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.
They commit and fund on a month by month basis. Just because they say there is currently no commitment does not mean that there will not be one a month following the previous commitment. That has been proven how many times? How about this.
Meanmike would you agree that Globalnet has received funding over the last two years?
Wrong again! It has been getting a green light month by month by month for two years now all wrapped up in this portion of the 8K's.
"The Company is also in discussions with the investors regarding continued funding of the audit and restatement process. While the Company believes that continued funding of the audit process will occur, there is currently no commitment to provide the necessary funding."
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001144204%252D07....
Which means the investors have funded the audit in the past indicated by the word "continued". The company (GLBT) "believes the funding will continue", I'm guessing and IMO as long as the company shows the investors progress. The investors have a 30 day out by "currently no commitment to provide the necessary funding". To me IMO this means investors will and have been taking it month by month to see how things advance, develop and progress and it must have been over the last two years to CONTINUALLY receive funding. It's only smart for the investors to not commit funding all at once. A little by little approach by the investors mitigates the exposure for loss if this whole thing falls apart; which I agree has it's possibilities for the reason being the company has not released information informing us shareholders convincingly one way or the other of success or failure.
Meanmike I guess symantically I could agree with you that the audit does get put on hold every month and then immediately after funding it gets the green light to continue efforts toward completion.
On IdialIp, is this reference to LA, California old? I do not remember seeing any indication of presence in California before. Am I wrong and it has been there for a while? The dot even looks highlighted as if to reflect recent development.
http://www.idialip.com/network_map.php
Surf, what were the questions you submitted to IR? I sent an email to Gil as well within a day or two of when you were talking about doing so. He sent me a response saying he forwarded my questions to the company and he is waiting there response. I'll let you know when I hear something.
CEO Form 4 10 million shares.
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001144204%252D07....
OT. Mark Schaftlein brought in AJW Offshore into Pacificap Entertainment. Financing sounds similar to GLBT.
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001013762%252D07...
IMO!
Posted by: fugazyh8er
In reply to: None Date:6/24/2007 4:59:11 PM
Post #of 2684
The drop in Alexa rating takes place right after the sale of IDialDirect to Dibz International in January. I would imagine now what Alexa reflects is what we are left with in our wholesale Voip product. It is low but seems fairly consolidated and consistent. It just needs to increase in activity.
Any thoughts?
The drop in Alexa rating takes place right after the sale of IDialDirect to Dibz International in January. I would imagine now what Alexa reflects is what we are left with in our wholesale Voip product. It is low but seems fairly consolidated and consistent. It just needs to increase in activity.
The link between Jay Wright and Mark Schaftlein being CFO for Speedcom around the same period is old? If that is the case I expect you would've provided that info along with copying bertspicks post. Dude, you've been holding out?
Possibly Interesting?
Nathanial remember this post you got from bertspick RB?
Posted by: nathanial
In reply to: None Date:3/7/2007 4:30:32 PM
Post #of 2663
BERT's post from RB:
bertspick
07 Mar 2007, 03:48 PM EST
Msg. 32330 of 32333
Jump to msg. #
MOBL Globalnet, Ocean Avenue, Shaftlein
I think some of you follow MOBL. Anyone else notice that Ocean Avenue Advisors owns a pretty big stake in MOBL, which provides broadband. Globalnet's current CEO is Mark Schaftlein who owns Ocean Avenue, Ocean Avenue is the one that keeps getting funding to keep Globalnet alive every two months. Schaftlein is the current CEO of Epicus, a telephone and VOIP provider as well. MOBL's website says they provide VOIP now too. Anyone remmeber the old news that Globalnet had deal with a major broadband provider. Its MOBL, IMHO. Schaftlien ties them all together. He is basically a loan broker. He gets Hedge funds to provide money to companies like Globalnet and he gets a percentage of shares as commission. It would be in his best interest to but these companies together and have them prosper. Plus if Globalnet has been providing MOBL with VOIP services, they can't afford for Globalnet to go under, hence the funding keeps coming.
- - - - -
View Replies »
« GLBT Message list | Reply to msg. | Post new msg.
