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.
I have feeling most posters here believe I make these things up > lol :)
I posted link at bottom of the page?
Actually If you do google searches >
vs TRADEWINDS ENVIRONMENTAL
TRADEWINDS ENVIRONMENTAL et al
you will find all sorts of related info. I have actually found a whole bunch of WEGI related DD with this search , dont want to hog the board, I am not sure the source or what other places this is posted. But I will gladly look around for other sources if you like. However I did include the link and I assure you I dont wrtie em I just post em.
Happy Posting.
Drummer beats anthrax, but cleanup has him reeling
The Villager
Volume 75, Number 46 | April 5 - 11 2006
By Bonnie Rosenstock
Last Wednesday evening — a week after being released from a Pennsylvania hospital where he had been recovering for more than a month after collapsing from anthrax while on tour — Greenwich Village African dancer and drum maker Vado Diomande held a press conference at the Unitarian Church of All Souls on Lexington Ave. and 80th St.
Looking gaunt and thin from his life-threatening ordeal, he spoke very briefly but warmly to a handful of reporters and well-wishers. In halting, heavily accented English, the smiling Diomande, 44, thanked everybody who helped him and said he was happy to be alive.
Diomande is the first person in America in more than 30 years to have contracted natural anthrax. Only 18 cases were reported in the country during the 20th century. Inhalation anthrax is not contagious from human to human.
According to a six-page handout that was distributed, Diomande purchased four goatskin hides for djembe drum making when he was visiting his home village in the Ivory Coast after 13 years of living abroad. The goatskins were transported in the cargo of the plane in a roll, wrapped in a plastic bag. Diomande carried them through U.S. customs, where they were inspected by officials and released back to him. In addition, Diomande acquired cowhides from a local New York supplier a few days prior to becoming ill. He and a co-worker recall that one of these hides was full of dander and dust, which rose in the air when he tossed it on the floor of his sixth-floor workspace on Prince St. in Brooklyn.
Lisa Diomande, who manages her husband’s Kotchegna Dance Company, said she was thrilled to be back home and thanked New Yorkers and the West African community for their support and sympathy.
“This experience has been one of shocking accidental illness,” she said. “We all want to work together to make sure this freak accident will never happen again. It’s been a pioneering experience.” She emphasized that being near Diomande doesn’t make anyone sick, that “you can hug him, kiss him, take class with him, buy his drums, you can trust his craftsmanship. He is not a contagion. He received an infection in his lungs from breathing in a certain amount of spores of a certain size. We’re going to find out exactly what the nature of naturally occurring bacillus anthracis infection is,” she promised.
She also expressed concern about how their artistic lives are going to resume and how to rebuild the image of West African drums and drum making.
“It’s a tainted image. Many people are paying the price for this,” she declared.
Another handout, a two-page paper headed “Questions and Points to Consider,” stated that the public is frightened to interact with Diomande and others who make and perform with drums made of animal hides, which has resulted in suspicion and cancelled bookings.
The Diomandes are facing a future filled with many uncertainties.
Diomande cannot return to their fifth-floor walk-up at 31 Downing St. in Greenwich Village because his lungs are not strong enough to manage all the stairs, and the apartment was decontaminated with bleach, which is not good for his still-recovering lungs to breathe.
“My place is rent stabilized, so I don’t pay very much,” noted Lisa Diomande. “Moving out of the Village is going to be hard enough because we can’t afford the rent on a new place there.”
In addition, they have no furniture. All porous possessions were incinerated, including curtains, rugs, the bed and all their clothing. Despite requests from the Diomandes, a complete inventory of the items removed from the apartment and 2 Prince St. has not been provided by the Environmental Protection Agency or the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, the two agencies responsible for overseeing the cleaning effort.
Both documents outlined the inconsistencies in decontamination procedures. For example, neither Diomande’s clothing nor boots he was wearing at the time of admission to the hospital were removed, tested or destroyed. Lisa Diomande chose to throw the boots out after a representative from D.O.H.M.H. said it was up to her.
Diomande’s brother- and sister-in-law were allowed to enter the apartment and take clothing to him and his wife. But all other clothing at the apartment was incinerated. At both the apartment and workspace some items were cleaned while others of similar material and composition were removed and destroyed. At the workspace irreplaceable costumes were fumigated, not washed, therefore rendering them unusable.
Among the many questions the Diomandes want answers to include: What criteria were used to determine what needed to be incinerated and what could have been successfully cleaned? Was the thoroughness of the decontamination effort warranted by the risk? What were the actual levels of contamination found in the apartment and the workspace?
For now the Diomandes are staying with Lisa’s brother Alex Harmon and his wife, Janine Coover, in Jersey City. Diomande will be in occupational, physical and respiratory therapy and will be training himself in dance and drum activity as he gets stronger.
“So far the doctors like what they see because he’s exceeding all expectations even though they have very little to go by with this disease,” Harmon told The Villager.
When Justin Kafando, a member of Diomande’s dance company and co-owner of Megastar Studios, housed on the third floor of the 2 Prince St. location, took the microphone after Diomande spoke, he could not contain his anguish. He said his life has been destroyed because of the cleanup.
“You have nothing to do with this,” he assured Diomande, adding, “Everything I’ve worked for, all my dreams have turned into a nightmare.”
Then he broke down in tears and could not continue speaking, though he answered questions later on.
Kafando’s recording studio was totally destroyed. Among items removed — worth hundreds of thousands of dollars — were speakers, microphones, all CD’s, hard drives, a G5 tower, the air conditioning unit, all software in boxes and personal documents from a cabinet. Even petty cash totaling a couple of hundred dollars was missing. Diomande told the press that 600 sealed boxes of CDs of his music were also taken away. Tradewinds, an independent contractor, was hired for the 2 Prince St. decontamination. The E.P.A. provided technical consultation, and D.O.H.M.H. had final say in decisions. The building owner had to pay for the cleanup, said to cost between $500,000 and $2 million.
Kafando was told that one speaker was contaminated; yet every expensive speaker is gone. Meanwhile, one worth about $25 wasn’t removed. Kafando related that the boom box that was in the rehearsal room was moved into the control room and set up with the cheap speaker that didn’t belong to it, so the workers could listen to music while they were decontaminating. The big, costly keyboard workstation is missing, yet the cheap one, which was back to back with it, wasn’t touched.
“Why haven’t we been given an inventory by Tradewinds, the E.P.A. or the D.O.H.M.H. of what was removed?” asked Persephone DaCosta, co-owner of Megastar Studios. “We wrote letters and called. We’re a small business. We didn’t have insurance. We could barely make the rent.”
Also present at the press conference was Norman Siegel, former head of the New York Civil Liberties Union and candidate for public advocate last year.
“We are committed to working with the people who are here today to find out why the government agencies moved in the way they did,” Siegel said. “Perhaps what happened was overkill, an overreaction, a human response to government action. Having Vado’s name become public is a violation of his privacy rights. But most important are the policy and legal questions that have come out of the situation. Perhaps a new protocol needs to be followed. Once we get all the facts, we will decide what their legal options are.”
Vado Diomande’s Kotchegna Dance Company will host a benefit for Diomande and the 2 Prince St. tenants on May 5 at the Unitarian Church of All Souls on Lexington Ave. and 80th St.
Anthrax victim returns to New York; supporters question cleanup
By ELIZABETH LeSURE
Associated Press Writer
March 29, 2006, 11:38 PM EST
NEW YORK -- Homecoming for Vado Diomande was bittersweet.
After a month of treatment for anthrax at a Pennsylvania hospital, he returned to the hugs and cheers of friends and relatives in New York on Wednesday to continue recovering from a form of the disease that is usually fatal.
