91720231
We all hope to be the next Curtis "50 cent" Jackson. We all want SAFC and every other penny stock we take a chance on to be our Vitamin Water with a billion dollar buy out around the corner.
But lets face it, most people can't affors to be relatively safe and still shoot for the moon. Most can't buy enough apple or google to get rich anymore. You have to be rich to begin with. And those prices are so high you nave to be "Trading Places" rich to absorb the loss if something catastrophic happens.
So I sit here with my SAFC stock that I should have flipped to at least recover my initial investment (but I wanted to cover the taxes too which would have left me with almost no SAFC) when I had the chance and hope I am wrong about where SAFC is headed.
Well, you guys are definitely right that our opinions of where SAFC is headed don't really mean anything. Either SAFC will turn out to have the products they claim and we will all make money or it will turn out that they ran out of time to produce the products before a creditor(s) that were unwilling to extend the agreement(s) came calling or that they were only in the business of printing and selling stock for personal gain from day one.
But that can really be said about every stock we discuss on I-hub.
The one thing I can say is that I am 99% sure the proceeds of the stock being dumped into the float do not benefit the company. Legitimate capital infusions from newly minted shares are either sold privately as restricted shares to big investors or sold to the public AFTER an announcement of the share increase and offering.
I'm not sure what you are saying I have missed in the licenses agreement. The .70 PPS value is guaranteed by SAFC making up any shortfall in additional shares. It does allow that another solution can be negotiated to replace SAFC making up any shortfall in additional shares but there is no way for SAFC to force another solution--it has to be agreed upon.
IMO, SAFC has nothing to offer but the additional shares to make up the $5.2 million they sill owe.
Expansion of the AS and OS through private sales of stock to raise operating capital is NOT pump and dumping. It is a legitimate and legal avenue to raise operating capital. In MDHI's case, at least with the most recent increase in AS and OS MDHI even informed us of the vote authorizing the increases by SEC filing and a letter to the shareholders prior to executing it and then again notified us by SEC filing and a letter to the shareholders when the increases were executed and what was done with the shares.
Again--none of that is a pump and dump. And there is no proof of any P&D activity by MDHI in the last three years.
The article you keep kinking to specifically discusses a KNOWN repeated pump and dump perpetrator getting caught.
Since there is no proof of any MDHI P&D activity in the last three years and only one P&D in MDHI's &history while Howard Teicher was running the company, please explain the relevance of the article in the link to MDHI.
First, SAFC cannot renegotiate the license agreement without a willing partner. As I found SAFC through that partner, I am well versed in the company that holds the guarantee. That company is a six time P&D offender according to pumandpumps.com and is the company I said would P&D again after the guarantee is fulfilled. That company listed the initial fair market value of the 10 million shares received in the license agreement as "cash revenue" even though the shares were restricted. They heavily promoted a dividend based on the receipts from license agreement on 2 separate occasions--first as cash and then as the actual shares in SAFC divided among it's shareholders. In each case they failed to deliver the dividend AND the increased the AS and OS prior to the the ex-dividend date--giving themselves additional shares--without giving any notice until months after the ex-dividend date.
Simply put, the holder of the 10 mil shares with the guaranteed value has a clear and indisputable history of the insiders lying to the shareholders with the intent of creating significant personal gain. There is no benefit to the other company to renegotiate the guarantee without significant additional compensation, which SAFC is not in a position to provide.
Second, while SAFC (or its insiders) is currently slowly dumping without the pump. As long as the dumps are slow, a pump isn't always necessary. Remember that the pump is more about creating demand for the stock than running up the price. Also SAFC is not above a P&D. Again, according to pumsandpumps.com SAFC is a 4 time offender,all withing the last 12 months.
Finally, IMO, with the terms of the guarantee coming due along with the lack of an actual product to sell to generate revenue and approximately zero cash on hand, the company cannot be killed because it is already dead. SAFC will owe $5.2 mil on 10 mil shares guaranteed to have a PPS of .70. If the PPS of SAFC (specifically those 10 mil shares which rules out a R/S to achieve the guaranteed PPS) is not @ or above .70, SAFC must make up the difference in fair market value shares or make other similar arrangements. SAFC has nothing else to offer. It's not like SAFC can offer cash.
Given that information, it appears the only way to cover the guarantee in the license agreement is by issuing additional new shares. Using the approximate current fair market value (.002), it will take 2.6 billion shares to fulfill the terms of the guarantee. That means SAFC will be bumping the AS by more than 2.5 times AND issuing all those shares to MFT* thereby also flooding the OS. While those shares will be restricted, a 10 fold increase in the OS will destroy the PPS.