I just found out that Jay O. Wright Chairman and CEO of MobilePro used to be the CFO of Speedcom Wireless Corp right before Mark Schaftlein. It is possible they are familiar with one another.
http://www.zoominfo.com/Search/PersonDetail.aspx?PersonID=47103609
Speedcom Wireless
http://sec.edgar-online.com/2003/11/12/0001193125-03-078070/Section13.asp
Are you saying that AJW is fine with limiting their conversion of shares to no more than 4.99% of the OS because their intention was to NSS on the side anyway? Naked Shorting 2 billion shares only works out to be $200K. If they are unable to continue shorting the stock are they going to default the loan or are they going to take the operation to filing status finally? Would you agree these are the two options they would entertain? If so, what is the benefit to them if they choose the route of default?
I believe your shares can be borrowed if your broker holds the certificate for your shares. If you hold the certificate in your possession physically than they cannot be borrowed. The draw back of holding your certificate is when you want to sell your shares you would then have to resubmit your certificate to a broker and your broker would have to then enter it back into their system. The process may take a few days; so when a run occurs you may very well miss the boat. There may be a way to sell shares and sign over certificates when physically holding the documents but I'm not familiar on how that works in the public market.
My interpretation is that GLBT has been diluted by 2+ billion Naked Short Shares. These shares will now have to be acquired and/or borrowed by those who originally sold them into the market (they have to be accessible) within 35 days of the effective date of the amendment (this is my understanding provided by the webcast, could be up for debate). The question that I have is, are there 2+ billion shares available for sale at .0001 or borrowing? By borrowing, brokers and dealers must be the holders of the certificates of the securities, if the shareholder themselves hold the certificates (paper form) they are not available to be borrowed (you can request a certificate for your shares from you broker). Since everyone now knows that there are 2 billion shares needing to be acquired or accessible for borrowing, what keeps the shareholders from holding on to them forcing the PPS upward? Especially if there is a time frame that the NS are held to? What happens if they can't get there hands on these shares in time? I may be missing something and if I am I would appreciate anyone adding clarification.
From the Webcast I do not hear anything referring to the time frame allowing 6 months to phase in the new amendment addressing covering of NSS positions. This is what I did hear, transcribed below:
http://www.connectlive.com/events/secopenmeetings/
Starting at 26:35 of the Webcast:
After carefully considering the comments we recommend that the commission adopt the amendments to eliminate the grand father provision as proposed. The amendments provide for a 35 day phase in period for previously grand fathered fail to deliver positions in securities that are on the threshold securities list on the effective date of the amendment to allow market participants sufficient time to comply with the new close out requirements; also after considering the comment letters we are recommending that the commission adopt today an amendment to Reg SHO that will extend the close out requirement for fail to deliver resulting from the sale of threshold securities pursuant to the rule 144 of the securities act. Under the amendment such fails to deliver will have to be closed out within 35 rather than 13 settlement days. The recommended amendments also include a technical amendment that will update the market decline limitation in Regulation SHO.
The 6 month time frame that I did hear was in response to commissioner Nazareths' question transcribed below.
Starting at 39:53 of the Webcast:
Could you discuss future plans to post the aggregate fail to deliver data that we receive from the DTC on the commission website. In the near future can you describe how that's going to work and what our reasons were for doing that?
The response mentioning 6 months:
Starting at 41:55 of the Webcast:
There's going to be a 6 month implementation period so that the industry can get its systems together and to be able to address twice a month reporting but we think that's around September. There may be some changes after the elimination of the price tests to brush up references to any one in those rules but I don't think that will delay the implementation period.
I may be wrong but it sounds to me like they have a 35 day phase in period from the effective date of the amendment and 35 days to close out sales from that point forward. Are there any other opinions out there? I would like to understand this thoroughly.
Cali, this link you provide refers to a 6 month period to comply; much longer than the 35 days I was excited about.
2 billion shares in 6 months works out to be 333 million per month. Is that enough to push this thing? I think we'll need help from the company. I've sent an email to Marks puppet already.
Posted by: calitrader
In reply to: None Date:6/13/2007 1:31:58 PM
Post #of 2617
I found this info surfing around ihub
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=20419852
Cali, this is the scenario I was hoping for. You have just asked the all important question. What will Mark do now? I hope he was saving up.
I was worried about a long drawn out comply period but 35 days is actually short. I wasn't expecting it to be that short. The only question I have is they have 35 days from the date it takes effect, when is that date? Today? I know the vote went through but is there additional steps for ratification?
Below is what I am wondering about. Taken from your post.