But he and his wife can't go home to their Manhattan apartment because he can't be exposed to the bleach used to clean it. Many of their belongings were incinerated. And they're encountering the financial and emotional effects the ordeal had on friends and neighbors.
"Now, as we come back to New York, I find that we are facing a life that has many questions," his wife, Lisa Diomande, said at a press conference with her husband Wednesday night. "We don't know where we're going to live."
The couple are staying temporarily with family members outside New York.
Vado Diomande, a dancer and drum maker, collapsed after a Feb. 16 dance performance at a Pennsylvania university. Officials believe he inhaled anthrax spores while using animal skins to make drums.
Diomande, 44, was discharged from Robert Packer Hospital a week ago. He said a few words to reporters gathered at an Upper East Side church Wednesday.
"I want to say thank you to everybody," he said, surrounded by friends, relatives and members of his dance troupe, Kotchegna Dance Co.
A friend and troupe member, Justin Kafando, handed him a drum, which he used to beat out a joyful rhythm.
"We feel so fortunate to have Vado back and doing well," dancer Aisha Saunders said before presenting him with flowers. "Vado is an inspiration to us all. He is loved and respected by many in the community."
Amid the happiness, Lisa Diomande and others expressed confusion over how the decontamination was handled, saying authorities may have been overzealous at the couple's apartment building and Vado Diomande's Brooklyn work space.
All their porous possessions _ clothing, curtains, rugs, the bed _ had to be destroyed, she said, adding they're worried that the image of West African dance and drum making was tainted by the ordeal and they're concerned about the dance company's future.
She said they were told the illness posed a very low public health risk, because it can't be spread from person to person.
"So why was it presented this way to the public, and then a cleanup operation that was top-level in terms of presentation, in terms of excessive cleanup?" she asked.
Kafando, who runs a recording studio in the Brooklyn building where Vado Diomande worked, said his studio was destroyed in the cleanup. His business partner, Persephone DaCosta, said officials did not give them a list of the items that had to be incinerated.
Attorneys Norman Siegel and Guy Vann appeared with the Diomandes and their supporters on Wednesday night and said they have started an investigation into the incident and response.
"We understand the public health concerns, but perhaps what happened here was overkill and overreaction," Siegel said.
A spokeswoman for the Environmental Protection Agency, Mary Mears, said the EPA directed the cleanup of the Diomandes' apartment and consulted on the decontamination effort in Brooklyn.
"Our first priority was to protect the health of the family and those who lived and worked around them," Mears said. "We worked with a representative for the family every step of the way on what would or wouldn't be discarded."
Mears said the owner of the Brooklyn building hired a contractor, Trade-Winds Environmental Restoration Inc., to conduct the cleanup there. A man who answered the telephone at Trade-Winds on Wednesday night said no one was available to comment.
A health department spokesman, Andrew Tucker, provided a statement about the work done at the Brooklyn building.
"It is our understanding from the contractor that items that couldn't be cleaned properly would be discarded," the statement said. "We have every reason to believe that they did an appropriate cleanup of the facility."
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/misc10.html
Landshark what is your take on this SEC filing? Laurus / WEGI filed this with SEC in 02/2007 > It is an offering to SELL over 5 million shares of WEGI.OB shares for $.09 per share > Per the filing once all shares are sold at .09 each the OS will be = 41,074,054.
I would like to know what you think this filing is for, and what do you call it, if not dillution?
FYI > I also found some very NEW and relevant NEWS on Tradewinds last night. I will make sure to past tonight tomorrow when I have some time. From what I gather the State of New York disposal contracts have had some "issues" with billing.
Here is the link to the SEC filing >
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/814915/000114420407006068/v064851_s1a.htm
The Offering
Issuer Windswept Environmental Group, Inc.
Outstanding common stock before offering 35,678,993 (as of January 31, 2007)
Number of shares offered for resale 5,395,061 (1)
Outstanding common stock after offering 41,074,054 (assuming all offered shares are sold)
Use of Proceeds We will not receive any proceeds from this offering.
Registration Rights We have agreed to use all reasonable commercial efforts to keep the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part effective and current until the date that all of the shares of common stock covered by this prospectus have been sold under the registration statement, have been sold pursuant to Rule 144 of the 1933 Securities Act, as amended, or may be freely traded without the effectiveness of such registration statement.
Trading Our common stock is quoted on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board under the symbol “WEGI.OB”.
Risk Factors See “Risk Factors” and the other information in this prospectus for a discussion of the factors you should carefully consider before deciding to invest in our common stock.
______________________________________
(1) Represents shares issuable upon conversion of, and/or in payment of principal and interest in shares by us on, the Note issued to Laurus.
TRADEWINDS ENVIRONMENTAL Has 4 "active" cases pending in New York Courts. Plus 5 other "disposed" cases
http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/FCASSearch
They are listed as "Defendant" in these (2) cases
WebCivil Supreme - Case Detail
Court: Nassau Civil Supreme Index Number: 001392/2007 Upstate RJI Number:
Case Name: ARSENSIO MEDICAL PC. vs. TRADEWINDS ENVIRONMENTAL
Case Type: Contract
Track: Complex
Disposition Date:
Date NOI Due: NOI Filed: Disposition Deadline:
Calendar Number: RJI Filed: 04/27/2007
Jury Status:
Justice Name: R. BRUCE COZZENS JR. (DCM)
WebCivil Supreme - Case Detail
Court: Suffolk Civil Supreme Index Number: 017325/2006 Upstate RJI Number:
Case Name: MCCORMICK REALTY ASSOC., LLC vs. TRADEWINDS ENVIRONMENTAL
Case Type: Other Special Proceedings - Nt
Track: Expedited
Disposition Date:
Date NOI Due: NOI Filed: Disposition Deadline:
Calendar Number: RJI Filed: 07/12/2006
Jury Status:
Justice Name: PETER FOX COHALAN
They are listed as "PLAINTIFF" in these (2) cases
WebCivil Supreme - Case Detail
Court: New York Civil Supreme Index Number: 115014/2004 Upstate RJI Number:
Case Name: TRADEWINDS ENVIRONMENTAL vs. CONSOLIDATED EDISON
Case Type: E-Filed Contract
Track: Complex
Disposition Date:
Date NOI Due: 07/06/2007 NOI Filed: Disposition Deadline:
Calendar Number: RJI Filed: 01/13/2005
Jury Status:
Justice Name: FRIED, BERNARD J.
WebCivil Supreme - Case Detail
Court: New York Civil Supreme Index Number: 602552/2004 Upstate RJI Number:
Case Name: TRADEWINDS ENVIRONMENTAL vs. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Case Type: City-Contract
Track: Complex
Disposition Date:
Date NOI Due: 04/06/2007 NOI Filed: Disposition Deadline:
Calendar Number: RJI Filed: 01/17/2005
Jury Status:
Justice Name: SMITH, KAREN S. (DCM)
I found this on the State of New York office of Inspector General >
2006 Noteworthy Audit and Investigation Report Abstracts
http://mtaig.state.ny.us/assets/pdf/2006%20blurbs.pdf
Follow-Up on Trade-Winds
Overcharges
MTA/OIG #2005-65L
In March of 2005, OIG released a report detailing $260,000 in unsupported and erroneous
charges by Trade-Winds Environmental Restoration (Trade-Winds) for the disposal of waste
materials generated by LIRR. In the report, OIG concluded that Trade-Winds had submitted
altered and/or incorrect documents to both OIG and the Suffolk County District Attorney’s
office. OIG recommended LIRR deny payment for the charges that could not be supported with
corresponding manifests and invoices.
