It makes zero sense to borrow money to buyback shares. It's one thing if you've got cash on the balance sheet to buyback shares, but to borrow money to do it is really stupid IMO. It would be real interesting to know what interest rate EMXC is paying for a credit line.

Does it not make sense to make your current businesses profitable before you borrow money at god knows what interest rate to make new acquisitions? And the company just this week announces it's exchanging 400,000,000 shares of EMAX to take a 20% stake in a telephone installation company? Now I ask, what synergies does a telephone installation company have with any EMAX assets? I can't think of any synergies. EMAX needs some focus IMO.

No_brag_just_fact....see link from otcmarkets.com I'm not going to lie to you. See yourself.

http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/EMXC/company-info

As you can see, despite what the pumpers will tell you, there is no shortage of shares.

If EMXC really has a $50,000,000 credit line, why did they neglect to mention the terms of the credit facility? Hmmmm....maybe because they'll be paying 12% interest or more? I find it interesting what the PR doesn't mention. Furthermore, it's pretty obvious to me that EMXC's current assets are probably underperforming and not producing enough income to grow organically. If you look at the paid in shareholder equity over the years, it's pretty sad they now need to tap into the credit markets.

According to the most recent information, EMXC has float of 1,504,875,649 shares.

This EMAX "lender" also allegedly did the same deal for BTDG 2 weeks ago...see link.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/SSM-MEDIA-Announces-Execution-iw-1572931037.html?x=0

I was checking out BTDG and I'm not kidding, they've got a total market valuation of around $650,000. You know what they say, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

See this EMAX PR link....it's almost a year old, and still, no buyback has been made. According to otcmarkets, the company as of 9-12-11 still had 2,291,972,864 shares outstanding.....see second link.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/eMax-Holdings-Corp-Announces-iw-1601190798.html?x=0&.v=1

http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/EMXC/company-info

EMAX has also been promising dividends that haven't materialized for years, and stating that EMAX filings were underway to uplist on OTC. See link from November 2010.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/eMax-Worldwide-Inc-Announces-iw-63608685.html?x=0&.v=1

It seems like there is a real disconnect between EMAX's PR's and actual execution from management. Where is the credibility? And where is the accountability for lack of execution?

In my opinion, this pump is so insiders can dump their restricted shares.

I think a financial audit is way way past due.

If there really was a share buyback, why didn't Roxy do a buyback over a week ago? Based on otcmarkets.com data, as of September 12th, no share buyback took place, and the pumping PR's now suggest EMXC really had no intention of doing a buyback.....because if they were doing a buyback, why wouldn't they have done so at much lower prices?

Same pump Inter Global did with BTDG....now they're using it with EMAX....see link. Sorry but IMO it is only a pump.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/SSM-MEDIA-Announces-Execution-iw-1572931037.html?x=0

EMXC has been promising buy backs, dividends, audited financials, uplisting, etc. etc. for years. Has any of these promises been kept? Not a single one of these promises have been kept. Not one.

Netflix's 3 month chart makes a great horror movie.

Flash has been marginalized with HTML5. That's just the way it is.

One word for NFLX.....PAIN.

The PEG Ratio is only .63 Apple is dirt cheap.

I never suggested the a deal with Unitell was not real. I'm only saying that there is no way any bank is going to provide a credit facility of $50,000,000 to a company with revenues of $1.4 million. Do the math and it makes no sense whatsoever.

I sit on the board of a bank holding company with about $2.2 billion in deposits. There is no way any bank is going to extend $50,000,000 in credit to a company that has $1.4 million in total revenues. Not a chance.

After the PR was released on Friday, I called the CEO of Unitell, Mr. Arthur Edwards. I asked him about the $6,000,000 credit facility and the stated commitment from his lender of an additional $50,000,000 in financing from his bank. For a company with $1,400,000 in revenues, a credit line of $50,000,000 seems like total nonsense to me. No bank is going to provide $50,000,000 in credit to a company with $1,400,000 in revenues. I specifically asked him the name of his bank and his bankers name. He asked me why I wanted to know, and I replied that I was doing my due diligence, but he WOULD NOT tell me who his bank was. I kept pressing him for an answer on this and he kept pushing back not wanting to answer, and finally he said he had to go and abruptly hung up. My point being, if he can't confirm who his lender is, the PR pure BS IMO. If these claims were true, he'd have no problem whatsoever naming his lender. The fact he wouldn't tell me, just confirms it's BS in my opinion. I invite all of you longs to call Arthur Edwards at 954-429-1714 and ask him the same question.....ask him what bank, and the name of his banker. I also found it peculiar that I guy with the last name of Edwards has a strong Spanish accent......strange.

No bank is going to provide a credit facility of $50,000,000 to some small telephone installation company. Certainly not with these credit markets.....no chance. In my opinion, this is total bunk.

It appears that LEXG is late with their most recent 10-Q.

