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.
Another Firm announces Class action suit.....
I have a feeling the Secureview money SEVU is claiming to be loading up on has the interest of a few law firms and shareholders alike.
Here is the newest suit:
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.asp?Symbol=US:SEVU&Feed=PR&Date=20010614&....
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against SeaView Video Technology, Inc. Seeking Damages on Behalf of Investors
June 14, 2001 12:19:00 PM ET
LITTLE ROCK, Ark., June 14 /PRNewswire/ -- The Law Firm of Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP announced today that it has filed a class action on behalf of all individuals and institutional investors that purchased the common stock of SeaView Video Technology, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: SEVU) ("SeaView" or the "Company") between March 30, 2000 and March 19, 2001, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit, captioned Howlin v. SeaView Video Technology, Inc., et al., Case No. 8:01 CV 1133-T-27 TGW, is pending in the United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, located at 801 N. Florida Avenue, Tampa, FL 33602, and has been assigned to the Honorable James D. Whittemore. A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on the firm's website at http://www.classlawyer.com/pr.seaview_video.pdf.
The Complaint charges SeaView and its President and Chief Executive Officer, Richard L. McBride ("McBride") with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, SeaView, a provider of marine, medical and security-related video equipment, and McBride made numerous materially false and misleading statements, concerning, among other things, SeaView's reported revenues for the second and third quarter of 2000 as well as expected revenue for the Year 2000, the demand for SeaView's products, and SeaView's ability to manufacture sufficient product to meet the purported demand. In addition, the Complaint charges that SeaView and McBride failed to disclose that the Company recognized revenue for non-existent sales. As alleged in the Complaint, on March 19, 2001, SeaView revealed, in a Form 8-K filed with the SEC, that its financial results for the second and third quarters of 2000 were materially false. On April 16, 2001, in its Form 10-K filed with the SEC, Sea View confirmed that was restating its financial results for those periods.
If you purchased SeaView common stock between March 30, 2000 and March 19, 2001, inclusive, you may, no later than July 16, 2001 request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action. If you are a member of this class, you can join this class action online at http://www.classlawyer.com/sign_up.html.
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP has substantial experience representing investors in securities fraud class action lawsuits such as this. The firm has offices in Florida, Arkansas and California, but represents shareholders from throughout the nation. If you have any questions about how you may be able to recover for your losses, or if you would like to consider serving as one of the lead plaintiffs in this lawsuit, you are encouraged to call or e-mail the Firm or visit the Firm's website at www.classlawyer.com.
CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN & COATES, LLP
Client Relations Department:
Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Charlie Gastineau
P.O. Box 25438
Little Rock, AR 72221-5438
Toll Free: 1-888-551-9944
E-mail: info@classlawyer.com
MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here
http://tbutton.prnewswire.com/prn/11690X73424127
© 2001 PRNewswire
Back to Recent News
Happy Posting!----
Sports Authority....
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=SEVU&read=36424
By: 739RTK $$$
Reply To: None Sunday, 10 Jun 2001 at 9:29 AM EDT
Post # of 36442
Today's Subject..THE SPORTS AUTHORITY...
OK,Boys and Girls,I have reviewed today's TSA Father's Day flier and much to my surprise...There is an underwater video system advertised!!!!!!
But,alas,it is not a SeaView!It is an Atlantis Sports Cam.Now, this may be a better,worse or equal product to SeaView,I don't know.But the fact remains that it,not SeaView,is in the flier and on their website(#685236).
I strongly suspect that the announcement by SEVU of a Sports Authority promotion was another example of them blowing smoke.
And The Beat Goes On!!!!!!!
JUST MY OBSERVATIONS AND OPINIONS
Yours truly,
739RTK
How come westmarine has no SEVU cams in stock?
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/commerce/command/ProductDisplay?prmenbr=201&prrfnbr=2514&ou...
Out of all of the brands the offer only Seaview is a drop ship? How come westmarine will not stock a seaview camera?
How come the top of the line is the fish eye?
How come the best seller is the fisheye?
The PR released by the New Managemet made it sound like westmarine was using SEVU as an exclusive. I have visited 2 seperate outlets and they do not even carry Seaview cams in stock? Only aquaview Fish eye?
Dont tell me the PR was misleading? Please explain?
Were is the 1.5 million PP New Mnagement promised in PR
WERE IS THE FILING FOR THE 100000 shares George & RLM bought claimed in PR?
I am going to print out ALL of the PR from the New Team tonight and generate a post outlining the things that have never happened, The things that should of happened by now! The questions we ALL deserve answers to!
Stay Tuned!
Happy Posting! -----
Sports Authority Fathers Day special!
I was in Altamonte Springs FL today, Stopped at the sports Authority to get a new basketball to play some hoop with the kids. I was interested in the Seaview Camera that the New Management claimed in a PR was in stock or even displayed for fathers day.
Here is the Phone number and location of the store I was at:
Altamonte Springs
380 S. State Road 434
Altamonte Springs FL, 32714
(407) 774-8088
WELL WELL WELL - NO SEAVIEW CAMERA! BUT........