3
Subsequent to the 2005 OIG report, Trade-Winds supplied LIRR with 133 waste manifests that it
claimed would verify almost $130,000 in questionable disposal charges. It also rejected the OIG
report’s claim that it had overcharged nearly $100,000 for the cleanup of mercury-contaminated
waste after mischaracterizing the toxicity level of the waste.
OIG reviewed the documents and concluded that most – not all – of the disposal charges to LIRR
remained unsubstantiated. While the manifests did support almost $28,000 in charges; $135,000
remains unsubstantiated. Sixty-one of the manifests did not pertain to the invoices they allegedly
supported, (i.e. the manifest identified a different work location than the invoice). The invoices
for the remaining unsupported charges either billed LIRR for more waste than the manifests
indicated or claimed charges unsupported by any manifests.
Trade-Winds iterated a belief that it had not overcharged LIRR for the disposal of mercurycontaminated
waste. OIG looked again at the tests performed on the waste by FDNY, by Trade-
Winds and by two registered waste disposal facilities and found that the waste was indeed
mischaracterized by Trade-Winds to their financial benefit.
Based on these findings, OIG recommended LIRR continue to withhold payment for the invoices
that remain unsubstantiated. OIG further recommended that LIRR consider the information
contained within this report as significant adverse information, which should be considered
during any future contract negotiations with Trade-Winds and/or any of its principles.
I am not trying to hurt anything, I am a realist > IMO WEGI is going to need more cash, nothing wrong with that? if you look at the burn rate for current operations they need more cash as is, but throw in a storm and then cash is king, when you operate in a disaster zone not only do you need to pay your people more in cash, you need cash to house them, cash to feed them, not to mention all your costs for fuel and supplies price goes way up and suppliers will want cash, the problem is most all of the large jobs will be insurance payments and they can take a long time to come thru, so WEGI will be laying out major cash to operate in the hazard zone, and waiting long time to ge money back, but as you know they will make money, lots of money in the hazard zone, literally millions to be made, but it is going to take CASH to be a player in the hazard zone and WEGI presently has very little.
IMPO WEGI will work out some form of bridge loan or credit line before the season gets into full swing, dont take it as an attack, it is business, it takes money to make money in these disasters > IMO they need more CASH.
Here are the totals from the filing >
as of March 31, 2007,
we had a cash balance of $376,680
We will be dependent upon collection of accounts receivable, improvements in operating results and cash flow and/or further financings to generate cash to finance operations.
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts, at March 31, 2007 and June 30, 2006, were $7,463,197 and $11,235,904, respectively. For these periods, approximately $2,588,000 and $5,089,000, respectively, of these amounts were disputed claims subject to collection litigation, primarily related to disputes over modifications of our work.
My opinion is 377k cash is NOT enough to go into hazard zone and pay workers, buy materials, you know that insurance payments for the work are super slow in coming and suppliers, employees will want top dollar cash on delivery for supplies and labour and housing and what about the insurance costs they must have to cover workers and equipment in a hazard zone, IMO they will need to hit Laurus for another 2-5 million to operate properly in a disaster zone. It is not a bash, it is just truth, I have feeling they will go to the Laurus financing center before season gets fully underway. They need it, again it is not a bash, it is business, they only have 377k cash and disaster will increase the operations need for cash in a major way, Yes I know they CAN ramp up, but they will need CASH to ramp up, and they will need it soon. IMO that is all I am saying.
WEGI IS TRYING TO COLLECT 7.5 MILLION IN LAWSUITS>
PLEASE NOTE THESE FUNDS > "...are included in our accounts receivable"
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
We are a plaintiff in approximately 19 lawsuits claiming an aggregate of approximately $7,500,000 pursuant to which we are seeking to collect amounts we believe are owed to us by customers that are included in our accounts receivable, primarily with respect to modifications to our scope of work. The defendants in these actions have asserted counterclaims for an aggregate of approximately $1,500,000.
We are a party to other litigation matters and claims that are normal in the course of our operations, and while the results of such litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes that the final outcome of such matters will not have a materially adverse effect on our consolidated financial statements, results of operations and cash flows.
So you are of the opinion $368K cash is enough to fund a major disaster operation thru a storm or 3?
End of year they had 0 cash on books > They borrowed 500k from Laurus Jan 07 > End of March they had 368k > So they used 150k cash for NORMAL operations in 3 months. And NO 100k monthly payments to Laurus by temp agreement
In my opinion they need MUCH MORE cash to operate in a storm. You know insurance payments from these storms are slow to pay, by WEGI own filings they are STILL trying to get paid for work done almost 2 years ago now.
From the filing >
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
As of March 31, 2007, we had a cash balance of $376,680, working capital of $2,401,441 and stockholders’ equity of $1,118,826. As of June 30, 2006, we had a cash balance of $610,884, a working capital deficit of $20,220,862 (including derivative liabilities of $27,163,901) and a stockholders’ deficiency of $16,749,348. We realized a net income of $11,103,042 for the nine months ended March 31, 2007 (including a gain on embedded derivatives of $15,721,986). The reduction in cash was due to the need to cover operating losses. We will be dependent upon collection of accounts receivable, improvements in operating results and cash flow and/or further financings to generate cash to finance operations.
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts, at March 31, 2007 and June 30, 2006, were $7,463,197 and $11,235,904, respectively. For these periods, approximately $2,588,000 and $5,089,000, respectively, of these amounts were disputed claims subject to collection litigation, primarily related to disputes over modifications of our work.
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
We are a plaintiff in approximately 19 lawsuits claiming an aggregate of approximately $7,500,000 pursuant to which we are seeking to collect amounts we believe are owed to us by customers that are included in our accounts receivable, primarily with respect to modifications to our scope of work. The defendants in these actions have asserted counterclaims for an aggregate of approximately $1,500,000.
We are a party to other litigation matters and claims that are normal in the course of our operations, and while the results of such litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes that the final outcome of such matters will not have a materially adverse effect on our consolidated financial statements, results of operations and cash flows.
Here are the terms from the 10Q >
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/814915/000114420407027666/v076122_10q.htm
Principal Borrowing Terms and Prepayment. Pursuant to the terms of the Note, which matures on June 30, 2009, the Company made, on the first day of each month, monthly payments of principal to Laurus in the amount of $229,687, plus interest, for the period from January 1, 2006 through June 30, 2006. For the period from July 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006, the Company was required to make interest payments only, which payments were made in cash or through partial conversion of the Note. Commencing January 1, 2007, until maturity, the Company is required to make monthly payments to Laurus of $100,000, first applied to interest and then to principal. Such payment for January 2007 was made through partial conversion of the Note. The interest portion of such payments for February and March 2007 was also made through a partial conversion of the Note. A waiver deferring payment through May 31, 2007, was received for the unpaid principal portion of such payments. In addition, if at any time after September 29, 2006, the Company has a cash and cash equivalents balance over $1,000,000, 50% of any cash received by the Company in excess of such amount will be used to pay down principal of the Note. Principal repayments were originally due to commence starting November 1, 2005 but, in November 2005, Laurus agreed to defer the initial repayment date until January 1, 2006. The principal monthly payments due November 1, 2005 and December 1, 2005 in the aggregate amount of $459,375 have been deferred until June 30, 2009. Laurus is required to convert such amounts into shares of the Company’s common stock, up to a maximum amount of $1,857,279, should all of the following conditions be satisfied:
· the average closing price of the Company’s common stock for the five (5) trading days immediately prior to the first of each month is equal to or greater than $.10;
· the amount of the payment then due is not an amount greater than thirty percent (30%) of the aggregate dollar trading volume of the common stock for the period of twenty-two (22) trading days immediately prior to the first day of each month for which payment is due;
· the common stock to be issued has been registered under an effective registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933 or is otherwise covered by an exemption from registration for resale pursuant to Rule 144 of the Securities Act of 1933;
· Laurus’ aggregate beneficial ownership of the Company’s shares of common stock does not and would not by virtue thereof exceed 9.99%;
· the Company is not in default of the Note; and
· the maximum number of shares of common stock into which the Note is convertible is not exceeded.