I will close out by again stating that I hope I am wrong and that SAFC is ready to unveil it's full product line. SAFC's PPS skyrockets and we all make beaucoup bucks. My experience with penny stocks has taught me it is much more likely that we all got caught in a 2 company scam where they used the interactions between the 2 in order to hide shady deals.
"With all the pumping and dumpimg that Ronnie and joe have done at mdhi"
Please provide any proof that MDHI has been involved with a Pump and Dump any time in the last 3 years.
According to pumpsnaddumps.com MDHI has neither pumped nor dumped during that time frame.
Please provide any evidence tying MDHI or Ronnie Adams to the facts from the article link provided twice in your post.
Does this article mention MDHI? Does it mention Ronnie Adams? Does it mention anyone affiliated with MDHI at all?
I'm not sure if I shoule be responding to your post or ceo1's reply but here are my thoughts of SAFC as of today:
Well, there we go with SAFC. Another week, another dump.
I don't believe SAFC is dumping shares, I believe SAFC is providing its management team and possibly other insiders shares to dump for personal profit before the guarantee in the license agreement must be satisfied
As to the RS--the terms of the license agreement guarantee the specific 10,000,000 shares that were paid out to have a PPS of .70. A reverse split will cause a corresponding reduction in the number of shares paid for that license agreement and will therefore violate the agreement. I would speculate that a reverse split would not be legally allowed until after the guarantee is satisfied.
I hope I am wrong, but this is my prediction for how the next 2+ months unfold. SAFC continues to dilute at a continuing accelerated pace as they can't get as much for each share. Its insiders continue to dump shares into the float, pocketing as much as they can before the guarantee comes due. When the guarantee comes dues we will see a massive expansion of the AS and OS to cover the $5.2 mil still owed on the license agreement. ASAP after the expansion a reverse split will be announced further eroding the PPS and the RS will eventually occur also eroding the shareholder value. On the other side, the holder of the guarantee will run a PUMP and Dump based on 4th qtr revenue of $5.2 mil just like they did on the $1.8 mil 4th qtr revenue a year ago.
I am kicking myself for not selling on the last bumb that ran to .019 and I am thinking of taking my loss now at .0002 rather than watching the PPS drop any further.
Did you ask them specifically about taking on audits for sec filings of a publicly traded company? Or just about taking on new clients?
Audits for sec filings is not all CPA's do. In fact most of the work CPA's do are not related to audits for publicly traded companies. And there are very strict rules about what constitutes an independent auditor for SEC filings.
http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7919.htm
This is a little dated, but has not changed enough that an inquiry about taking on new clients is not likely to have the firm believing you are looking for SEC audits and filings:
"in 1999, non-Big Five firms earned less than one percent of their annual revenues from consulting services provided to public company audit clients.214 Consequently, we believe there will be only an incidental impact on accounting firms that provide audit and non-audit services principally to audit clients that are private companies not registered with the SEC."
Most work done by CPA firms is easily interchangeable among the firms accountants. Independent audits for publicly traded companies like the specific work this firm does for MDHI are not.
By stating "I called the new auditor. Guess what? No one on holidays", it is your claim that:
A) An SEC authorized CPA firm was willing to give out personal information about the vacation time taken by people that work at the firm to some random person calling them on the phone?
B) A firm in New Jersey, a state where nearly 90% of the people that can afford to take vacations take at least a portion of the that time between Memorial Day and Labor Day, had no one away right before the end of the summer?
Just to back up that I know what I am talking about with the state of NJ, I live in there. I worked at the Jersey Shore for nearly a decade and vacationed there much longer. The area I lived had a winter population of about 30,000 people and a summer population of about 250,000 people. About 25-30% of the extra people had summer long rentals and everyone else had weekly rentals. The 2 busiest times were and are around 4th of July and just before Labor Day.
The same population explosion happens up and down the entire coastline of the state and this does not take into account people that go to other coastal vacation spots up and down the entire eastern seaboard from Maine to Key West.
Sorry for the delay in responding. I guess the 2 calls I placed made me feel better but I think the best way to put it is that my conversations with people at MDHI re-inforced my previous feelings about the company.
The first call to MDHI I was able to talk to an actual person who I didn't think gave me a run around which was reinforced when I spoke to the same person the next day. The second time I called she asked me what my questions were to see if she could answer them and immediately transferred me when she couldn't.
