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.
lol correcting my typo - meant OPXS first public filing not Optex DE.
Not doing a segue here & the point was >> Optex DE initially stated in first public filing that Optex DE issued shares to Arland & he/Longview owned Optex DE up until 2009. However, they later changed that & stated that Optex DE issued shares to Alpha which he allegedly sold to Arland & after dropping Arland & his $15+M from filings, company inserted Alpha into his place (story 3) & claimed that Alpha & Longview owned Optex DE up until 2009, which you thought/posted was a "typo" & i showed was a typo/story being used to date, period.
"BTW, stories 1 and 2 are correct, and other than what I see as an obvious typo (listing Alpha instead of Arland even tho they said Arland owned the shares after Oct 2008) story 3 is also correct..." -- forgot to address this & like keeping facts straight for the board due to so much misinformation throughout the years. SO as was posted, story 3 (the perfected version) with its "typo" is the story they have been using since dropping Arland & his $15+M from filings. However, they are no longer listing the story in one paragraph since changing their first public filing in relation to Optex DE issuing shares to Arland.
Additionally, these insider fools don't seem to realize that if Alpha was in fact issued Optex DE shares rather than Arland & if Alpha did in fact sell those Optex DE shares to Arland on October 30, 2008 then they should have left Arland listed as the owner with Longview up until 2009 like he was in the first filing before they opted to change who Optex DE issued those shares to lol
thurs 3/1 250 short vol from 7,400 total vol (0 buy vol --- 7,400 sell vol --- range $1.00/03)
20180301|OPXS|250|0|7400|O http://regsho.finra.org/FORFshvol20180301.txt
wed 2/28 11,500 short vol from 22,707 total vol (buy vol 10,857 --- 11,550 sell vol -- 300 unknown vol - range $1.02/08)
20180228|OPXS|11500|0|22707|O http://regsho.finra.org/FORFshvol20180228.txt
Might wanna pay attention to some words of wisdom from one of the victims from the second investor rip off that much like the first group of victims also felt confident...
you care more about company than the insiders do b/c all they have done is rip their investors off @ every company where they have played together, which you would know had you checked them out & is something SEC recommends doing by the way, especially with OTC P&D companies like this one lol
rotfl - financials are right back up to around same ranges they were before, ah hello >> r/s - toxic financing - 2nd investor rip off & have a long way to go to get back up to that 27+M these shysters started with!
Tues 2/27 6,520 short vol from 19,220 total vol (700 buy vol @ $1.05 --- 17,720 sell vol --- 800 unknown vol --- range $1.02/05
20180227|OPXS|6520|0|19220|O http://regsho.finra.org/FORFshvol20180227.txt
lol nice try but you are "mixing facts with incorrect interpretations" again so might wanna re-read what i thought i spelled out very clearly in my last post & stop this nonsense.
Ok got it >> "Arland" spells "Alpha" for you & you didn't seem to have a problem with spelling after i posted link to filing for you as per your request back in Dec lol https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=138737880
lol oh great teacher >> you seem to be forgetting that i posted 3 stories right here https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=138830322
1 story showed that company issued shares to Arland & the other 2 showed that they issued those same shares to Alpha along with changing the story of Optex DE ownership up until 2009 which is the best i will do so might wanna move on!
Imo, Alpha should have been listed right there under Longview in their very first "public" filing along providing a break down like they did with Longview's Optex DE shares rather than add that to later filing so like i said >> take your pick b/c i have no clue what version is correct .... Not to mention, doesn't really matter b/c according to state of DE, these 3 insiders (Longview/Alpha & Sileas Hirschman) set the plan in motion way back & they have ripped their investors off twice now...
rotfl - nice try to avoid admitting that you have been "mixing facts with incorrect interpretations" b/c the facts do speak for themselves & company filings are all over the place & we know the filings did not reflect Alpha being issued all Series C - just as the last 10K did not reflect his unloading 400+K in Nov/Dec so...
I'm correct about Alpha unloading 400K+ shares in Nov-Dec too... I already cut and paste directly out of the company's 10K --- Really??
If you have a link to a filing to explain Arland's 15+M along with why company changed ownership of Optex DE up until 2009 then please do share b/c nothing personal here, but not interested in your explanation/interpretation, especially considering that you have been off with some things - like Alpha unloading shares etc. And if you can't provide links to filings then doesn't really matter b/c i know this company is a scam & there will probably be a third investor rip off & too bad i didn't know about the first one but at least i did dig myself out from under & these shysters didn't get as much from as they got from some others :)
subject/story whatever - both words are fairly similar in relation to accounting of events etc & you seem to be changing the subject/story now which concerned the typo in "Story 3". Bottom line, there 3 separate stories so take your pick!