Should the Company be required to pay cash, this may have an adverse effect on the Company’s cash flow and liquidity.
The Note may be redeemed by the Company in cash by paying the holder of the Note 110% of the principal amount, plus accrued interest. As discussed below, the holder of the Note may convert a portion of the Note, together with related interest and fees, into fully paid shares of the Company’s common stock at any time, provided that, commencing September 29, 2006, the amount converted cannot exceed $1,942,175 ($1,857,279 as of the date of filing of this Form 10-Q). The number of shares to be issued shall equal the total amount of the Note to be converted, divided by an initial fixed conversion price of $.09.
The conversion price of the Note may be adjusted pursuant to customary anti-dilution provisions, such as if the Company pays a stock dividend, reclassifies its capital stock or subdivides or combines its outstanding shares of common stock into a greater or lesser number of shares.
The Company may receive proceeds from the exercise of the Options and the warrant issued to Laurus if Laurus elects to pay the exercise price in cash rather than executing a cashless exercise. Laurus may effect a cashless exercise of the warrant if the market price of the Company’s common stock exceeds the per share exercise price, and it may effect a cashless exercise of the Options if (a) the market price of the Company’s common stock exceeds the per share exercise price and (b) (1) the Company has not registered the shares underlying the Options pursuant to an effective registration statement or (2) an event of default under the Note has occurred and is continuing. Upon a cashless exercise in lieu of paying the exercise price in cash, Laurus would receive shares of the Company’s common stock with a value equal to the difference between the market price per share of the Company’s common stock at the time of exercise and the exercise price per share set forth in the Options and the warrant, multiplied by the number of shares with respect to which the Options or warrant are exercised.
There would be no proceeds payable to the Company upon a cashless exercise of the Options or the warrant. There can be no assurances that Laurus will exercise the Options and warrant or that it will elect to pay the exercise price in cash in lieu of a cashless exercise. On September 12, 2005, the Company issued 1,500,000 shares of its common stock to Laurus in connection with its partial exercise of the option issued to it in connection with its original investment at an exercise price of $.0001 per share for an aggregate exercise price of $150.
Laurus has contractually agreed to restrict its ability to convert the Note and/or exercise its warrant and Options if such conversion and/or exercise would cause its beneficial ownership of shares of the Company’s common stock to exceed 9.99% of the outstanding shares of common stock which is null and void without notice to the Company upon the occurrence and during the continuance of an event of default or upon 61 days’ prior written notice to the Company. Since Laurus is irrevocably prohibited from waiving this 9.99% limitation, except as described above, even if the other conditions allowing the Company to pay in shares of common stock have been satisfied, if Laurus cannot or does not reduce its ownership of the Company’s common stock at a time when such reduction would be necessary to allow the Company to make a payment in shares of common stock, the Company would be required to pay Laurus in cash. This may have an adverse effect on the Company’s cash flow and liquidity.
So the Merrill contract is just an IHUB post? gotcha.....
cargo what does this have to do with the post you responded to? Does this or is this some how connected to Merrill? Not sure what u r asking me to respond to? My post was about Brikk post on a merrill lynch deal? please explain?
I missed the deal with Merrill > How long ago was it? Dont see any mention in recent PR or filings from WEGI???
I agree u should post this article in the ibox, the SEC, only in last few years, has cleared these allegations, I am sure some investors still remember old Windswept before they cleaned house > might be good idea to let this info be known, I assure you it was not hard to find the SEC allegation against the former management, actually Yet your post was the only info I have seen explaining this was in the past and wiped clean by O'reily and associates.
excuse me brikk? Not sure what u r referring 2? please enlighten me....
I was not aware previous CFO of WindSwept was involved in SEC investigation. Sorry > I thought it was viable topic for discussion being Windswept has obviously come a LONG way since the late 90s' and these investigations. VERY enlightening article you posted - I appreciate you posting it - I for one enjoy reading stories like this.
Good to know these folks are no longer associated with WindSwept. FYI > Here is what SEC was alledging >
http://sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-47907.htm
On November 10, 1999, the Commission filed a complaint ("Complaint") against Behanna and sixteen others, SEC v. Curtis, et al., 99 CV 7357 (E.D.N.Y.), alleging, in relevant part, as follows:
1. From at least 1994 through 1996, defendants Grant R. Curtis ("Curtis"), Timothy H. Masley ("Masley") and Leo Mangan ("Mangan") (collectively, "the Trio"), acting as a partnership, masterminded and engaged in a fraudulent scheme to exercise undisclosed control over Windswept and two other public companies and used that control to retail stock of those companies illegally at inflated prices to the public. The Trio caused Windswept to issue an aggregate of over 4 million shares of its common stock to various foreign shell companies, nearly all of which were under the control of the Trio. Approximately 3.4 million of the 4 million shares of Windswept stock issued to the foreign shell companies were sold to the investing public for approximately $5 million. Behanna and other defendants, acting at the direction of the Trio, engaged in conduct which furthered the scheme.
2. With respect to the issuance of the Windswept stock, the Complaint further alleges, among other things, as follows:
a. In March 1995, Windswept issued a total of 200,000 shares of stock to Piedmont Securities, Ltd. ("Piedmont"), an Irish shell company, and filed with the Commission a Form S-8 Registration Statement, signed by Behanna, which purported to register 500,000 shares of Windswept common stock, including the 200,000 shares issued to Piedmont. Behanna signed the corporate resolution authorizing the issuance of the stock to Piedmont. Piedmont never performed any services for Windswept and never paid any consideration for the 200,000 shares of Windswept stock.
b. From May 1995 through May 1996, Windswept issued a total of 2,800,000 shares of unregistered stock in three transactions to Hersilia Investments, Ltd., a British Virgin Islands corporation, and the Hersilia Trust, located in Guernsey, Channel Islands (collectively "Hersilia"). Those transactions purportedly fell within a safe harbor exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act provided by Regulation S for offers and sales of securities to foreign persons that occur outside the United States. 17 C.F.R. § 230.901 et seq. Hersilia, however, was controlled by the Trio. Windswept did not receive full consideration for the stock issued to Hersilia.
c. In July 1996, Windswept issued 115,000 shares to Broadcast Communications, Inc. ("Broadcast"), a Liberian company. This stock was purportedly registered on a Form S-8 Registration Statement filed with the Commission on December 21, 1995, which Behanna signed. Broadcast was a nominee for defendant Donald Kessler ("Kessler"), Windswept's then president, chairman, and CEO. Broadcast did not provide any services to Windswept.
d. None of these issuances of Windswept stock described above were properly registered with the Commission or exempt from registration. Most of the stock issued was sold to the public.
3. Behanna, as CFO and through his involvement in Windswept's day-to-day operations, knew, or was reckless in not knowing, that Windswept was controlled by the Trio; that the Trio controlled Piedmont and Hersilia; that Kessler controlled Broadcast; and that Windswept received no consideration for the stock it issued to Piedmont and Broadcast and less than full consideration for the stock it issued to Hersilia. Further, in light of his position and involvement with Windswept, Behanna was a controlling person of Windswept.