They had a huge display and working camera's for Atlantis Camera's! The camera included a 5.5 inch 420 line TV, IR Camera with an awesome ballast, Sees in total darkness to 25 feet distance, more with little light, 75 ft cord & Video instruction.
AUW-401 MINI ATLANTIS SYSTEM
- 4" Monitor with 2 camera inputs
- 75' steel-mesh cable
- B/W 420 line high resolution camera
- 6 high-powered infrared LEDs for night viewing
- 5-hour rechargable 12V battery
- Built-in sun visor, adjustable for group viewing
- 92 degree angle wide viewing lens
- Durable, watertight case
- Vehicle and 110 adapter included for battery charging
- VCR adapter included for recording
- 1-year Manufacturer's Warranty.
The "Fathers Day" special as it was being sold as was 249.00, 50.00 off retail!
Now you longs call them! The rep said the camera's came in one week ago for the Fathers Day promotion, They had 6 in stock & one operating in a large tank!
Here is the website I took off the box.
Sportsman Underwater Camera by Atlantis
www.atlantiscamera.com
http://www.atlantiscamera.com/
Now either the New Management totally lied or as they say on TV, George you got some splainin to do!
Happy Posting!------
Allthat is new head cheerleader!
Longs, Shorts, No position, Read this last post by allthat and tell me who he sounds like? Do you think he may be associated with SEVU?
How many red flags does it take!
HMMMMMMMM...
Now if that is not the pot calling the kettle black!
FG ever think that allot of posters here feel the same about your posts? I mean look at the history of bad information you have sent out as well as the lie's you have backed from SEVU.
Before you make yourself hollier than thou make sure you are without sin. What is that saying about throwing stones?
IMO
Happy Posting! -----
Yes, Fast Food is a prospect big time.....
However, SEVU needs to target the corporate headquarters not the GM at the Mc D's...I do a ton of work for DRI Darden Restaurants in Orlando. Not a single Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Bahama Breeze or Smokey bones manager is going to buy a single unit, corporate however, if interested, will do the buying. Darden owns every single of the named restaurants above, everyone of them, NYSE symbol DRI, I bought at 17.00. Good solid company & stock.
Try the francise lists available, It is easy to get the home office for the Fast Fooders, Money wasted if you mail to every fast food location. IMO
"my figures came from the licensing arm of the dept of business and professional regulation for the state of fla. they would know better than any indepentent research co.
they say they have issued 370,326 licenses in this state for restaurants"
LOL
You have allot to learn about Direct Mail grasshopper. Go ahead and purchase this list from the State and mail it out, Talk about a horrible list, The nixie & return rate will be HUGE!
The ST of FL DPR is the most notorious department for having awfully "bad" data. I mean bad stinking Government pork BAD! I have used the DPR list many many times. After I get done running a CASS & PAVE and dedupe, You will have a fraction of the original file left to mail. What is left will be highly suspect.
Peace......
Cabo_Tacos Bars & Restaurants mailing list Entire USA
Sic Code
5812-08 Restaurants 404,098
5813-01 BARS = 38,831
5813-03 COCKTAIL LOUNGES = 9,437
5813-04 Night Clubs = 8,145
ENTIRE USA = 460,511 (This is the list SEVU meant)
FL ALONE ALL CATAGORIES = 26,627
This is from InfoUSA - Largest commercial count around
D&B Has roughly 10% less on the count (tighter list IMO)
Cost for the list alone $.04 each or $18,420.44 (retail cost)
My cost roughly 30% less.....
Hope this helps........
P.S. - Allthat please refrain from the personal attacks via PM!
What is the TOS for personal attacks in PM?
PLEASE!
Are you including Burger King, McD's, ETC...?
If you mail to the fast fooders you ARE wasting big time money, get the franchisee list. NO Fast food manager is going to spend a dime on anything, Corporate will decide. This alone excludes over 50% of ALL restaurants on any mailing list.
Want to run your own count on D&B? www.acculeads.com go to the count system, anyone can use the scaled down system without much effort. This is a great system. I will post the D&B count in the morning.
I ran a count excluding the Fast Food Franchise chains only.
Why did SEVU reword it then Cabos_Taco? It was wrong!
Man, you guys are to much !
How many Red Flags does it take!
I hope your new partial owner is not some Newsletter company, Pump it & Dump it type? Anyone know about this new filer?
Well we have at least uncovered part of the mystery as of late, we know who bought 1.5 million shares, now who sold the 1.5 million shares, and who is the big time sellers as of late. I have a feeling we will ALL know the truth real soon!
Again, Cabos....How many Red Flags does it take!
Seaview must read your posts PRINT.
SeaView Video Technology Corrects Wording in Earlier Release
--(BUSINESS WIRE)--
In BW0281, (FL-SEAVIEW-VIDEO-TECH) SeaView CEO Bernardich Recaps First 100 Days, fourth graph, second line should read xxx
Restaurant establishments in the U.S., starting with the State of Florida. (sted ...Restaurant establishments in the State of Florida.).
