There's a Glass Floor below all of us. Difficult to argue the merits of PE ratio and book values when the floor can break on us at any moment.

PXYN made a case that the NHS was a non-exclusive deal. Why haven't they acquired a few new channels to support revenue?

Fundamentals are still shaky (glass floor) and the CEO refuses to communicate with street shareholders.

The one thing that is crystal clear amid all the obfuscation and hustle is that Ed Kurtz seems content to allow his company's PPS to decline; without comment.

PXYN looks more and more like a smoke and mirrors game.

I'd save your money for the subpenny reset.

It's not the financials; the financials are fine. It's the business model which has been implemented like a temporary TV headline taking advantage of populist momentum.

PXYNs business is built on short-term (one year or less) marketing contracts. They have no in-house contingency support should the contracts expire, or terminate. No obvious staying power. No three-year, or five-year plan that a bank can run numbers against to determine risk.

And their share pools a sloppy mess. The one asset a bank might be able to leverage against a LOC is being polluted with no obvious effort to manage.

It's not the financials; the financials are fine. It's the business model which has been implemented like a temporary TV headline taking advantage of populist momentum.

PXYNs business is built on short-term (one year or less) marketing contracts. They have no in-house contingency support should the contracts expire, or terminate. No obvious staying power. No three-year, or five-year plan that a bank can run numbers against to determine risk.

And their share pools a sloppy mess. The one asset a bank might be able to leverage against a LOC is being polluted with no obvious effort to manage.

No such thing as a 10 year startup. PXYN is a 2 year startup, and an 8 year failure.

It's nice, but irrelevant. Bears have had control of the PXYN narrative for some time now. The only counter narrative comes from unabashed, transparent pumping efforts.

PXYN remains silent on all issues as usual.

Appears PXYN's case has been consolidated into TPS's suit. PXYNs motion to disqualify attorney of record is now scheduled for 12/14/2015.

I believe this is the new(TPS's old) case nu: 30-2015-00776389. I'll check my docs when I get home later today.

Based on the flurry of filings the last few months, it looks to be a fight. Both parties look like they're not backing down.

It's difficult enough to speculate on anticipated revenue in the OTC; and much more so when a company elects not to provide timely updates to material events that directly impact revenue.

Haven't heard a peep from PXYN regarding this issue yet they're happy to allow bulls to continue touting the company irrespective of a much criticized blunder.

If PXYN operates as stated -meaning if the NHS contract suffers no further interruptions to schedule; then they should be somewhere round-about $24M in topline. This takes into consideration their fee schedule -which was stricken from the contract but still relevant as a yardstick measurement for performance.

Why common shareholders continue to express supreme confidence in PXYN leadership is beyond me. They obviously do not care about timely release of information to common, -as they clearly demonstrated this past Q.

PXYN's failed to provide the catalyst each time momentum has surged.

I doubt they intend to start doing so this week. But good luck, I wish the best for everyone here.

That makes no sense... on the OTC.

That makes no sense.

Long stretch after Q3. Let's hope you're right.

There's irony in your comment if you can find it. What do you think PXYN intends to do?

Still a ways to go. I just don't see Q3 propelling us to higher highs. PXYN missed a stellar opportunity to build on momentum Q2. Instead, they botched the NHS start date; and have dragged their feet on all substantial changes to the company this year.

I don't have faith that Ed is organized enough, or understands the OTC enough, to capitalize on anything related to this quotation system.

I think we need several Q's that trend organically. If they can improve the balance sheet enough to look like a potential buyout candidate, it'll attract a few fund managers.

That's stipulated on the requirement that they fix share structure. Improvements don't matter squat if the share structure is out of control. And right now it's borderline out of control.

Maybe next year.

That doesn't matter much if they can't control share structure.

It's not a race. It doesn't matter who sues who first.

And PXYN did take the money... They're not completely irreprehensible.

Link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7EAgpkjyeCudmFXVUdIdzVpbUE/view?usp=sharing

I posted the TPS vs PXYN link awhile ago.

Comon guys, really? Nothing I'm saying is a stretch. This is all common sense stuff going on here. Don't rebel against a stated logic just because it doesn't serve your interest.

Much of the controversy has to do with shares owed. TPS is demanding their 166M shares back. The Weisels aren't giving back their 60M shares either. Any settlement agreement will likely address these issues by providing a reduced amount of shares.