4. Windswept's Form 10-K for its fiscal year ended April 30, 1995, its quarterly and annual filings for its fiscal year ended April 30, 1996, and its Form 10-Q for its quarter ended July, 1996, which were all signed by Behanna and filed with the Commission, contained materially false and misleading statements because they failed to disclose, among other things, that (i) Curtis and Masley were control persons of Windswept; (ii) Curtis had been convicted of a felony within the past five years; (iii) the stock issuances to the foreign shell companies were related party transactions; and (iv) the foreign shell companies had performed no services or paid little or no consideration for the stock issued to them.
5. Windswept's books and records, including corporate resolutions, falsely reflected stock issuances to the foreign shell companies, as described above, when, in fact, the members of the Trio and/or Kessler were the true recipients of the stock, and Windswept received little or no consideration for the stock. Windswept failed to adopt internal accounting controls sufficient to accurately reflect that Windswept stock was issued, for little or no consideration, to various nominees and aliases of the Trio and/or Kessler in related party transactions.
6. Behanna and others failed to disclose material facts to accountants in connection with the preparation and filing of documents and reports filed with the Commission, as set forth above, and failed to disclose material facts to accountants in connection with an audit of Windswept's financial statements.
Yes interesting story - so many agencies doing predictions - all using different models - but per the article they are usually very close to accurate - I especially took interest in the part about landfall predictions >
Good hurricane forecasts are important for the insurance industry, which has a deep financial interest in assessing risk to coastal property. But an insurer doesn't care about storms that never hit the coast, no matter how big they are. There were only four hurricanes during the 1992 season (just as Gray and others had predicted), but one of them happened to be the catastrophic Hurricane Andrew.
Forecasters try to assess how many hurricanes will make landfall each season by looking at how certain climatological features—like the placement of a high-pressure area in the subtropics—might affect the path of tropical storms. Gray's team says there's a 77 percent chance of a major hurricane landfall in the United States this year.
How Good Are Hurricane Forecasts?
Last year, they blew.
By Daniel Engber
Posted Thursday, May 24, 2007, at 2:43 PM ET
Government weathermen announced their forecast for this year's hurricane season on Tuesday, predicting 13 to 17 named storms. Last year, they guessed there would be eight to 10 hurricanes, but in the end, we had only five. In an "Explainer" column published in 2005 and reprinted below, Daniel Engber wondered about the accuracy of these forecasts.
The first tropical storm of the Atlantic hurricane season appeared in the Caribbean on Thursday. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, we can expect somewhere between 12 and 15 tropical storms this year. Scientists at Colorado State University predict 15 tropical storms, while a private company based in Britain says there will be around 14. If these predictions are accurate, we're in for an active season—the historical average for storms per year is 9.6. But how reliable are these hurricane forecasts?
Not bad at all. In general, the predictions fall within a storm or two of the observed totals. Last season, though, the forecasters had a bad year. 2004's six intense hurricanes doubled most predictions. The seasonal total of nine hurricanes was also significantly higher than expected. Forecasters blamed the poor predictions on a "year [that] did not behave like any other year we have studied."
Forecasting groups use more than 50 years of data to find correlations between oceanic conditions, weather patterns, and hurricane-season severity. El Niño seasons, for example, tend to have few hurricanes, while warm sea temperatures portend stormy weather. Since 1995, ominous temperature and wind patterns have foreshadowed a particularly long run of bad weather.
A seasonal hurricane forecast typically includes predictions for tropical storms, hurricanes, intense hurricanes, and ACE ("accumulated cyclone energy"). In a tropical storm, winds measure between 33 and 63 knots; hurricanes reach speeds between 63 and 95 knots, and intense hurricanes swirl at more than 95 knots. ACE measures the season's total storm energy—to compute it, meteorologists tally up the squared, maximum wind speeds of all tropical storms at six-hour intervals.
Each group has its own style and methods. The seasoned Colorado State forecaster William Gray uses both statistics and intuition to arrive at exact numbers for each kind of storm. NOAA prefers to make probabilistic statements—will the season have an above-average or below-average number of storms? These statements correspond to ranges of expected storms: This year, they say, we should get seven to nine hurricanes. The British company Tropical Storm Risk and the Hurricane Climate group at Florida State University use their own statistical models to assign probabilities for how likely we are to get different numbers of storms. Tropical Storm Risk then publishes the mean values for these distributions (which turn out not to be whole numbers). In 2005, Tropical Storm Risk is predicting 13.8 storms, 7.8 hurricanes, and 3.5 intense hurricanes.
Good hurricane forecasts are important for the insurance industry, which has a deep financial interest in assessing risk to coastal property. But an insurer doesn't care about storms that never hit the coast, no matter how big they are. There were only four hurricanes during the 1992 season (just as Gray and others had predicted), but one of them happened to be the catastrophic Hurricane Andrew.
Forecasters try to assess how many hurricanes will make landfall each season by looking at how certain climatological features—like the placement of a high-pressure area in the subtropics—might affect the path of tropical storms. Gray's team says there's a 77 percent chance of a major hurricane landfall in the United States this year.
Got a question about today's news? Ask the Explainer.
Explainer thanks James Elsner of Florida State University.
Daniel Engber is an associate editor at Slate. He can be reached at danengber@yahoo.com.
Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2166978/
Copyright 2007 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC
I found GFCI on the NASDAQ REG SHO threshold list > The "naked" short list > Below is the link and report dates, I also looked thru most, not all, of the most recent reports and NO NAKED SHORT presently exists in GFCI, However per below, in the past, YES, there has been naked short postitions in GFCI but per the recent reports they are now covered, no squeeze, IMO our CEO printed some new shares for the scamscum shorts to cover for pennies for sure > IMPO of course > IMO
Here is link to the main page for NASDAQ REG SHO threshhold list >
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/aspx/regsho.aspx
Here are the report Dates I found GFCI listed >
ftp://ftp.nasdaqtrader.com/symboldirectory/regsho
03/16/2005 12:35AM 8,013 nasdaqth20050315.txt
03/17/2005 02:30AM 7,968 nasdaqth20050316.txt
03/18/2005 10:40AM 8,115 nasdaqth20050317.txt
03/19/2005 12:20AM 8,074 nasdaqth20050318.txt
03/22/2005 12:55AM 7,784 nasdaqth20050321.txt
03/23/2005 12:00AM 7,917 nasdaqth20050322.txt
03/24/2005 12:25AM 8,124 nasdaqth20050323.txt
03/25/2005 12:00AM 8,068 nasdaqth20050324.txt
03/29/2005 12:05AM 7,997 nasdaqth20050328.txt
03/30/2005 12:00AM 8,096 nasdaqth20050329.txt
03/31/2005 12:00AM 8,355 nasdaqth20050330.txt
03/19/2007 11:00PM 9,729 nasdaqth20070319.txt
03/20/2007 11:00PM 9,806 nasdaqth20070320.txt
03/21/2007 11:00PM 9,909 nasdaqth20070321.txt
03/22/2007 11:00PM 9,975 nasdaqth20070322.txt
03/23/2007 11:00PM 9,990 nasdaqth20070323.txt
03/26/2007 11:00PM 9,953 nasdaqth20070326.txt
03/27/2007 11:00PM 9,667 nasdaqth20070327.txt
03/28/2007 11:00PM 9,836 nasdaqth20070328.txt
03/29/2007 11:00PM 9,630 nasdaqth20070329.txt
03/30/2007 11:00PM 9,829 nasdaqth20070330.txt
04/02/2007 11:00PM 9,654 nasdaqth20070402.txt
04/03/2007 11:00PM 9,304 nasdaqth20070403.txt
04/04/2007 11:00PM 9,451 nasdaqth20070404.txt
04/05/2007 11:00PM 9,826 nasdaqth20070405.txt
04/09/2007 11:00PM 9,892 nasdaqth20070409.txt
04/10/2007 11:00PM 9,988 nasdaqth20070410.txt
04/11/2007 11:00PM 10,157 nasdaqth20070411.txt
04/12/2007 11:00PM 10,039 nasdaqth20070412.txt
04/13/2007 11:00PM 10,054 nasdaqth20070413.txt
04/16/2007 11:00PM 10,010 nasdaqth20070416.txt
04/17/2007 11:00PM 9,985 nasdaqth20070417.txt
04/18/2007 11:00PM 9,740 nasdaqth20070418.txt
04/19/2007 11:00PM 9,930 nasdaqth20070419.txt
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 19350 / August 26, 2005
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION V. GRANT R. CURTIS, ET AL., Case No. 99 CIV 7357 (NG) E.D.N.Y.