Again, I was impressed that a member of MDHI's management team came to the phone quickly and didn't seem bothered to be talking to an investor. Not only were the initial questions answered without fumbling, the follow ups which came to mind based on the initial answers were easily handled and more in depth as required. The part that I liked the most was the answer to the question based on rokkdatstock's post. What I asked gave a lot of room to skirt the question or not give a lot of info as it was worded along the lines of "can you tell me more about the new wireless feature". The answer was in depth and detailed. It was probably as forthcoming as legally possible.
Nope. Not from my conversation. I thought DR. Ken may have discussed it in his last call to MDHI. and posted about it here but a quick review of his recent posts shows he was only discussing the 10-k for 2012 from MDHI.
This is also something I did not address directly with MDHI, but according to Dr.Ken MDHI currently expects to release the 2012 audited numbers next week.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=91655140
OK. Here are the results of my phone call to MDHI this afternoon.
1) Any residual income on international sales? No
I followed up with if this would be true for China as well. The answer was essentially: the China agreement is not complete yet so there are no guarantees but as of now MDHI will be in charge of and paid for the monitoring.
2) Is Costco arrangement drop shipping? Yes
3) Why are 2012's taking so much longer from receipt to postings than 2011 did? Auditor has been on vacation
I followed up with if this is the inhouse auditor reviewing the numbers and was told essentially: the independent auditor has been on vacation. The numbers have been completed but the 10-k itself has not
4) If 2013 audited financials are taking a long time, will MDHI post un-audited ones to update shareholders until the audits are complete? No but this was followed with essentially: paying accountants to do both unaudited and audited numbers is an unnecessary redundency and that no one will be satisfied with unaudited numbers after MDHI has been getting caught up with the audited ones. At this point the company feels it is better served producing the audited numbers late than unaudited numbers at all. I would have a hard time arguing with that logic as long as audited 2012 appears soon.
Finally based on rokkdatstock's request I asked if MDHI can provide any additional information about the new wireless feature. The answer was very complete, telling me essentially: Currently the wireless connection is a small add on upgrade device that can be plugged into any existing medipendant. The next generation medipendant that will have the wireless built is not available yet. The wireless capability is what MDHI feels is important to advertise at this time more so than who the carrier is because MDHI expects to have multiple carriers. ATT is the first provider to sign on with MDHI to provide wireless service.
I will ask if MDHI can provide any additional information about the new feature but this is a direct quote from the Costco MediPendant page:
"NEW - NO HOME PHONE LINE NECESSARY. Your MediPendant® will work even if you don't have a regular phone in your home"
http://www.costco.com/MediPendant%E2%84%A2-Medical-Alarm-System.product.11748169.html
So some wireless is now available.
The new product is like any other product upgrade. The older pendants are not obsolete just different. For example, the Samsung Galaxy S3 is still a good cell phone and availabel right along side the Galaxy S4.
The use of wireless is the newest thing in medical alarm tech and most companies either have or will be adding it as as option without changing the other comparisons between companies.
To me, what makes MDHI's product the one I would want my parents to have is the direct connection to the pendant and the 24 hr coverage by certified EMTs at the call center. I also like that the lock box is included in the purchase but that may be a standard thing in the business now. I am pretty sure we had to pay extra for the lock box when we got my grandmother her alert system years ago.
Also, won't the new shares used to pa the debt be restricted?
Assuming the interest has been paid off monthly and the convertible debt is still the initial $110,000.00 it will take a new 44 mil shares a a PPS of .0025 to pay off that debt.
If you think this is a huge dilution, wait til SAFC has to pay off the $5.2 million still owed in the license agreement. If the PPS has not reached .70 by mid November the guarantee calls for the value to be made up in additional shares.
That is nearly 50 times as much money that SAFC will have to cover at that time.
A label like that would definitely indicate drop shipping From MDHI so until there is something definitive that indicates otherwise I now accept that drop shipping directly from MDHI is what happens.
You are correct that MDHI gets that money up front when the unit is sold to the end user in a drop shipment arrangement.
However, MDHI gets that money up front for all the units Costco buys if Costco controls the distribution. Even if it is a lower % of the sales price, back in June of 2012 the lump sum cash infusion would have benefited MDHI a lot.
You are absolutely correct that official SEC filings from MDHI carry much more weight than something a random poster says on MDHI's i-hub page. However, I believe that calling the company can have some merit specifically from certain posters regardless of their views on MDHI.
At this point there is no doubt in my mind that Louislasvegas received his information directly from the company and, since my views are not in line with his, wants me to verify the information he presented.
I will call tomorrow if I have time although I expect it will have to wait til Monday. These are the questions I have to ask of MDHI as of now:
1) Any residual income on international sales?
2) Is Costco arrangement drop shipping?
3) Why are 2012's taking so much longer from receipt to postings than 2011 did?