Additionally - all is connected & only reason i could come up with for company changing Lonview/Arland to Longview/Alpha owning Optex De up until 2009 was b/c it might have made it easier for company to bypass explaining what happened to Arland's $15+ M so maybe you have a better reason but if company followed SEC rules then neither one of us would havta guess lol
And we already covered this Arland/Alpha share thing (endless loop) back in Dec & as per your request i posted a link to OPXS first "public" filing that clearly relayed the following.
sheesh - am not changing the story & posted all 3 versions & think you might wanna go back & read your last post "Easy- story 3 is a typo that should have been corrected." & then read my response to see what i was talking about b/f you attempted to go back to that endless loop lol
rotfl - you have one version of the 3 that i just showed you & clearly if Alpha did in sell his Optex DE to Arland then company should not have changed who owned that company up until 2009...BUT maybe changing it to Alpha made it easier to bypass explaining what happened to Arland & his $15+M...
lol sorry but think you might be doing another one of those "facts mixed with incorrect interpretations" & may wanna check into some filings & don't havta go back very far either "perfected version" is in last 10K & Longview/Alpha owning Optex DE until 2009 is their story & right or wrong they're sticking to it lol
Additionally - believe a company can only issue shares once & according to first "public" filing Optex DE issued shares to Longview/Arland.
Story 1
As of December 28, 2008, the Company was authorized to issue 300,000,000 shares of $.001 par value common stock, of which 50,000,000 shares were issued and outstanding as follows:
Longview = 45,081,350
Arland = 4,918,650
Story 2
"...(which consisted of the issuance by Optex Systems, Inc. (Delaware) of 45,081,350 and 4,918,650 shares of its common stock to each of Longview Fund and Alpha, respectively). On October 30, 2008, Alpha sold its Optex Systems, Inc. (Delaware) common stock to Arland Holdings, Ltd. Longview and Arland Holdings, Ltd. owned Optex Systems, Inc. (Delaware) together until February 20, 2009, when Longview sold 100% of its equity interests ..
Story 3 -perfected version lol
Optex Systems, Inc. (Delaware) issued common stock to each of Longview and Alpha in the quantities of 45,081,350 and 4,918,650, respectively. On October 30, 2008, Alpha sold its Optex Systems, Inc. (Delaware) common stock to Arland Holding, Ltd. Longview and Alpha owned Optex Systems, Inc. (Delaware) until February 20, 2009, when Longview sold 100% of its interests...
lol see you only covered 1 aspect of 3 & nice try but company clearly stated in 2 separate filings that they only issued 50M outstanding shares & both of these initial filings very clearly stated 45,081,350 were issued to Longview & 4,918,650 were issued to Arland. Additionally & in case you don't know, the 8 K/A is used for amendments & private/public company must issue shares to individual (s) before they can sell/exchange those shares. So how do you explain without using your own "interpretations" why company did not correct this in 8 K/A & state that 4,918,650 of the 50M outstanding were issued to Alpha rather than continue to list Arland?
Clearly this is not company insider's first rodeo and imo, only a fool would trust a company that violates SEC rules in order to play by their own rules...
lol many points i could cover here but not into breaking them all down AGAIN b/c like i said before, this has become very circular. But will play a little here b/c my assessment has proven to be correct so far & your assessment is still unproven SO, care to elaborate how 2 investor rip-offs are "facts mixed with incorrect interpretations?" You already covered the second investor rip-off but what about the first investor rip-off??
AND what about those 2 "SEC filings"- like the initial "SEC-filed" 8K (already posted) along with a later "SEC-filed" 8 K/A - how were they "facts mixed with incorrect interpretations?" Both "SEC filings" clearly stated that Optex DE only issued shares to Longview & Arland which they were free to sell/exchange etc.
Additionally, am not one that tends to believe/trust in OTC company filings that create/change their story as they go along but since you do and since we have already negated Alpha being issued all Series C, care to elaborate on how/where you got anything in "SEC filings" about Alpha unloading 400K in Nov/Dec. His "SEC-Filed" 11/13/17 13G reflects his owning 818,190 shares & company's "SEC-filed" 12/20/17 10K reflects he was still holding 734,959 shares (commons + 78 Series C) & it may be there but didn't see anything in last "SEC-Filed" 10Q referencing any insider by name or their sells?
Now math is not my best subject & if i trusted this scam company's filings, which i don't & for good reasons then looks like Alpha at most unloaded 83+K in Nov/Dec & also seems like your post a few days back may be another one of those "facts mixed with incorrect interpretations." However, if i missed seeing something in the filings in relation to Alpha unloading 400K then please do post with link. tia :)
Well said & i really don't get how folks could possibly think/believe this company is anything but a scam, especially after 2 investor rip offs - go figure!! Again, so sorry for your $13+K loss but i did my best via posting facts that as you well know, some didn't like on this board!! And some things never change > nice little 300 share paint job yesterday after 13+K selling day but at least sell vol was not short lol
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=125360203
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=124726727
must have missed that mention in your last post after i asked for a link & was pretty much told to look it up b/c you couldn't re locate. In any event, at least that story has been cleared up!!
Alpha has been selling/buying since 2009 & is still here with his partner Longview, so i rest my case lol. Additionally, have not yet located anything in filings indicating that he was issued all Series C so contrary to your claim, doesn't look like he was b/c as per the filings, he would/should have been listed as an owner before last 10K filing & believe his13G filing combined his commons with the 78 Series C - just like Brausers' 13G filing combined his commons with warrants.
rotfl >> 2 investor rip offs are not alternative facts. However, thinking/believing Alpha is leaving the cow that he and Longview created for their milk is!!