CONSENT JUDGMENTS ENTERED AGAINST DEFENDANTS GRANT CURTIS, RAIMOND IRNI, LILLIAN VINCI, AND ANNE MARIE NOEL
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that in July 2002, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York entered final consent judgments against defendants Grant Curtis, Raimond Irni, Lillian Vinci, and Anne Marie Noel. Curtis, Irni, Vinci, and Noel were each enjoined from future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (Securities Act) and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Additionally, Curtis and Irni were enjoined from violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act. Curtis was further enjoined from violations of Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act and Rules 13d-1 thereunder, Exchange Act Rule 13b2-1, and, as a "control person" pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-13.
In addition, the Court permanently barred Curtis from serving as an officer or director of a public company.
The Court also ordered Curtis to pay $7,819,270 representing disgorgement of his ill-gotten gain, and prejudgment interest, obtained as a result of his alleged conduct, but waived payment of that amount based upon Curtis' sworn representations of his financial condition. For the same reason, the Court did not order Curtis to pay a civil money penalty. The Court ordered Irni to pay $200,000 representing disgorgement of his ill-gotten gain, and prejudgment interest, obtained as a result of his alleged conduct, but waived payment of that amount based upon Irni's sworn representations of his financial condition. For the same reason, the Court did not order Irni to pay a civil money penalty.
The Court ordered Vinci to pay disgorgement of her ill-gotten gains and prejudgment interest in the amount of $84,500, but waived payment of all but $32,500, and waived payment of a civil penalty, based upon Vinci's sworn representations regarding her financial condition. The Court ordered Noel to pay disgorgement of her ill-gotten gains and prejudgment interest in the amount of $32,500, but waived payment of all but $9,500, and waived payment of a civil penalty, based upon Noel's sworn representations regarding her financial condition.
The Commission filed its action against Curtis, Irni, Vinci, Noel, and thirteen other defendants on November 10, 1999. The Commission's Complaint alleges that, from 1994 through 1996, Curtis and others exercised undisclosed control over three public companies, Windswept Environmental Group, Inc., ICIS Management Group, Inc. and Pilot Transport, Inc. Using that control, they caused these companies to issue more than eight million shares of stock, in most cases for little or no consideration, to various nominees, and then caused over five million shares of that stock, all of which was unregistered or improperly registered, to be sold to the public. The scheme generated illicit proceeds of more than $8 million. Vinci, Noel and other brokers retailed the fraudulently issued stock to the public and received undisclosed kickbacks. Irni participated in arranging and making the undisclosed kickback payments various brokerage firms to retail the stock to the public.
Previously, defendants Timothy Masley, Jonathan Lyons, Leo Mangan, James W. Nearen, Pedro Dibrito Gomez, Donald E. Kessler, David R. Behanna, Andrea Varsi, and Kenneth A. Orr consented to the entry of final judgments that, among other things, permanently enjoined them from future violations of the federal securities laws.
In July 2005, the Commission obtained a jury verdict of securities fraud liability in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against two of three trial defendants, Michael Lipkin and Joshua Shainberg. The Court's determination of appropriate relief against those two defendants remains pending. The Commission is seeking against Lipkin and Shainberg orders imposing permanent injunctions, disgorgement plus prejudgment interest, civil monetary penalties, and such other relief as the Court deems appropriate. The jury found the third defendant in that trial, Robert Shatles, not liable. The litigation remains pending against defendant Phillip J. Milligan in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
For further information, see Litigation Release No. 19317 (July 29, 2005).
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr19350.htm
Toxic Financing
The IHUB "Toxic Financing" board has WEGI largest shareholder and lead financeer, Laurus Funds, listed as one of the "toxic" financing firms > FYI
http://investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=4318
Cornell Capital http://www.cornellcapital.com/portfolio/Domestic_Transactions/index.asp?Section=3,0,0
VFIN http://www.vfinance.com/home.asp?ToolPage=inst_complete.asp&ab=pub
Dutchess http://www.dutchessadvisors.com/folio.htm
Laurus Funds http://www.laurusfunds.com/investments_lobby.asp
has provided a
$5,000,000
Convertible Note
Windswept Environmental Group, Inc.
(OTCBB: WEGI )
http://www.laurusfunds.com/investments_lobby.asp?CurrentPage=8
GFCI released PR on 12/14/06 announcing "its" exercise of option on the gas leases > Now you tell me - WERE DOES IT MENTION UERI IN THIS PR? When UERI a private company had in fact exercised the lease, a PRIVATE company not GFCI as outlined in this PR? This PR is more then forward looking, it is a total lie imo, the deal struck for the first leases were signed before this PR and were not in GFCI name, this PR is total LIE IMO of the FACTS >
Grifco Announces Seven-Well Permian Basin Program
Grifco International, Inc. 12/14/2006
URL: http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=39144
Grifco International, Inc. on Thursday announced the exercise of its option for 100% of the working interest (WI) and 75% of the Net Royalty Interest in 208 gas leases located in the Permian Basin geologic formation in Crockett County, Texas. The Permian Basin is the 6th largest known producing, proven and probable recoverable hydrocarbon basin in the world--larger than the North Slope Alaska USA. Under the terms of the option, the Company will begin spudding on 7 drill sites in the next 30 days. Each drill site will take approximately 2 weeks to complete. It will take another 2-3 weeks for commercial production.
The proven reserves of gas in the 208 drill sites are 109 billion cubic feet based upon an expert geologist report. The closing price of gas on the New York Mercantile Exchange as of December 8, 2006 was $7.56 per cubic foot of gas. Cost of the option, drilling and production costs is estimated at $1.75 per cubic foot.
There are five different pay zones with the first 6 wells targeted in the shallow pay zone at 5,000 ft. Other pay zones are located in the geologic formations composed of San Andres; Canyon Sandstone; Pennsylvanian Strawn Limestone; and Ordovician Ellenburger Dolomite. The cost of drilling in deeper pay zones is higher than in shallow zones.
The net proceeds from the 7 drill sites will be used by the Company to expand drilling operations to the remaining 208 drill sites and to finance the repurchase up to 25,000,000 of its shares in the public market place.
Grifco International is a provider of oil and gas services equipment, specializing in the conception, architecture, and development of tools for the coil tubing, wire line, and snubbing industries throughout the United States, China, Mexico, South America, the Middle East and Africa. Grifco holds and owns design rights and manufacturing facilities for producing more than 6,000 products for the oil and gas industry with more than 150 clients.
IMPO Lease documents on UERI website are setup with INTENT to MISLEAD.
Parcels UERI website make claim to on Exhibit "A" are NOT the same as the ones RRex obtained from the courthouse > Compare the exhibit A on both documents, I am not talking about the page# and deed holder name missing on UERI docs, The parcels outlined on exhibit A are NOT the same, the UERI website version makes claim to more parcels then the documents RRex posted from the court on exhibit A
PLUS > UERI ADDED and Exhibit "B" to mislead on the UERI website - they clearly want "investors" to believe this is part of the notarized document > NOT very professional > IMPO it is intentionaly setup in this manner to mislead
The Facts IMO are The lease on the UERI website is NOT the "lease" that is notarized and on file with the court. IMO UERI is attempting to MISLEAD investors > HUGE RED FLAG > Not very professional and downright shady.