4) If 2013 audited financials are taking a long time, will MDHI post un-audited ones to update shareholders until the audits are complete?
I am not sure it MDHI can answer the last 2 but that doesn't mean I can't ask.
MDHI offers the monitoring service regardless of if the medipendant is shipped by Costco or MDHI, therefore they gain control of the customer as soon as the customer activates the monitoring service. At that time they can do everything you mentioned
If you mother saved the shipping label we can know for sure who sent it.
Are you saying that you have spoken with MDHI and been told either Ireland is a one time sale or that Costco sales are drop shipped?
If so, you may have saved me the step. I know that you used to be in contact with MDHI and Ronnie. I know the you may very well have access to information I don't have. I was not trying to be combative.
We have differing opinions of MDHI--possibly because you have been an investor a lot longer that I have--but your posts about MDHI are truthful to the best of my knowledge.
From what I have seen of the un-audited 2012 numbers the only good things about audited ones will be that we are progressing towards getting the 2013 numbers and they can show the un-audited nombers were reasonably accurate.
Revenue went up but so did expenses because MDHI ordered a bunch of pendants to handle the expectation of new demand. THis is just my opinion but I think there were a number of units sold under the Costco "pre-paid" model so that none of the recurring revenue began until 3rd qtr of 2013.
I have already addressed that here is no proof MDHI is profitable yet. Hopefully that will come in the audited 2013 financials. I accept the statement that MDHI has achieved positive cash flow because this specific staement as made in an SEC filing and was not using a forward looking statement for it--at least for 3rd qtr fiscal 13.
As for other's post stateing that MDHI is profitable, either they are fully buying into a forward looking statement--which is a mistake--or they are incorrectly using "positive cash flow" and "profit" interchangeably.
When I ask for proof of something it is because an unknown is stated as fact or something that is incorrect is stated as fact.
Here is an example of something that is unknown. If someone states that MDHI's Ireland contract calls for the sale of the unit only, they may have seen that in a PR or an SEC filing in which case they are correct and can provide that information. If they just think "it makes sense" it is an opinion not a fact.
Here is an example of something that is known and incorrect. If someone says MDHI has diluted by dumping more than a billion shares into the market, that is a verifiable statement can be dis-proven by looking at the structure of the OS from multiple SEC filings that show MDHI which has less than that as unrestricted shares.
If I know the answer and dispute a statement, I do so. If I don't know the answer to something stated as fact, I ask for proof. I do so because having as musc information as possible about MDHI is good for me as an investor and I legitimately want to know if what I am being told is accurate.
I believe drop shipments make sense on one hand for Costco as they do not have the expense of stocking the product but also doesn't make sense for them on the other hand as they loose control over a significant portion of the initial customer service involved in delivering the product.
As for the MDHI side, why does drop shipment make sense for MDHI? especially in the short term when the agreement began, a large cash infusion from the initial Costco order would have been a huge boost for MDHI.
Either way, what you or I believe makes sense for one side of the agreement or the other does not constitute proof.
I want to start out by saying that I think the product that SAFC is supposed to be trying to bring to the market looks like it is an extremely good one with phenomenal sales potential. That being said, without the release of bad news, a company's volume does not go from 120k shares to 21.5 mil shares and lose share value unless someone is filling just about any bid. There is no way I believe that kind of volume came from short sellers.
So what I see happening is insiders dumping shares.
I have not seen any evidence that this is a pump and dump. It is lacking the pump. But, as I have said before, since June 30 the company has expanded the OS by about 60 mil shares through a slow trickle of repeatedly issuing 5-10+ mil shares. That does not include the 30 mil shares the two managers purchased in June. That means that about 45% of the current OS has are shares that have been newly minted since the middle of June. If the new OS that we get on Friday is 220 mil or more as expected it would indicate that the expansion of the OS is accelerating as the PPS is dropping.
It lends further credence to my belief that the insiders know the terms of the guarantee in the license agreement require SAFC to make up the $5.2 million SAFC still owes through additional shares if other arrangements are not made. SAFC is unlikely to have a PPS of .70 in time and MFT* is unlikely to accept other terms.
Do you have any proof that this is MDHI's agreement over there? If so please provide it.
I am not saying you are incorrect because I don't know the specifics of that agreement but this statement similar to the ones made by several posters that they know for a fact that MDHI drop ships the Costco sales yet provide nothing to verify the statement.
Correction. That should have read:
B) Positive cash flow has been growing at a rate that, as of April 2013, MDHI "expects" operational profit to begin showing in 4th qtr fiscal 2013.