CONTACT:
SeaView Video Technology, Inc., St. Petersburg
Scan: When you acquire more than 5% of the outstanding shares of a company you must register your holdings by filing a 13d with the SEC. Evidently Suburban Capital (whoever they are) has acquired 1,500,000 shares or 7.5% of the outstanding shares.
Funny thing is that would mean that at the time of the filing, May 23rd there were 20,000,000 shares outstanding, yet in post 35084 2 days ago MagicMatty stated the transfer agent told him there were 18,912,000 outstanding.
RB post: http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=SEVU&read=35461
OK, How many shares are outstanding? Is this not the wildest ride of them all, The SEVU ever expanding float ride!
I only posted this for the bottom part of it, I did not want to re-type the enire thing myself. Same thing came to my mind.
Peace....-----
NEW SEVU FILING SCHD 13D
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/quotes_sec.asp?symbol=SEVU&selected=SEVU
What do you think about THIS!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB APPROVAL
OMB Number: 3235-0145
Expires: October 31, 2002
Estimated average burden
hours per form ....... 14.90
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
SCHEDULE 13D
Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Amendment No. ____)*
Seaview Video Technology, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Name of Issuer)
Common Stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Title of Class of Securities)
81273Q102
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CUSIP Number)
Robert S. Luce, Esq., 399 Quentin Road, Suite A, Palatine, IL 60067
(Name, Address and Telephone Number of Person Authorized to Receive Notices and
Communications)
May 14, 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Date of Event which Requires Filing of this Statement)
If the filing person has previously filed a statement on Schedule 13G to report the acquisition which is the subject of this Schedule 13D, and is filing this schedule because of (S)(S)240.13d-1(e), 240.13d-1(f) or 240.13d-1(g), check the following box [_].
Note: Schedules filed in paper format shall include a signed original and five copes of the schedule, including all exhibits. See(S)240.13d-7 for other parties to whom copies are to be sent.
* The remainder of this cover page shall be filled out for a reporting person's initial filing on this form with respect to the subject class of securities, and for any subsequent amendment containing information which would alter disclosures provided in a prior cover page.
The information required on the remainder of this cover page shall not be deemed to be "filed" for the purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Act") or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section of the Act but shall be subject to all other provisions of the Act (however, see the Notes).
Persons who respond to the collection of information contained in this form are not required to respond unless the form displays a currently valid OMB control number.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CUSIP NO. 81273Q102
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAMES OF REPORTING PERSONS
1 I.R.S. IDENTIFICATION NOS. OF ABOVE PERSONS (entities only).
Suburban Capital Corporation
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX IF A MEMBER OF A GROUP (See Instructions)
2 (a) [_]
(b) [_]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC USE ONLY
3
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOURCE OF FUNDS (See Instructions)
4
WC
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHECK BOX IF DISCLOSURE OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS IS REQUIRED PURSUANT
TO ITEMS 2(d) or 2(e) [_]
5
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CITIZENSHIP OR PLACE OF ORGANIZATION
6
Nevada
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOLE VOTING POWER
7
NUMBER OF
1,500,000
SHARES -----------------------------------------------------------
SHARED VOTING POWER
BENEFICIALLY 8
0
OWNED BY
-----------------------------------------------------------
EACH SOLE DISPOSITIVE POWER
9
REPORTING 1,500,000
PERSON -----------------------------------------------------------
SHARED DISPOSITIVE POWER
WITH 10
0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AGGREGATE AMOUNT BENEFICIALLY OWNED BY EACH REPORTING PERSON
11
1,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHECK IF THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT IN ROW (11) EXCLUDES CERTAIN SHARES
12
(See Instructions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PERCENT OF CLASS REPRESENTED BY AMOUNT IN ROW (11)
13
7.5%
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYPE OF REPORTING PERSON (See Instructions)
14
CO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instructions for Cover Page
(1) Names and I.R.S. Identification Numbers of Reporting Persons--Furnish the
full legal name of each person for whom the report is filed--i.e., each
person required to sign the schedule itself - including each member of a
group. Do not include the name of a person required to be identified in the
report but who is not a reporting person. Reporting persons that are
entities are also requested to furnish their I.R.S. identification
numbers, although disclosure of such numbers is voluntary, not mandatory
(see "SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLYING WITH SCHEDULE 13D" below).
(2) If any of the shares beneficially owned by a reporting person are held as a
member of a group and the membership is expressly affirmed, please check
row 2(a). If the reporting person disclaims membership in a group or
describes a relationship with other persons but does not affirm the
existence of a group, please check row 2(b) [(unless it is a joint filing
pursuant to Rule 13d-1(k)(l) in which case it may not be necessary to check
row 2(b)].
(3) The 3rd row is for SEC internal use; please leave blank.
2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNATURE
After reasonable inquiry and to the best of my knowledge and belief, I certify that the information set forth in this statement is true, complete and correct.
May 23, 2001
Date
/s/Sara Wetzel
--------------
Signature
Sara Wetzel/President
Name/Title
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Filing
Still no word on the 1.5 million?
Can anyone make the claim this is not a bold face lie at this point? Can any of you PROVE that this stated info from the PR is in fact true? What is the limitations on this thing? We have PR after PR NO UPDATE! NO FILING!