Link to UERI copy of the leases>
http://www.universalenergyresources.com/TermAssignmentofOil&GasLease.pdf
Link to RRex copy of the leases >
http://www.4shared.com/dir/2766635/63667a90/sharing%20html
ALL IMO of the FACTS
WEGI: Short Interest DN 54.5% to 12.3K in May 2007
FRIDAY , MAY 25, 2007 01:25 AM
According to new short interest data from OTCBB.com, short interest for Windswept Environmental Group Inc (OTCBB: WEGI) DECREASED 54.5% to 12,272 shares for the month ended mid-May, 2007.
SYMBOL APRIL MAY CHANGE %CHANGE DAYS/COVER
-------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----------
WEGI 26,970 12,272 -14,698 -54.50% 1
Based on WEGI's 20-day average daily share volume of 82,662, it would require approximately 1 day(s) of buying to cover this short interest.
WEGI: Volume Spike; 21% > 20-adsv, Stock +4.35%
FRIDAY , MAY 25, 2007 12:00 PM
This is the 3rd VOLUME alert for WEGI in the past 7 calendar days.
Trading for Windswept Environmental Group Inc (OTCBB: WEGI) has been heavier than usual in today's session. By 12:00 ET, the stock had already traded 116,200 shares via 21 trades. The cumulative volume is 21.35% above its 20-day average of 95,752. Normally the stock experiences around 22 individual trades per session.
So far, today's volume surge has caused a net rise in WEGI's stock price. At the time of this alert, the stock was trading at $0.240, up $0.010 (+4.35%).
One year ago, the Company's shares closed at $0.290. The price has declined more than 17 percent since then.
Over the last 10 trading session WEGI has traded in a range between $0.200 and $0.270 and is currently trading 48.94% below its 52-week high of $0.470 set on June 30,2006 and 200.00% above its 52-week low of $0.080 from December 12,2006.
In the previous 3 sessions, WEGI trading has displayed a negative trend. Closing results have been as follows:
May 24, 2007 --- closed at $0.230 down $0.009 (-3.77%) on 278,800 shares
May 23, 2007 --- closed at $0.239 down $0.001 (-0.42%) on 75,400 shares
May 22, 2007 --- closed at $0.240 down $0.002 (-0.83%) on 313,000 shares
The Company has not released news in the past 30 days
WINDSWEPT ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP INC
Through its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Trade-Winds Environmental Restoration Inc. and North Atlantic Laboratories, Inc., provides a full array of emergency response, remediation and disaster restoration services to a broad range of clients.
you know cargo they should have included a name with that PR - sounds to much like a pink sheet stock announcing contracts with "unnamed" companies - a lot of investors will make that connection pretty quickly - true or false the contract with the unnamed fortune 500 company is red flag to a lot of investors.
starnes I must agree and TampaTrdr can almost top it >
Posted by: TampaTradr
Post #of 1585
Print, we were over .28 in May. From a low of .08, that is...let me see...uhhh....8 times 3.5 = 28. Yep, I think he is right...that is definitely 350%!
I do have to question your math in your logic you posted. That is 300%, not 200%. If you don't believe me, take your calculator and enter .08, then hit the "x" button, then type 300, then hit the "%" key. Mine says .24. You might have gained 200%, but you have 300% of what you started with!
Tamapa .08 goes to .16 that is what? a one bagger 100% increase > Now add another .08 to .24 and what is it? a 2 bagger 200% increase from the original .08 > "ThusFar" as in TODAY WEGI is it .24 > The low was .08 that is 200% increase > PLEASE tell me you can at least understand simple math???? wow...... lol
were do you get 350% move up?
R U talking about the low of .08 in December to todays price of .24? That is let me see, (.08)+.08+.08 ummmm 200% in 6 months - very impressive but surely not 350%..... please lets try to keep things real, 200% in 6 months is pretty darn good, no need to post misleading information when you have the goods my friend
FA I dont write em I just post em > Here is link u can fight with knobias if u like >
http://cobrand.knobias.com/otcbb/Headline_Frame.htm?ticker=wegi
WEGI: Volume Spike; 174% > 20-adsv, Stock -1.65%
TUESDAY , MAY 22, 2007 12:45 PM
This is the 1st VOLUME alert for WEGI in the past 7 calendar days.
Trading for Windswept Environmental Group Inc (OTCBB: WEGI) has been heavier than usual in today's session. By 12:45 ET, the stock had already traded 213,900 shares via 25 trades. The cumulative volume is 174.15% above its 20-day average of 78,022. Normally the stock experiences around 21 individual trades per session.
So far, today's volume surge has caused a net decline in WEGI's stock price. At the time of this alert, the stock was trading at $0.238, down $-0.004 (-1.65%).
One year ago, the Company's shares closed at $0.290. The price has declined more than 17 percent since then.
Over the last 10 trading session WEGI has traded in a range between $0.240 and $0.280 and is currently trading 49.36% below its 52-week high of $0.470 set on June 30,2006 and 197.50% above its 52-week low of $0.080 from December 12,2006.
In the previous 3 sessions, WEGI trading has displayed a mixed trend. Closing results have been as follows:
May 21, 2007 --- closed at $0.242 down $0.018 (-6.92%) on 59,370 shares
May 18, 2007 --- closed at $0.260 even for the day on 133,300 shares
May 17, 2007 --- closed at $0.260 down $0.005 (-1.89%) on 48,560 shares
The Company has not released news in the past 30 days
WINDSWEPT ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP INC
Through its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Trade-Winds Environmental Restoration Inc. and North Atlantic Laboratories, Inc., provides a full array of emergency response, remediation and disaster restoration services to a broad range of clients.
WEGI: Volume Spike; 174% > 20-adsv, Stock -1.65%
TUESDAY , MAY 22, 2007 12:45 PM
This is the 1st VOLUME alert for WEGI in the past 7 calendar days.
Trading for Windswept Environmental Group Inc (OTCBB: WEGI) has been heavier than usual in today's session. By 12:45 ET, the stock had already traded 213,900 shares via 25 trades. The cumulative volume is 174.15% above its 20-day average of 78,022. Normally the stock experiences around 21 individual trades per session.
So far, today's volume surge has caused a net decline in WEGI's stock price. At the time of this alert, the stock was trading at $0.238, down $-0.004 (-1.65%).
One year ago, the Company's shares closed at $0.290. The price has declined more than 17 percent since then.
Over the last 10 trading session WEGI has traded in a range between $0.240 and $0.280 and is currently trading 49.36% below its 52-week high of $0.470 set on June 30,2006 and 197.50% above its 52-week low of $0.080 from December 12,2006.
In the previous 3 sessions, WEGI trading has displayed a mixed trend. Closing results have been as follows:
May 21, 2007 --- closed at $0.242 down $0.018 (-6.92%) on 59,370 shares
May 18, 2007 --- closed at $0.260 even for the day on 133,300 shares
May 17, 2007 --- closed at $0.260 down $0.005 (-1.89%) on 48,560 shares
The Company has not released news in the past 30 days
WINDSWEPT ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP INC
Through its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Trade-Winds Environmental Restoration Inc. and North Atlantic Laboratories, Inc., provides a full array of emergency response, remediation and disaster restoration services to a broad range of clients.
In last 2 years WEGI contractually agreed to pledge Laurus Master Fund MILIONS as shares at .0001 > I just did quick scan of the filing, I will stop by tomorrow and or next days and answer Cargo Hauler and Birks request for me to post some info.