Posted by: calitrader
In reply to: None Date:6/13/2007 12:19:06 PM
Post #of 2609
SEC Votes To End Short-Selling 'Grandfather' Protections
June 13, 2007 11:23 ET
By Judith Burns
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
Once the change takes effect, short positions previously protected by the grandfather clause must be closed out within 35 days.
I thought as companies have a tendency to leak information of upcoming events the SEC would also leak as to which way the vote may be leaning. If so, as the low volume would indicate the vote would not be in our favor. I do hope for the contrary. I would also expect, if the vote is in our favor, those with NSP to not wait for enforcement and cover their positions while the shares are at rock bottom. If the vote is in our favor are we not expecting 2 billion in NSP's to create a level of momentum driving the PPS upward increasing the cost to cover?
In addition, if we do get the vote, benefiting from the enforcement may not meet expectations due to the probability of the time period of enforcement being drawn out to where covering NSP can be accomplished gradually having little to no affect on PPS.
Not that it was going to have the same magnitude of affect but I thought pinksheets linking companies to symbols was going to have some motivating affect on companies. That was supposed to have taken place May 1st. It still shows all symbols and coming soon! They (SEC, Pinksheets, etc.) should have everything in line and hit the ground running to affect change.
If there was a real chance that the SEC would oust the GF clause, wouldn't there be more urgency and activity to cover a 2 billion naked short position than the 6 million volume today?
5 days straight 0 volume. I don't think we have ever gone longer having 0 volume. Anyone?
That's the impression that I'm getting. I'm not sure how well it works out for shareholders each time but the companies seem to have a life after his departure.
The aggravating thing is that he has been able to do for Pacificap in one month and we remain waiting now for a couple years. I'm sure due to the complex issues involved in GLBT's scenario but none the less still frustrating.
Cali, This is the number to Ocean Ave Advisors. I just called and the menu lists Ira Miller and Mark Schaftlein as well as a couple other individuals.
949-833-9001
How's this Cali?
Ocean Ave Advisors:
949-833-9001
2361 Campus Dr # 101
Irvine, CA 92612, US
http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?cat=ocean%20avenue%20advisors&formtype=address&addtohis...
I'll see what I can come up with. I was wondering if that was near you at all. A surprise visit might be good. Do you think Schaft works out of that office?
Here is something you all will find aggravating! If I am understanding this correctly. Schaft is appointed President of Pacificap Entertainment (PFEH) on 1/26/2007
8K filed 1/31/2007
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001144204%252D07...
During the month to follow he identifies some financials cannot be relied upon and provides the restated financial information. ALL IN ONE MONTH, TO THE DAY? Is this how you all interpret this information?
8K filed 2/26/2007
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001013762%252D07...
My post is intended to provide information of the Schafts tactics. The post you replied to was regarding his compensation from SP Holdings. I'm gathering and posting information so we may form some expectations based on his past examples in turning other companies around. Seeing how we are not privy to information involving Globalnet at this time we may formulate an understanding by looking at his other dealings. Does he have a tendency to bleed companies dry until they are completely dead or has he been successful at turning them around and departing a company with a solid foundation? These are questions that can possibly be answered by looking at what else he has done with other companies.
Schaft form 3 for FEEC
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001223257%252D03....
I don't know if this link is working but it is the form 3 on 11/24/2003.
It also looks like he spent time catching up or revising 10Q's and 10K's as CFO for FEEC. Note the timing of the filings provided by this link below. Several filings on one day representing various time periods.
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2FResults.asp%3Fcriteria%3Dticker%255Fsymbol%....
If this link is not working just notice the dates of 10Q's and 10K's filed during the years 2003-2004. Many of them are filed on one day. This occurs numerous times.
The Schaft interim CFO of Far East Energy Corp. from 2003-2004 found in SP Holdings filing SC 14F-1 1/26/07 (Link Below).
Current Director and Executive Officer
Mark Schaftlein, the sole director, acting chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the Company, will resign upon the closing of the Merger Agreement. Mr. Schaftlein, age 48, has served as the Company’s sole director and executive officer since January 2004. Since December 2005, Mr. Schaftlein has served as chief executive officer of Epicus Communication Group, Inc. During 2003 and 2004, Mr. Schaftlein served as a consultant and interim chief financial officer of Far East Energy Corporation. Mr. Schaftlein has been managing director of Ocean Avenue Advisors, a financial advisory firm since 2000.