Thought I changed it.
My guess is that what's coming is SAFC's OS around 220 mil the next time we get an update from the transfer agent.
By the way, thanks to you and ceo1 for getting and posting that information on a regular basis.
Now we are getting into real discussions about MDHI's potential profitability instead of people using positive cash flow and profit interchangeably.
We won't really know anything for sure until the audited financials for fiscal 2013 are posted. However, these are the claims made by MDHI in SEC filings:
A) Positive cash flow was achieved in 3rd qtr Fiscal 2013 and continued into 4th qtr fiscal 2013.
B) Positive cash flow has been growing at a rate that, as of April 2013, MDHI "expects" operational profit to begin showing in 4th qtr fiscal 2014.
This is the type of progression we need to see. A growing positive cash flow should lead to operational profits and should eventually lead to real profits and eventually to paper profits as carried accounting losses diminish.
UK is correct that from a "new knowledge" stand point the audited 2012 financials should not provide much but from "MDHI is moving towards full compliance" stand point it is a big hurdle.
I have to admit that I am surprised filing the 2012 10-k is taking so long. We were led to believe they "reviewed" the 2011 audits and wrote the rest of the SEC filing in about a week before the 10-k was posted. We have been told that MDHI has had the audited numbers for 2012 since 8-15-13 so it is going on 2 weeks of review/writing now.
That does not mean I don't think MDHI will file the next 10-k soon--I'm just surprised the process is taking this long.
Since you have again stated "With all the pumping and dumpimg that Ronnie and joe have done at mdhi I wonder if the FBI would be interested"
I will again ask that you please provide any proof of MDHI perpetrating a Pump and Dump. According the detailed lists at pumpanddumps.com MDHI has not partaken in the practice in at least 3 years.
http://www.pumpsanddumps.com/p/hall-of-fame-m-z.html
So far, despite repeated requests for any proof at all, none has been provided.
You keep saying that "mdhi posted that financials will be current by a certain date"
That is factually incorrect. MDHI has never stated or posted in any SEC filing "that financials will be current by a certain date". As you included in your quote, what MDHI said was "the Company intends to have all of its delinquent quarterly and annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission by July 31, 2013. "
"Intends" does not mean "will"
Here is the accepted definition of "intends"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intend
Are you saying that cash flow positive cannot mean profitability? I would hope you mean that cash flow positive does not necessarily mean either operational profit or overall profit. Being cash flow positive is certainly an important step in producing profit.
MDHI has said they have a strong and growing positive cash flow since the first quarter of calendar 2013 and expect to to surpass the point of becoming profitable during the second quarter of calendar 2013.
Sorry. You are correct that the law enforcement agency you initially mentioned was the attorney generals office.
As in the 2nd example you gave, the case I am familiar with was built by the FBI.
However, both the FBI and the attorney general's office:
A) wont undertake an investigation based on hearsay. Both will require some legitimate, verifiable evidence as I have asked you to provide for this message board. So far nothing more than speculation--one man's opinion--has been provided.
B) Neither will pursue action against the insiders of a publicly traded company until after the SEC--the regulating authority over publicly traded companies and the law enforcement agency with jurisdiction over publicly traded companies--has found wrong doing and taken action. Initially the SEC would halt the company's trading. Then the company is given a chance to respond to any allegations. If the response is satisfactory the company can resume trading normally. If not the company is de-listed and moved to the grey market (a situation I believe you are familiar with) and the criminal investigation by either the FBI or the attorney general's office would commence.
I will take that to mean there is no proof you can provide of MDHI's participation in a single pump and dump since March 2010. Never mind repeated pump and dumps.
Go ahead and call the FBI with unfounded accusations about MDHI. I'm pretty sure the FBI will require more concrete evidence than members of a message board would accept before they would pursue a case.
Apparently you cannot even provide any evidence for the message board.
Yes, dilution of both the AS and OS can hurt investor confidence without accurate information.
The Costco announcement doubled the share value, but without sustained information, particularly up to date audited financials such a bump will be short lived. It is great to know MDHI's medipendant is being sold in Costco and by Coventry. It is great to hear in an SEC filing that the company has passed the threshold of positive cash flow.
None of it makes a real sustained difference until MDHI provides up to date audited financial proving the difference those 2 distribution channels have made and proving that the positive cash flow is real. Even then there will be ups and downs as some investors take short term gains and, yes, many of those currently restricted shares will find their way into the float.
No one invested in MDHI to hold the shares forever. But most those shares will be dumped by investors that provided capital infusion in exchange for shares rather than management which must privately retain 27% of the OS according to MDHI's bylaws.