What happened? Were is the filing?
How about that RLM Spring Home show stuff? RLM told us all he wa going to make 125k NET profit per show? Spring is gone my friends!
Who is selling all of the shares in the large blocks! FG says it is a gopher guy, I dont think the Gopher guys got that much stock to support the size of the sells we have seen. How many Gopher shares are NON RLM shares?
446,000 Bars & Restaurants in FL! Now that is a bold face LIE! Prove it! I ran a search on D&B as well as Infousa, Under 22000 my friends in FL! LIE!
Another misworded, misguided SEVU PR? By the "New" team..
Printmail ERROR?
I just read the PR from MSN yes .5 to 1%, I think the PR I read here was missing the the "." or I just missed.
I am posting in between calls etc. today, Life is good in Printmail01 land, Very busy but good.
Sorry about the error,
So, .5 to 1%, Now is that reponse rate or closing rate (orders). BIG difference in the two!
What about the 446000 Bars & Restaurants in FL? Now that is a bogus line! Show me the list this came from!
Continuing on the sales front, next week begins our direct-mail
launch of SecureView to the 446,000 Bar and Restaurant establishments in the State of Florida. On average direct mail produces a response rate between .5% and 1%. The success of this initial mailing will determine our expansion into this market across the United States.
First lets addres the money issue here, If SEVU were to mail out nearly 500000 pices of mail you are talking about an expense of $135000 to $185000 if the mailed the enire file at once. Of course if they part it out they spend as much as $250000. Big dollar cost for a company with no money? IMO
Next lets look at the repsonse rate of 1 - 5%. Now there is a GAP! What does SEUV mean by reponse? An actual order or an iquiry for more information. Direct Mail does produce about 1-5% response. However, there ARE HUGE factors involved. If they have a response of 1% what is the closing rate of that 1%? 10-30% on average? Very tricky wording IMO, SEVU makes it look like the will see a 1-5% order rate or response rate. Big Big BIG differnece.
Third, THE LIST! Please! 446,000 Bar & restaurants in the State of Florida! Please Please Please! In the enire USA maybe, BIG maybe 446,000, D&B has only 380,000 in the USA & Under 20,000 for the Stae of FL. If you go to the cheap list, infousa, you may get the Number 446000 across the USA, however, The claim to mail out 446,000 in FL is ALL bogus!
It never fails. SEVU releases so much junk in there PR. What about releasing some factual, good news instead of just fluff! How much does a OR cost to send out?
IMO
"Every so often, he buys the stock from the large seller, minus 1/2 to 1 cent/share commission..."
Please tell us about this "large" seller......
He has been selling allot of shares? Who has a large block of shares to ocver all of this selling?
Any Opinions?
Hoffman? RLM? who else has so many shares?
Who is selling the larger blocks of shares?
Everynight we have seen some large block trades take place. It is almost predictable at this point.
Who is selling the large blocks?
Who is buying the large blocks?
Were is that Hoffman Colonel guy at? He is an original holder of a large amount of stock. Have not heard a word about him as of late.
Find out the TRUTH regarding these 3 questions and IMO we find out were the SEVU money is really going?
http://moneycentral.msn.com/scripts/webquote.dll?iPage=qd&Symbol=SEVU
IMO
Happy Posting ! ------
OT: What is the deal with all of the "ifs" & "maybe's" on this board? Is it only moderated to quiet the bearish posts?
New Management promises?
Homeplug.com application was accepted?
Not a sponsor:
http://www.homeplug.com/members/index.html
Not a participant:
http://www.homeplug.com/members/paticipant.html
Not even an adopter:
http://www.homeplug.com/members/adopter.html
SEVU again has mislead investors with wordplay? IMO
Westmarine still has no systems in STOCK? Others do?http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/commerce/command/ProductDisplay?prmenbr=201&prrfnbr=2514&ou...
Westmarine best seller? NOT SEVU!
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/commerce/command/ProductDisplay?prmenbr=201&prrfnbr=2514&st...
Westmarine top of the line? NOT SEVU:
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/commerce/command/ProductDisplay?prmenbr=201&prrfnbr=2514&st...
Westmarine PR was no more than words on the wire NO substance? IMO
Sports Authority? NO SEVU CAMERA'S ON WWW?http://www.thesportsauthority.com/searchHandler/index.jsp?keywords=seaview
1.5 Million dollar PP? Did not see it in Q1? PR was released well in advance of the filing? NO PP, NO 1.5 MILLION as of today? Prove it ?
How many Secureviews are being made? SEVU did a PR for 10,000 then said they were defective? Did a PR about 20,000? Was this included or above the 10,000 defective units? Please clarify? Is it 10000, 20000 or 300000 as the PR would lead you to believe?
I can not find one SEVU product on ANY of the retailers websites New Management has claimed! Please someone post a site from a PR that has a SEVU product other than the ONE yes ONE unit from smarthome.com? Maybe I am missing something, but, All I see is PR with big names for many many months yet the Big names have NO SEVU products? anyone? Old or New PR? Anyone?