Here are some interesting issues I noticed in my quick scan thru > All directly Cut n pasted from the current SEC filing >
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/814915/000114420407027666/0001144204-07-027666-index.htm
On September 12, 2005, the Company issued 1,500,000 shares of its common stock to Laurus in connection with its partial exercise of the option issued to it in connection with its original investment at an exercise price of $.0001 per share for an aggregate exercise price of $150
REAFFIRMATION AND RATIFICATION AGREEMENT
April 17, 2007
Purchaser and the Company granting Purchaser the right to purchase 30,395,179 shares of the Company's common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (the "Common Stock") at an exercise price of $.0001 per share
Not to mention the notes to the current filing outlines this look into the share structure >
The diluted loss per share for the three and nine months ended March 31, 2007 excludes from the calculation 79,996,452 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options and warrants and 25,395,710 shares issuable upon the conversion of convertible securities, respectively.
They DO notate the risk to common stock>
Equity Price Risk - Our primary market risk exposure relates to the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Note. In connection with the issuance of the Note, we issued to Laurus a warrant to purchase 13,750,000 shares of our common stock and options to purchase 30,395,175 and 11,145,000 shares of our common stock. On September 12, 2005, we issued 1,500,000 shares of our common stock to Laurus in connection with its partial exercise of the original option. These shares have been recorded at their intrinsic value, which is based on the difference between the exercise price per share and the market price per share of our common stock on June 30, 2005, the date of issuance at the inception date of the agreement.
AGAIN I must direct you the the SEC and WEGI if you have issue with the WEGI "offering" If you would like I will GLADLY repost if you need some help finding the info
Here is the link to the SEC filing >
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/814915/000114420407006068/v064851_s1a.htm
Here is the share count info exactly as I posted it few times for you to review in past - If you DO NOT agree with it - nothing I can do about it, again take it up with SEC and WEGI. >
The Offering
Issuer Windswept Environmental Group, Inc.
Outstanding common stock before offering 35,678,993 (as of January 31, 2007)
Number of shares offered for resale 5,395,061 (1)
Outstanding common stock after offering 41,074,054 (assuming all offered shares are sold)
Use of Proceeds We will not receive any proceeds from this offering.
Registration Rights We have agreed to use all reasonable commercial efforts to keep the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part effective and current until the date that all of the shares of common stock covered by this prospectus have been sold under the registration statement, have been sold pursuant to Rule 144 of the 1933 Securities Act, as amended, or may be freely traded without the effectiveness of such registration statement.
Trading Our common stock is quoted on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board under the symbol “WEGI.OB”.
Risk Factors See “Risk Factors” and the other information in this prospectus for a discussion of the factors you should carefully consider before deciding to invest in our common stock.
______________________________________
(1) Represents shares issuable upon conversion of, and/or in payment of principal and interest in shares by us on, the Note issued to Laurus.
Cargo Hauler - did you call for me?
I guess we need to dig thru this filing and make sure I am reading it correctly - I GREATLY appreciate the invitation.
I did notice this in TODAYS filing >
The diluted loss per share for the three and nine months ended March 31, 2007 excludes from the calculation 79,996,452 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options and warrants and 25,395,710 shares issuable upon the conversion of convertible securities, respectively.
AND Yes the total shares from the February Offering as outlined in the SEC filing is 41,074,054 shares (assuming all offered shares are sold)> DIRECT FROM SEC filing as I posted it > again Please dont take my word for it - it is ALL in the filing exactly as I posted it - Please take it up with SEC or WEGI if you disagree with this sales of 5 million shares of stock for $.09 per share >
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/814915/000114420407006068/v064851_s1a.htm
The Offering
Issuer Windswept Environmental Group, Inc.
Outstanding common stock before offering 35,678,993 (as of January 31, 2007)
Number of shares offered for resale 5,395,061 (1)
Outstanding common stock after offering 41,074,054 (assuming all offered shares are sold)
Use of Proceeds We will not receive any proceeds from this offering.
Laurus loaned WEGI 500K @ 17.5% >
Non-Convertible Secured Note. On January 12, 2007, the Company issued a non-convertible secured term note to Laurus in the principal amount of $250,000. Interest is payable monthly commencing February 1, 2007 at per annum rate of 17.50% (plus an additional 5% per annum in the event of a default) and the principal is payable on January 12, 2008. The note is prepayable by us and provides Laurus with the option, in the event of a default, to demand repayment at 110% of the outstanding principal amount. In connection with the issuance of this note, on January 12, 2007, the Company also entered into a Reaffirmation and Ratification Agreement with Laurus, pursuant to which we acknowledged and ratified all of our obligations to Laurus under the securities purchase agreement and related documents. Pursuant to this Agreement, the obligations under the January 2007 note are subject to the terms of the security agreement between Laurus and the Company. A management fee of $8,750 was paid to Laurus in connection with this transaction.
7. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
On April 18, 2007, the non-convertible secured term note to Laurus described in the last paragraph of Note 6, was increased by an additional principal amount of $250,000. This addition is subject to the same terms and conditions as the original non-convertible secured term note. The additional net proceeds from this amended note is for the expansion of the Company’s residential business in Suffolk County New York, including purchases of capital equipment, advertising and marketing. A management fee of $8,750 was paid to Laurus in connection with this transaction
Do you guys read these Qs? WEGI is very sick company financially, They are taking out loans @ 17.5% every couple months just to make payments. I am not going to post WEGI is not in hot sector, NEVER HAVE > However > I sure will post the FACTS on WEGI finances, they are in BAD shape.....
It looks like Well Renewal has sold shares thru REG D filings recently, and they have 2 amendments to the filings, of course they are paper filings, makes it hard for investors to get the details, you will have to contact SEC for copies to get details of the shares sold in these filings, or if they ever file a 10K these will have to be fully disclosed, if investor plans in going LONG with large dollars it is wise to get these filings first, paper filings are often paper for a reason, makes it hard to get the details of stock sales.
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?company=Well+Renewal&CIK=&filenum=&State=&SI...
REGDEX/A [html][text] 1 KB [Amend][Paper]Notice of Sale of Securities [Regulation D and Section 4(6) of the Securities Act of 1933], item 04
Acc-no: 9999999997-07-019200 (34 Act) 2007-04-11 021-99800
07050986
REGDEX/A [html][text] 1 KB [Amend][Paper]Notice of Sale of Securities [Regulation D and Section 4(6) of the Securities Act of 1933], item 04
Acc-no: 9999999997-07-008017 (34 Act) 2007-02-23 021-99800
07045120
REGDEX [html][text] 1 KB [Paper]Notice of Sale of Securities [Regulation D and Section 4(6) of the Securities Act of 1933], item 04
Acc-no: 9999999997-07-005980 (34 Act) 2007-02-05 021-99800
07043595
My post was inline with this post from half hour ago? The letter to shareholders does not say if financing was CD,PIPE,PP other but it is pretty clear the financing was pretty toxic to the shares outstanding? I am sure you agree?
Not sure about you or others but this sounds pretty toxic to me?
From Letter to Shareholders >
We have also recently completed a net equity capital raise of
approximately $800,000 for the company. During the course of our
equity capital raise we obviously needed to issue significant amounts
of stock. The number of shares currently outstanding is approximately
562,000,000.
We have also initiated the process of raising additional equity
capital of between $1 million and $5 million. We anticipate being in
a position to raise this capital within the next 3 to 4 months.
I am Currently doing some DD into small pink oil service plays. Have been looking at Well Renewal for few days now, not sure what to think, I do however believe they have done some toxic financing and looks like they plan to do more soon, to me I see a R/S and then maybe time to buy after it settles back in. IMPO