Wasting more shareholder equity IMO. Lets see, music, TV, agri-business, green businesses, finance, oil and gas, real estate development, online merchandise, outdoor sports and concerts, and now she buys into a telephone installation company? All these businesses yet according to the last financial report EMAX generated $460,000 in sales. IMO, if she thinks these other businesses have potential, she should be investing in her current businesses and not moving onto new ones when she's not generating much in the way of earnings from EMAX's current assets. It's like her philosophy is throw investors equity against a whole bunch of walls and hope something sticks. Where is the company's focus? If these other businesses are viable, why isn't she trying to grow EMAX's current assets? IMO, she is squandering investor capital in businesses she knows nothing about. I see massive dilution coming for shareholders.

Read this EMAX PR from the past. The interesting thing about this old PR, is that nobody in the City of Silverthorn knew anything. Not even the Mayor knew anything about it, and in this PR EMAX was claiming it would generate lol, 1 billion dollars a year in revenues. Does anyone else see a pattern of misleading investors? And if you do the math on today's PR, this makes ZERO sense either. Outrageous claims IMO.

http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2004_4th/Dec04_Silverthorne.html

This EMAX PR announcement makes about as much sense as this EMAX PR announcement. Anybody with the most basic understanding of finance knows this makes zero sense.

http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2004_4th/Dec04_Silverthorne.html

Except EMAX shares are .0014/share, not .025.

How are 400,000,000 shares worth $9,728,123? Think about it. This EMAX PR makes no sense whatsoever.

In my opinion, this "deal" with Unitell makes no sense at all. The PR states an exchange of 400,000,000 shares with a stated value of .025/share. Sorry but this is more than 3X the entire market cap of EMAX. EMAX PPS isn't anywhere near .025/share. Secondly, the PR states that Unitell has a credit facility of $6,000,000 and their "Lenders Bank" confirmed a willingness to provide a credit facility up to $50,000,000. I ask, who is their "lenders bank"? Why don't they name their bank? Nothing in this PR makes any sense IMO.

It appears Roxanna has taken down her EMAX video's from Youtube. I just checked and it says taken down by user. I wonder why they removed them?

Somebody ask Roxanna when that audit is going to be completed because it's the longest audit in history. I'd ask her myself but she won't answer my emails. I mean seriously, this audit is taking so long that you'd think they were auditing Exxon Mobil.

How is this for fundamentals? Investors have paid in capital of over $46,000,000 in EMXC, and yet the company has a market cap of only $2,770,367. On that invested capital of over $46 million dollars, EMXC had net earnings of only about $110,000. A return on equity of less than a quarter of 1%. Do the math yourself. Risk free US Treasuries would have a RISK FREE yield more than 10X EMXC's.

You certainly are entitled to your own opinion, and if you want to believe the newspaper article is a misprint or some kind of mistake, that's your prerogative.

The Sun-Sentinel.com is an extremely legitimate website. Why don't you click on all the links and tabs and see for yourself. It is the newspapers website. A newspaper could not legally go to print with false information about EMAX VP and Director, Dorliss Bright, or they'd be open to a libel and lawsuit. So feel free to trying the website out yourself, and I think you'll find that yes indeed, this is the Sun-Sentinel's website.

Gosh, I would hope the float would shrink seeing that EMAX has float of 1,504,875,649 shares. Over 500,000,000 more shares out there than Apple.

Roxanna has 18 video's on Youtube for you to watch.

A Roxanna Weber serenade. Maybe this track will make it onto Itunes too?

Well, it's Sun-Sentinel's website. Why don't you call the newspaper and ask them if their website is legitimate? Just like Fox News, I report, you decide.

Well IMO, these are serious charges, especially for a Director of a public company. I also found that another past director and big shareholder Slavo was charged with arson in burning down one of his businesses. The owner of National Stock Transfer was convicted and served time in prison for child pornography. So this is 3 people connected with EMAX that have had serious charges brought against them. It only makes me wonder, what kind of due diligence is Roxanna doing that she completely missed this information when she makes management decisions?

I was doing some background checks on EMAX management. Now this is over 20 years old, but it does raise some interesting questions seeing that Dorliss Bright is a Director and Vice President of EMAX. Perhaps it's not the same person. However, this article is from 1990 and it states this Dorliss Bright was 46 years old at that time. Fast forward to today and this Dorliss Bright would be about 67 years old. After checking the Florida database, there is just 1 Dorliss Bright in Florida, and yes he's 67 years old. Granted, this article is almost 21 years old, I'll give you that. However, after a certain age do people's basic personality traits ever change? It's up to shareholders to decide if this is relevant or not.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1990-09-20/news/9002150062_1_false-report-burglary-police

Yeah but less than $1800 in trades all day. So, a little perspective is warranted.

If there is value at these levels, why hasn't Roxanna used the opportunity to reduce the outstanding shares? According to EMAX's September 11th update at otcmarkets, the company still has 2,291,972,864 outstanding shares. Unless of course she thinks she'll be able to do it at lower prices, I wonder why she hasn't pulled the trigger. The question is, what is she waiting for?