Tawain? We here PR about this that the other for over a year now, New & Old management, Yet, NO SALES to Tawain! Just lots of cryptique word play. IMO
How many red flags does it take?
How many Class action suits does it take?
How many misleading PR's does it take?
How many SEC investigations does it take?
How many fraudulent filings does it take?
IMO
Happy Posting! ----
What will the bid be on SEVU in the morning?
I am really interested in the large blocks that have sold over the last 2 weeks. IMO this seller has had more than inside information.
What if we have no bid on SEVU? Can they hault an OTCBB for an order imbalance? What will tomorrow hold?
I have a feeling the guy who sold that 267,000 shares after the bell has some explaining to do?
IMO
SEVU admitted the lie!
What more does a jury need besides the 8k! Do they need the SEC investigation as well? Do they need the RLM probation fraud thing? Do they need the inside truth story?
This is a clear cut case! SEVU mislead investors and the SEC in public filings! End of story! SEVU must compensate any investor who bought shares on the basis of SEVU SEC filings!
Can you guys get off the MM thing! This entire saga is based on fraudulent filings (8k) The founder being on Felony Probation for fraud, No revenue, No earnings, Misleading PR.
IMO
How many .50 restricted shareholders are left?
From what I can gather almost 1.5 years ago SEVU sold many a share at .50 restricted for a year. I remeber everyone on TI talking about the deal, All of the fisherman knew SEVU and the .50 restricted shares. I heard of SEVU first from the stock at .50 long before the product or printing. All you heard over the course of the restrictions was the killing they all were making, The huge loads of money RLM and SEVU had made all them, I am talking .50 all the way to 28.00! Yet they could not sell, They all had the dreams of making a killing! .50 to 28.00!
Today you see the reality of SEVU. People got BURNT and BURNT BAD! It is not the MM, It is not ther Shorts, It is not the bashers. SEVU is at .45 for one reason! NO REVENUE, NO PROFIT, RED FLAGS & AWFUL LEADERSHIP THEN & NOW!
IMO...Class action...How muuch money does RLM have? I think some lawyers will be looking really really close
IMO of course.....
.50 restricted holders?
FG, SEAHAG, GOTINEARLY, TAFIREHAWK, MADHATTER, ???? Yes or No? .50 restricted with dreams of the big kill? please advise?
"As SecureView production and fulfillment continues to ramp up, the Company is re-confirming the $9 million in backorders with customers and dealers, to process for shipping. "In the last four days, we have shipped $40,034 in SecureView credit card orders."
At this rate the backlog will be filled in 900 days or about 2 1/2 years!!!!!!!!
Re-confirming the 9 million backorder? What exactly is that supposed to mean?
SEVU is not listed on Homeplug.com ANYWERE! The way it sounds to me is ..Yes we got your application...When we see a SEVU link on the site then we can talk about it, with JR making a statement I think we need more?
RLM & George bought 100,000 shares together? How many each & please PROVE IT! RLM made claims of buying shares himself a month ago! What about that claim?
Were is the 1.5 million PP!
So many red flags, so little good points.
IMO
Couple of questions for the group
LOANS, CREDIT LINES, MORGTAGE
RLM may have never SOLD any shares, but, I bet he sure can or has used a few for collateral.
The whole thing about the lost cert, then he got new cert, were is that old cert at? Why the cert story in the first place? Any bank or investment banker will take certs against loans & credit etc..Maybe RLM needed that extra million shares to keep the credit? margin call, if you will? IMO
What RLM does with the shares if he does not really sell them, I believe, Is not information we are privvy to. I think he can use them for collateral against loans? Does not have to disclose this nor does the SEC require him to, unless, The bank takes possesion and sells? Any other opinions on this
?'S
I wonder who is buying and who is selling everyday at the bell? any opinion on this subject?
Who is unloading these larger trades? Who is buying them? Who is selling them?
RLM said here in April he bought shares. No proof or filing, now today we have a PR saying he & G3 bought like 100,000 shares? What is the deal? Did RLM buy shares in April like he said here? Is todays PR just words or will we see a filing?
WHAT ABOUT THE 1.5 MILLION PP! We have never heard another word on it from SEVU? We never saw a filing? How come it has never been addressed?
IMO
LOL Lashark....
Who is buying all of the after hour stuff? Form T? Got any idea or opinion of who is selling and who is buying?
im thinking
14,400 @ .695
peace........
Interesting story...relevant story...
http://moneycentral.msn.com/articles/news/extra/6956.asp
It took a little while, but the lawsuits from the stock market crash are starting to pile up.
Join the discussion on our Your Money message board.
So far this year, according to the Securities Class Action Clearinghouse at the Stanford University Law School, 89 class-action lawsuits involving securities fraud have been filed in federal court. At that rate, the total could top 250 by the end of the year, well above the 231 similar lawsuits filed in 1994. Six class-action lawsuits have been filed against Cisco Systems in the last month alone.