PXYN also has a cash flow problem. From an investment perspective, it makes great sense to give cash first and leave the SS alone. But 1.) they don't have any cash, and 2.) they're looking at things from a corporate business perspective taking in their cash flow; it makes more sense to issue common shares.

Lastly, PXYN historically has resolved share structure issues, by issuing more shares. Reference the notes in the Q's.

I've generally expected a good outcome, but any settlement agreement is guaranteed to come with a share allotment. PXYN will have to give up something in order to make them go away. I don't think either party will risk a court decision.

I also realize I could be completely wrong. Until we see the results, caution is the best play.

If either VFIN or VERT show up, I would lean toward an unfavorable scenario. For now it's a wait and see.

However, one extra point I can't help but assert through all of this: SS continues to expand.

I'm not suggesting a toxic scenario yet; but there are a few coincidental facts to consider:

1. The consolidated court cases are coming to a close. Oct 5th is the scheduled hearing and so any settlement agreement, if accepted should appear -right about now.

2. VNDM's timing supports my first point.

3. If there was a settlement agreement; it could go favorably, or unfavorably. In the event of a favorable agreement, PXYN will hand over an allotment of shares, and those share will hit the market immediately. In the event of an unfavorable agreement, the scenario is the same, except a Volume Weighted Average Price (VWAP) will be attached to the agreed to minimum price.

You should consider all of the angles. The next 3 weeks will be telling. We may either rally, or fall to subpenny depending on the outcome.

Okay. Thank you for the instruction.

Okay. Hope you're right.

You should. They are the preferred market maker for toxic settlement scenarios. Ironridge, Asher, Hannover use them. Most toxic financing institutions use them. VNDM, VFIN, VERT. These MM's facilitate unfavorable settlement agreements on behalf of their clients, and they love court-ordered VWAP scenarios.

Yes they are Market Makers. They are also known as Facilitators.

Sure Sean.. When VNDM wraps up, we'll see.

For the record, I hope I'm wrong.

If it is a settlement agreement, it likely won't be the attorney but the actual litigant involved in the civil suit. One or more.

Trading like this is indicative of a settlement agreement. PXYN may have come to an agreement with one or more defendants (or plaintiffs depending on the case). Under such agreements, the receiving party is normally required to liquidate the settlement package within a reasonable timeframe, and not hold the shares.

Possible filing to follow soon; maybe in a few days/weeks depending on the amount settled for.

This is just a guess; it could be many things but I'm leaning toward this scenario. The timing is appropriate -we're closing in on the consolidated, Oct 5th deadline. Let's just hope it isn't a toxic VWAP scenario.

Goodness... There's such a sense of certitude in your statement.

Yes, they are a Market Maker, Senderos. If you'd like me to explain the rest I will.

Honest question:

1. How many think VNDM isn't diluting?
2. and VNDM showing up after the PXYN PR is just a coincidence?

I don't fault the IR. She was probably just doing her job as she's been instructed. Decisions get made higher up.

This is the OTC; when a PR drops and VNDM shows up ... just be cautious...

The timing is suspicious. Ed doesn't generally issue promo Press Releases, but the IR has been telling people the PR was coming for days now. They were waiting for something.

Maybe it's something else, but right now it looks like they were waiting for the credit to deposit before releasing.

You're right that it could be any number of reasons; but historically when VNDM shows up, it's because Ed paid a bill.

I'm going to assume no one here can claim the 3 200K share buys this morning correct? The guys over at Vandham are pretty sharp; they know how to stir the pot before dumping the payment (on behalf of whoever got paid).

Where do you think VNDM came from? The preferreds are using Broadridge to convert and exit. VNDM usually means Ed paid a bill with shares. I'm not speculating; this has just been the historical trend. When the next Q releases, we'll likely see a footnote explaining some sort of payment to meet cash flow.

Ed must have paid another bill.

That would buy the total authorized share count 4 times over. They don't need $30M, when $4M would currently buy back half the authorized (333M shares).

Will PXYN do so?

No. It's obvious we're still being diluted.

On the subject of Mergers and Acq's... What I know is Ed Kurtz uses Common Shares like a hammer, not like the financial tool it's meant to be. Common Shares are a payment method for PXYN, they've never been used as anything else.

I'd anticipate a 1 year lock-up and then more conversion pressure if they announce an M&A.