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.
BTW, did you notice it's a reverse merger? Guess that makes IBRC a shell, huh? Where's the $13M?
It's a wonderful world, isn't it?
What part of my explanation did you not understand?
Sadly, yes.
The deal was fake. There never was a $13M payment.
Which is why I think the deal never happened.
Apparently he can, or did. Once the merger is complete, I don't believe they have to report any of the missing financials, either. You can check me on that, though.
All interesting, none relevant. It is a reverse, the $13M is gone.
Three ways I know there is no $13M.
One. This is not an acquisition, it is a merger. When MO announced the deal was "filled and finalized", he also announced several other things. His resignation, some BS about a rap personality, And a MERGER with a "compatible company." Michael's own words. Merger.
Two. Someone at Dreamlife inadvertently confirmed that it is not only a merger, but a reverse merger.
Three. There are only two legal means that I know of that a private company can use to go public: IPO and reverse merger. There is no IPO, so this is by default a reverse merger.
In a reverse merger, there are two parties, the merging company and the shell. That's the rule. The company that is publicly traded and being merged into is the shell. That's us. A shell means that the parties have agreed to declare the value of the business and assets of the shell to be ZERO. Doesn't matter if the business had income previously, it's value at the time of the merger is declared to be zero. It's only value is it's listing on an exchange.
A company can become a shell for several reasons. Perhaps it has been dormant for several years with no business, like IBRC before MO. Or, it could be because all the valuable assets of the company are going out the door with the previous owners. (This is a hint, guys) Instant shell company.
What this means is that Michael and Jim Lay got together and declared the value of our company's business to be ZERO.
And that means there is no $13M, either in unfinished deals or in the bank. There is no ongoing contract for 250K of oil per month. There are no companies being held by IBRC.
Nothing. Zero.
So, which is it? Been in business for 20 years, or rising from the ashes? And again, can you name those assets? Bet you can't.
Look at the five years previous. Six months is nothing. And for all those acquisitions, name what assets ibrc now owns.
I would disagree with one point. This company has been in existence for 20 years. It certainly hasn't been doing much business in that time. Like none.
I've posted my agreement with this several times. They just weren't using the right terms to indicate the deal was real. For example, escrow was mentioned, but I know from personal experience that payment for an amount of this size for a commodity such as this is usually done through a letter of credit. Never saw that term anywhere.
OK. It's five weeks. Now, about your research. What did you find out when you researched force field technology?
It's a bit more than that. Let me ask you, how many people do you think follow this board without posting? Lots of them. What started me posting was when William Bills, the fake Indian chief, showed up.
First, every name here is made up. Second, been holding for well over a year. I was holding when Ogburn came on board. Sorry, you got the wrong newb.
Did you do any research on the current state of "force field technology"? Know who else is working in that space? 'Cause those are a couple of things you might want to consider before you go betting all your marbles on a new player to the field. If anyone else posting here has bothered to check that out, sadly, it's probably Ben Lurken
If you actually believe this, I have some prime real estate in central Florida I'd love to sell you.
The good news? Milk is legal for recreational use in all 50 states.
And messages that say "Don't sell in May". And nobody can see the pump?
That's freakin' funny!
Two things wrong with your theory. This is a reverse merger, not an acquisition. And "this man" (I assume you mean MO)is no longer involved here.
Like I said, my money, my choice. The only companies that go silent when you ask for information are companies that are trying to hide something from you.
Note I said they owe me all the information they can legally give me. Your reply is specious. If you can't understand the reference to "borrowing", I can't explain it any more clearly.
You don't get it. These people are looking to "borrow" your money. YOUR money. My feeling is that they owe me every piece of information they can legally give me. Which, by the way, is why real companies have something called an Investor's Relations department.
My question is why would you run with that information without verifying it yourself? Pick up the phone and call them yourself. I did.
First, this is a private company, not publicly traded, therefore there there is no "Insider" information. Second, anything that provides you more information is considered due diligence.
It's called "performing due diligence".
Since Dreamlife is not a public company, there are no insiders. Unregulated by the SEC.
I guess Investopedia has it all wrong then. See attached.
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/reverse-merger-ipo.asp
And anybody worried about the share retirement needs to read this. It's from Zack's. I'm talking to you, shally.
Original Shareholders
If you are an original shareholder in a failed company that is planning to go through a reverse merger, you will have a chance to vote on whether to accept the merger. Since your stock is essentially worthless, voting for the reverse merger might seem to present hope of eventually recovering your investment. You will receive a certain number of shares in the new company in exchange for your original shares, but that number will be considerably smaller than the number of shares in your original holding. For example, the new company may trade 25 percent ownership for the public shell. If the new company has 100 million shares authorized, it gives 25 million to the original company's shareholders. If the original company had 250 million shares issued, each shareholder will receive one share of the new company in exchange for 10 original shares. In this example, if you owned 1,000 shares of the original stock, you would receive a certificate for 100 shares of the new stock.
Yep. 53x my original investment on the shares I DUMPED.
They may be in a quiet period now, not allowed to talk about it.
And you heard that from what reliable source?
Who are the backers? Been trying to find out.
Good point. The baseline compensates for the "ambient" level of stress.
I can vouch for that. It was a ready made platform for whatever MO wanted to do with it.
I sent via PM. Did you receive?
May I send you PM?
For your sake, I hope it is true. Unfortunately, all the indications to me say no.