What's causing the rise in class-action lawsuits seems to be the tech stock crash of the last year or so. Many investors are livid, and the lawyers who specialize in class-action securities lawsuits sense an opportunity. They're accusing companies and investment banks of disclosing misleading information, insider trading and disclosure and distribution practices that artificially pump up stock prices during initial public offerings. What's more, some are even challenging the idea of matching 401(k) plan contributions only in the form of company stock.
While exactly how much anyone can recover from these lawsuits is anyone's guess, it's most likely that shareholders won't get anything near a full recovery of their lost investing dollars.
Five cents on the dollar invested is possible. Sometimes, settlements have included cash and additional shares.
A spate of IPO lawsuits
The current batch of lawsuits concerns company practices during initial public offerings (IPOs). On April 23, shareholders sued Avici Systems, NetZero and Autoweb.com, claiming that the companies failed to disclose the magnitude of commissions paid to underwriters as well as other practices used to artificially inflate the IPO stock price. Earlier, MarketWatch.com, Ariba and VA Linux Systems were hit with similar lawsuits. The lawsuits cover shareholders who purchased stocks in the companies during various periods since 1999, when the IPO market was red hot.
On April 24, investors sued Marimba, charging that its prospectus was "materially false and misleading" at the time of its IPO. The suit also accuses investment bankers Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Credit Suisse First Boston and Bear Stearns of practices that pumped up the price of the stock at the time.
Here's what the Marimba case charges:
First, that Marimba and the investment banks allegedly failed to disclose important ("material," in the language of securities law) information in the prospectus. Perhaps more importantly, the lawsuit claims that the investment banks received significant unreported commissions from some investors. In return, the banks and Marimba made sure these investors received more shares at the $20 a share price.
(Marimba closed at $60.75 on April 30, 1999, the first day its shares traded publicly. The stock peaked at $66.44 on the next trading day, May 3, 1999. The stock has been selling at about $3 recently.).
Further, the lawsuit claims that the investment banks first secured promises from investors to buy additional Marimba shares in the aftermarket at higher prices than the offering price. These practices, if proved, could be violations of securities laws that ban practices that compensate brokers unfairly and that inflate stock prices.
In fact, the Securities and Exchange Commission is reported to be investigating these practices, which were apparently widespread during the IPO boom. Their investigation reportedly involves whether the large commissions constitute "kickbacks" to the investment banks and whether the "tie in" arrangements with customers -- the promise to buy more shares in the aftermarket in exchange for receiving allocations of shares at the IPO price -- artificially inflated the stock's price. The SEC is concerned that these practices may have lured small investors into the IPO frenzy, leading to huge investment losses.
Failure to disclose
Other shareholder lawsuits center around misleading disclosures or failure to disclose material information in press releases, SEC filings, analysts' conferences and other corporate communications. Last November, for example, computer network-equipment maker 3Com agreed to pay $259 million to settle a shareholder lawsuit that alleged that 3Com hid derogatory information about the $7.3 billion acquisition of U.S. Robotics in 1997.
The 3Com lawsuit included shareholders who purchased 3Com between April 23, 1997, and Nov. 5, 1997. In the two months before the U.S. Robotics purchase in June 1997, 3Com's stock price more than doubled in price. During the same period, the lawsuit claims, insiders sold 4 million shares of 3Com stock, pocketing $200 million in profit.
In the Cisco cases, lawsuits are claiming the company depended on its rising stock price to finance its growth and engaged in inappropriate accounting practices that made the company's business look stronger than it was. At the same time, the suits say that insiders were able to sell millions of dollars of stock at inflated prices because the company failed to disclose growing problems.
Safe harbor is not exactly safe
Shareholder suits have been part of the landscape of corporate management since Congress passed the Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934, the foundations of modern securities law. They often don't produce big recoveries for shareholders, but, for a management team, it can be "like getting a kick in the butt," says David Rosenstein, director of external affairs at Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, which files easily the largest share of shareholder suits against companies.
In the early 1990s, technology companies in particular lobbied strongly to limit what they regarded as frivolous lawsuits. Congress responded with the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and overrode a veto by then-President Clinton. The act essentially did two things:
It protected executives from litigation if they made sales and earnings projections that were ultimately not met. That's why you now see companies including boilerplate text saying they can't guarantee earnings sales and profits.
It forced litigants to find investors who had big stakes in companies to sue. That way at least, the clients, not the lawyers, appeared to be directing the litigation.
The result, says Joseph Grundfest, a Stanford law professor and a former Securities and Exchange commissioner, was not a reduction in the number of lawsuits. In fact, more than 1,000 securities-related class-action lawsuits have been filed since 1995. Instead, the plaintiff's bar began to focus its efforts on proving deceptive or inappropriate accounting methods and insider trading. About 90% of complaints filed today focus on these questions, he says.
Participants in 401(k) plans can be vulnerable to huge losses if their company's stock tanks. Why? Many companies match employee contributions with company stock.
Fraudulent insider trading is especially tricky to prove with technology companies, Grundfest says, because so many tech companies use stock and options as compensation. If an executive is selling, when does that activity allow you to infer that the executive "acted with conscious intent to defraud?"