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Summary Compensation
Mr. Schaftlein has not received any direct compensation for acting as director or as an executive officer of the Company.
Option Grants
The Company did not grant options to Mr. Schaftlein in fiscal year 2006.
Long-Term Incentive Plan Awards
The Company did not award any shares, warrants or other rights under any long-term incentive plans to Mr. Schaftlein in fiscal year 2006.
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0000922423%252D07...
No volume at all for four days, what is the deal with that? If anyone is covering they are not covering here yet.
Letters from the grave!
I know this has been around. It was brought to my attention almost two years ago. It is very interesting reading about Richard Hirschfeld one of the founding fathers of Globalnet. It is a seven chapter series. I thought some of the new blood here would get a kick out of it if you haven't been introduced to this information already.
Follow the chapter links:
http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=101311&ran=70850
This link may prove positive.
I have not read it entirely but it does refer to Schaftlein resigning as sole executive and the placement of a board of directors as well as executives for SP Holding Corp which looks to now be Organic To Go Food Corp (OTGO).
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/FetchFilingFrameset.aspx?FilingID=5101790&Type=HTML&Peop...
Mark Shaftlein is involved with
Globalnet (GLBT)
Epicus Communications (EPCG)
Pacificap Entertainment (PFEH)
He has been involved with the following companies in the past. I have not found tickers yet. I do not know if they are still in operation or have merged, gone BK or changed names at this point
SP Holdings Corp
http://www.myplanetwide.com/pressrelease.php?release=2005111001
Speedcom Wireless
http://sec.edgar-online.com/2003/11/12/0001193125-03-078070/Section13.asp
Here is some info about SP Holdings Corp and Speedcom Wireless
http://www.zoominfo.com/Search/CompanyDetail.aspx?CompanyID=118964610&cs=QFHF0GCYQ&QueryID=8...
Westmark Group Holdings Inc.
http://www.secinfo.com/dVQeh.7Vu.b.htm
Ira Miller owns 100% equity of OAA but Mark Shaftlein gets a 50% cut of profits (Link Below)
http://www.secinfo.com/d13ACs.v1hj.htm
Secretary of State California OAA address (Link Below)
http://kepler.ss.ca.gov/corpdata/ShowLpllcAllList?QueryLpllcNumber=200323810004
Cali, In one of my previous posts there is a link from Larry J. Kolb explaining the attempt to link Hirschfeld to Russian Mobster, Semion Mogilevich. Mogelevich supposedly traffics women from Latvia, among other things. Alexa web traffic rankings for Globalnet in Latvia is second to Mexico. I'm curious to know if there is any link between Mogilevich and Ribotsky (AJW Partners) and/or Arthur Zagorsky (included in the list of names I provided earlier today)? This would definitely explain continued funding, wouldn't you say?
Link to Debt settlement agreement with MCI WorldCom.
http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?1b3
Cali, does this link help?
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/people.aspx?cik=810932
also, not listed:
Arik Meimoun (Next Communications CEO)
David Phipps (GEF)
AJW Partners
Corey S. Ribotsky (Manager)
Shimon Ben Shimol transfers 97,426,666 common shares of GLBT to acquire an option to acquire 20% of Next Communications back in 1/04. This leaves him with 1,873,334 common shares of GLBT. I wonder if he ever acqired the 20% of Next Communications? Hmmm...!
Where would he have transferred the 97,426,666 shares to?
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/810932/000101376204000312/xslF345X02/mar92004form4shimol_ex.x...
I'm sure this is known by many of you but, just in case. I'm just trying to see who might still have a stake in GLBT.
Arik Meimoun is the CEO of Next Communications.
http://www.nextcomm.cc/about_us.asp
Owned by GEF while the whole Irag contract issues in 2004 were taking place (competitors).
Voex Inc's principals had a 5% interest in the Globalnet/Ericsson consortium
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/vsat-04b.html
That was my take. The brother of a founding father of Globalnet owning 100,000,000 shares along with potential for other influential investors they may have attracted could prove beneficial in making this thing move. I'm betting that they are not the type of people that absorb loss well or would accept an R/S. Hopefully for our benefit we can ride along with them and profit simultaneously. GLTA!
Cali, thanks for the updates!
Arik Meimoun, What is it that he purchased of Globalnet?
At bottom of page Click to enlarge scroll down in the (in connection to column).
http://www.larryjkolb.com/file/49.html