No kidding - filing stated that Optex DE issued shares to Longview & Arland not Alpha plus company was formed/created mid Sept.2008 & don't know if they did an express or had to wait a few weeks on paper work etc.
In any event, this is getting very circular & you can spin whatever story you want. Just like everyone else, you too bought into a scam but unlike others before you that got ripped off by these shysters, you have the been given the facts so if i were you, when this thing gets pumped up to $2 maybe $3, i would take my money & run!
? Spent much time covering this along with some other things with you around end of Dec, remember? And looks like my link has been changed again lol BUT doesn't matter b/c as per your request, link to original SEC filing (NOT OTC markets) was posted for you to see & that original 8K clearly reflected that Alpha was not issued any shares to sell to Arland so.
Since company has since replaced original 4/09 8k with newer one in their "clean-up" work to remove some contradictions - like Optex DE NOT issuing shares to Alpha to sell to Arland lol, you might wanna go back and read the beginnings of this board b/c believe it covers some of what was in original 8K... AND again - insiders (Longview/Alpha with "Slieas" Hirschman) set the plan up well in advance, which State of De records clearly reflect so
lol Believe company started with approximately 30M annual revs - had no debt or dilution & PPS was 40-55 cent range which changed real quick after these insiders (Longview/Alpha with Hirschman) enacted their plan. Not to mention - can check State of Delaware records to see that all was planned well in advance by these 3 insiders. Sensors acquired Optex Texas 1/06 - Optex Systems Holdings was formed/created 4/06 which was even before Optex DE formed created in 9/08.
Company was not in dire straights when these same insiders (Longview/Alpha with Hirschman) set everything up to bring company down & rip investors off the first time...
Wed 2/21 - 14,200 short vol from 16,100 total vol(3,800 buy vol --- 9,200 sell vol --- 3,100 unknown vol --- Day range $1.03/05
20180221|OPXS|14200|0|16100|O http://regsho.finra.org/FORFshvol20180221.txt
Again for you >> 2 investor rip offs via the insiders answers your own question. They clearly set everything up to bring this company down - PPS went from 40-55 cent range down 01-02 cents very quickly & would be in subber land had they not done second investor rip off - r/s, toxic financing etc, etc. Just a matter of time b/f it's back there again imo.
you didn't clear anything up - still waiting on filing to explain the disappearance of Arland & his $15+M that i believe you said you were gonna look for, which i know is not there!
According to company filings, they are required to list all owners & opted to keep Arland & his $15+M in there before dropping him without any explanation, BUT OTC is known as the wild west & pretty much anything goes down here lol. AND c'mon - 2 investor rip offs via the insiders answers your own question. They clearly were out to bring this company down & within a few short months, PPS went from 40-55 cent range to around 04 cents before finding it's new home around 01 cent which i think happened before the end of 2009.
So it is your opinion that between October 23,2016 (warrant exercise date) & 12/16 10k report that he sold off his remaining 6.7% b/c that would mean pretty much all Nov 2016 vol was him selling & still does not negate that his ownership should have been listed in 10K imo & following Q should have covered his selling. And what explanation is there for Arland's 9.96% disappearance - the person that allegedly owned Optex DE w/Longview up until 2009 when Longview sold his interests?
2017 10k - "...Beneficial ownership data in the table has been calculated based on Commission rules that require us to identify all securities that are exercisable or convertible into shares of our common stock within 60 days of July 19, 2017 and treat the underlying stock as outstanding for the purpose of computing the percentage of ownership of the holder...." https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1397016/000161577417007478/s108458_10k.htm
5/10/17 13G - Gate City Capital https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1397016/000139834417006202/fp0025764_sc13g.htm
2016 10K - "...Beneficial ownership data in the table has been calculated based on Commission rules that require us to identify all securities that are exercisable or convertible into shares of our common stock within 60 days of December 22, 2016 and treat the underlying stock as outstanding for the purpose of computing the percentage of ownership of the holder...." https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1397016/000161577417007478/s108458_10k.htm
10/4/2016 - 13G Brauser Michael
Amount Beneficially Owned: 486,750(1)(2)
Percent of Class: 6.7% (Based on 6,912,434 shares outstanding as of September 14, 2016) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1336508/000165495416002623/brauser13g_opxs-sep2016.htm
I suggest that you read the rules - believe company is supposed to disclose info surrounding 5% ownership that includes all securities that convert into common stock, which i believe a warranty is and is also as Brauser's "Oct" 13G filing reflects . And there is no excuse for just dropping Arland & his 15+M from filings lol
lol i guess the short talk on this board in the past and Finra daily reports have it all wrong & most of the daily vol isn't short vol.
lol yes, i do understand that & you do understand that OPXS is required to spell out what is going with owners & not just omit and or drop them from filings. Brauser was listed as an owner holding over 5% in Oct which the 10K should have covered just like Arland & his $15+M should have been covered!!