New twist: 401(k) plan shareholders
In a new twist on shareholder lawsuits, the Communications Workers of America joined a shareholder lawsuit against Lucent Technologies on behalf of its members in the company's 401(k) plan. It also asked its members to join in the lawsuit. The complaint charges Lucent with "the dissemination of materially false and misleading statements concerning, among other things, the company's deteriorating financial condition, the lack of demand for the company's products, its inability to control costs and maintain profit margins, and the effects these adverse undisclosed conditions would ultimately have on the company's operations, liquidity, and stock price."
These are fairly standard charges in shareholder lawsuits.
What makes the Lucent case unique is that a large number of members of the shareholder class in the suit are investors in Lucent's 401(k) plan. As fellow MSN MoneyCentral writer Ginger Applegarth recently pointed out in her article, "One way to reduce risk in your 401(k)," participants in 401(k) plans can be vulnerable to huge losses if their company's stock tanks. Why? Many companies match employee contributions with company stock. That part may be OK for both the employer and plan participant. The problem arises when a situation like Lucent occurs -- losing more than 80% of its stock value in 2000 alone. Most 401(k) plans put significant restrictions on the ability of participants to unload company stock. Usually, only events like termination of employment, reaching age 55 or retirement grant participants the right to sell the stock. Such limitations make 401(k) participants much more vulnerable to losses than shareholders in general.
The issue is the nightmare that critics of the practice have feared. A company's management is inherently in conflict with itself when it offers company stock as the match in a 401(k) plan, says Nell Minow, a longtime shareholder activist. "We may want employees to be motivated to produce and be loyal to companies, but, on the other hand, we do not want them to be overly dependent on the company's fortunes for their own retirement income security."
So, stay tuned. We may see more participation in lawsuits from 401(k) plan participants in the future.
Happy Posting! ----
Interesting news?.....
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.asp?Symbol=US:NVEI&Feed=BW&Date=20010509&...
Tell me how come SEVU can not do this? Bears here post truth? Got to love the Truth!
New Visual Entertainment Obtains Retraction Regarding Message Board Postings
May 09, 2001 09:04:00 AM ET
SAN DIEGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 9, 2001--New Visual Entertainment Inc. NVEI, a pioneer in the development of proprietary transmission technology, Wednesday announced it has reached an out-of-court settlement with one defendant in a lawsuit that it brought against several defendants who had posted information regarding New Visual on the Raging Bull message board.
The lawsuit alleged that various persons posted false, misleading and defamatory information about New Visual Entertainment and its business practices and management on the Internet.
John Howell, executive vice president of New Visual, stated, "It was important to us to set the record straight. While it is our policy not to comment on rumors or speculation, because of the widespread nature of defamatory statements that originated on the Raging Bull Web site, we felt that in this case a formal response was necessary. We hope that the settlement announced today will put the information available on Internet message boards regarding New Visual in their proper context."
New Visual Entertainment reached a settlement with one defendant, identified as "wbe," who stated, " `wbe' hereby fully and publicly retracts each and every one of its messages regarding New Visual Entertainment Inc. posted on the Raging Bull message board."
The settlement agreement contains additional provisions in which "wbe" further represented that it has not at any time purchased, offered to purchase, traded, sold or offered to sell New Visual stock, whether as a broker, agent or principal. "wbe" agrees to never again post messages on any public forum as "wbe" or any other pseudonym.
New Visual Entertainment has dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice against the other defendants. As a result, New Visual management maintains the option to re-open the lawsuit at any time should additional evidence surface regarding any of the defendants.
About New Visual Entertainment Inc.
New Visual Entertainment is pioneering the development of a proprietary broadband transmission technology with the mission to utilize existing copper telecommunications infrastructure to deliver high data content to the home or office at VDSL or fiber optic transfer rates. Through its New Wheel Technology Inc. subsidiary, New Visual Entertainment is developing this technology, which would allow the bundling of voice, video, and data over existing copper telephone wires, thus potentially eliminating the need for fiber optic cable to the home or office. Its initial development efforts include Very High Rate Digital Subscriber Line (VDSL), and have demonstrated results exceeding industry standards. New Visual Entertainment's common stock is traded on the Over-The-Counter Bulletin Board under the symbol NVEI.
© 2001 BusinessWire
Delete whatever..however
If it is such a NON event this 1st qtr 2001. How about some estimates?
Revenue?
Dillution?
Operating Expense?
TAfirehawk, It is a filing, The only time you get the truth from SEVU is in the filings. Well sometimes...
Im interested, Im sure the Short position as of late is very interested, We ALL know the SEC is interested.
Feel FRRE to post your position TAfirehawk.
Were is that proxy? Did it mail? When will it mail?
IMO
I dont like to see anyone run off...
All you guys shouting about me and my posts better understand first that I disagree with the Ban. But, I do agree there was a problem.
FG had taken over the board with his personal problem with Admin Bob, Way way to much info, Way waste of time, Been going on way way to long, FG operated the board outside of TOS to his liking, iHUB wants more posts, More action, FG deleted and squashed any bearish opinion, right wrong MO or FACT he would find ways to squash any form of information that did not conform to his investment in SEVU.
The truth is. iHUB needs F+G as much as they need me or any other poster. This board represents freedom, Freedom to give your opinion, As long as it is within TOS. Good Bad or indiferent. We need guys like F+G but we also need FAIR deletion and running of the board. F+G Needs to work with the system he helped create to end this.
SI sucks! Pay to post? Come on now that is weak. The new FG board is as dead as this one, FG talking to himself allot, Selling is wares.
IMO
Were is the Proxy!
It was clamined they mailed on 4-30, I know the post office, If they did mail on the date of 4-30 some local deleviries had to get done last week, By today, All of them should be delivered.
jmho
Per your post schoffer
"If you recall, McBride wrote such PR's in the past when he explained that he connected the SecureView to the computer and put it on the internet to watch his house from work over the internet."
The first place we should start is "McBride wrote such PR" enough said on that point. It is not mentioned on the website? if it can be done and if fairly simple why dont you or RLM post the method to connect secureview the the PC and or the WWW or include it on the website. Please post the hard ware and software manaufacturers and cost needed to make this work.
A McBride PR, you make it sound so simple.
IMO
Seaview Canada?
http://www.atlanticseaview.com/
Has SEVU ever broken down sales by product?
Does SEVU hold all of the licensing and uitilty patents for ALL of Seaview Marine like the secureview deal it made with RLM? Does RLM firm produce cameras for other vendors in addition to SEVU?
Hey!
DID SHAREHOLDERS GET THE PROXY! IT WAS MAILED ON 04-31, DELIVER TIME IS NOW.
HAS ANYONE SEEN THE PROXY!
IMO
I enjoy posting on ihub
SEVU makes for a solid bear posture, SEVU has made it easy for Shorters and now the MM's. The bashers are picking them apart.
I find it interesting that some here would actually BUY SEVU for the very first time if they just got the filings & News from last 3 months alone.
Products , yeah, there is some value, But How much? Maybe more value to SEVU investors to SELL company to the likes of intellon.
I want to view my Secure View on my computer!
I like the products to a point
is Secureview the product SEVU claims it is? Maybe not.
How come Abrahams could not do it with 10,000,000 in funding and SEVU with NONE thinks it can do better?
The marine & secureview products in there present form have a market but how big and ready a market? Not a rosy as SEVU makes it sound for sure.
It is easy to make telemarketing calls offering FREE product with great terms and guaranteed buy back contracts. NOT SO easy to manufacture, ship, service the products while wating net 120 or more for payments.
IMO of course
Check out this network camera system.
http://www.ceverything.com/index.asp
This is a great business system, you can use whatever cameras you want, versatile, functional, accessible. This is secureview if it had a some PC and WWW technology behind it.
PC based cameras are the wave of the future.
Again I will ask this question:
If you wanted to hook just one secureview to your PC what would it take to do it?
Video board. What COST. What model? Were can I get ONE.
Software? SEVU? Others license? What COST ? Were do I get it?
Would it have the versatilty that the other web based cameras have?
HOW & AT WHAT COST CAN THIS BE DONE?
This one questions can mean millions of dollars in revenue. Can secureview work on your PC and can it transmit over the WWW.
IMO
HOW DOES FIERO RELATE TO SEVU?
I SEE NO CONNECTION?
SEVU IS TO BLAME FOR .60 A SHARE MORE THAN ANY MM.
Same old Fiero Bros story that has NO relevence!
IMO
Black n White for ya all
http://www.investorshub.com/beta/read_msg.asp?message_id=94191
Per RLM:
http://www.investorshub.com/beta/read_msg.asp?message_id=93310
When is that 1st Qtr due out!? I hope its not as long and drawn out as the last filing.
Happy Posting! ----
(OT) iHUB is a way better board than SI will ever be. It has many traits that make it better than RB, Long and strong iHUB!
This could be the best thing ever for
SEVUhttp://www.intellon.com/
Any word on the application? How about a partnership....
Intellon is in Ocala. Private company.
Anyone else here of any connections?
MO
read it lashark
SECU Classic LOL! Dont get me started....
IMO
SecureView WILL NOT SHIP TILL JUNE?
Units will not ship until June? Per RLM Post on iHUB.
http://www.investorshub.com/beta/read_msg.asp?message_id=93310
"My E-mail this week dealt mainly with the SecureViewRS camera and specifically with production. This camera is being produced in Taiwan and the first shipment will be the end of May, with mass production for both cameras in June."
I belive the PR read over 120 days TO PRODUCE SMALL FIRST RUN.
Other posters on iHUB:
http://www.investorshub.com/beta/read_msg.asp?message_id=93842
Posted by: john45323
In reply to: Rich McBride who wrote msg# 8326 Date: 5/5/2001 2:22:39 PM (ET)
Post # of 8357
Rich: Production date???????
The last PR I remember said that the components for the
next production run would be available on May 7th.
Are you saying that the next production run will not
start untill June?????
WHEN WILL SEVU SHIP SECUREVIEW~! HOW MANY? HOW FAST? THE PR IS CONFUSING!
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=SEVU&read=32906
IMO