M&A business
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.
I fully agree with you.
DECN as a fully reporting Company would get a different Kind of following (not in the Forums) in the markets.
Due to newer and stricter rules, those in Charge of Managing funds for third parties are not allowed any longer to invest in companies that are not up-to-date. I personally know from friends who are Portfolio Managers and advisors of small-caps, that they consider DECN a very intersting Play, but can do nothing, until and unless DECN is back reporting.
Having said that about stricter rules, then of course the same is valid for those putting their stamp under the financials. The new Auditor certainly cannot be blamed for what has been done wrong by the former accounting firm and this from my Point of view explains the delay. What is clear as well, a Management cannot put pressure on Auditors to move ahead in high Speed (those times are over) but then I guess, it won't take too Long anymore, as the new Audit firm is now on this for a rather lengthy time.
Having said all this, for those thinking that a Company in a period of not filing would have a free Agenda I must say: Nada, on the contrary the new rules are clear on what you can do and what not during such a period.
From what I know, there would be a totally new concept with a Pipeline of different products and of course a different Management, except a certain Person.
Money should not be a Problem from what I know but Money alone is not the solution. Based from my POV they are still in the Due-Dilligence process which involves legal questions but then as well questions with reference to the Balance sheet and the restructuring of the shares-structure.
For their benefit I have to say, that they are willing to spend rather a substantial amount of Money to at least get a hand on the outstanding Shares. This is rather a preventive move, nothing more.
The question is how they will finance the new-start up if and when a final decision is taken? It is not the Money I refer to it is through which vehicle. Further Dilution would not be the solution as they would punish themselves.
What has to be done: Once a decision is taken to go ahead, then First, get the Company back as reporting, then they will have to come out with the new Executive Summary covering all and answering all questions, restructure the balance-sheet (easy part) do a Reverse-Split of 50 to 1 (my take as an example) but then as well do the same with the authorized.
This would reduce the O/S to roughly 35 Mio shs. and the authorized to 60 Mio. The present cap. is $ 510.000.-- If they are willing to go ahead with the execution, I do not have a Problem to see a quick Revival that they could make 10 - 20 times (min) their Investment back, I mean we would be talking about a capitalisation of 5 to 10 Mio which certainly is not speculative.
If they go for it - and it is still a big if - then my take would be,that with the new pipeline of products and a totally different Kind of Profil, they could have the ways and means to become a strong Player in the market.
Until then, it is all speculation and if they put a stop on it, they will walk away with a lot of worthless Shares they have purchased and a write-off of maybe then 500.000 however in relation to their Money power not a big amount. I consider this adventure like entering a Marketing deal with a Team from the Football league. The first 2 years you throw Money out of the window, for testing: If you hit the Jackpot voila - if not, write it off and move on.
The culmination of possibilities in the causa J&J – DECN is in a way fascinating. Reading this it shows that it ain’t over until the fat lady sings. Reminds me of a statement in a closed forum from a “professional” who clearly was in opposition of the offers J&J made and finished his lecture by saying: If DECN plays the game right and is using all Jokers, the amount on the table would be closer to the 100 Mio figure than to a 10 Mio figure. Now this is rather a wide spread I would then say, but when reading this verdict of payments for compensatory damages and punitive damages who would have given a dime 1 year ago for C.P. to get that kind of rewards.
In the causa DECN – J&J will have another problem: It is not on DECN to proof how much they lost by being sued for patent infringement, it is the statistic (see further below) of the test strips market, that will do the proof for them. IF a market is closed for you, you cannot negotiate deals and if you cannot negotiate deals you cannot sell and if you cannot sell you have no revenues and worse, you cannot plan for the future which means, even if you win, you lost all those years from the time you were stopped from selling and the lost years due to not planning for the time after. I would call this: Missed opportunities covering 4 to 6 years.
But by suing DECN, J&J has send out signals, that if they would not have sued DECN, then DECN would have taken them away a rather nice market share and if it would not be so, why bother then to sue? I guess a judge will follow this logic as well. And what market share could then a judge award: 5 % - 10 % - 15 %? If J&J would then argue, that this is too much and try get away with 1 %, then the judge could be in a mood to ask: Why then all the costs, pain and bad publicity to sue a company for only taking a 1% share out of the market?
So the judge would be served with a statistic from the DECN lawyers that would show, that the Strip market generated revenues around 9 billion and LifeScan controls roughly 30 % of it and that this market is a fast growing market and if you are stripped from being part of it for at least a period of 2 years and stripped of planning for the future, the possible percentage of loss could be based on an estimated market share of 5 %. If Lifescan generates roughly $ 2.5 billion plus then a 5 % share would amount to $ 125 Mio. (Maybe after all the guy with the 100 Mio figure was not that far away)
The judge would then read as well: The Blood Glucose Device (SMBG) (Test Strips, Lancet, Meter) Market & Forecast - Worldwide research report says that by the end of 2013 there was 382 Million people suffering from diabetes and this figure is expect to rise further to 592 Million by 2035. Blood glucose monitoring devices market is very lucrative business with enormous future potential. Self-monitoring blood glucose market is primarily dependent on number of diabetic patients. So with the growth in diabetic patients blood glucose monitoring devices market is set to grow many folds. . According to GlobalData, the entire monitoring market will reach $12.2 billion by the year 2017. As a point of reference, in 2010, the test strips themselves accounted for close to 90% of the total market value. Therefore, over $11 billion will be up for grabs in 2017 on the sale of test strips alone.
Conclusion:
The judge would clearly understand, why J&J wanted to have DECN out of this lucrative market and would then present them a nice bill for compensatory damages and punitive damages. All in all, what a diamond of a company: On one hand they are moving ahead – see recent press-release with the execution of a new executive summary which will generate revenues and then with “hidden-reserves” from a settlement that will come one way or another.
The Theory I know - who would not - but then I did not say, that AAPT belongs into the category "the fittest" on the contrary. But what Darwin did not cover was the thinking of the Street: Opportunities for surival you find in those companies or organisations that are broken.
I bet my neck, that the buyers of all thoses Shares with their cost-average of maybe around the 3 Level are guaranteed making 200 % or 300 % return on their Investment. There are not many opportunities around in the world of the biggies to enjoy such a Performance.
If your prediction of "not surviving 2015" is true, then the buyers would not have done their homework. Could very well be, nobody is perfect or can Claim to be perfect. But if you never try - you never find out.
A patent infringement case would be possible. It has happened in many cases, when companies were taken over by another company, and in their portfolio they carried a patent or patents. The former company never paid attention if their patent was infringed however the new owner did and sued those who infringed it.
As Life Scan was not the owner of those patents and the owner of the patents sold it to DECN and now DECN could prove, that in the years back, LifeScan infringed those patents, DECN could sue them.
As a matter of fact, it happens more often than one thinks and there are law firms out there searching for such patents to be acquired and then going after infringers. Keep in mind, such a process is not cheap and time consuming and for this reason, small companies do not even think about starting such a legal process.
DECN on the other hand is battle-proven, has an excellent law-team around them and I guess could be backed by some litigations funds.
It is a very hot game indeed, but it could catapult DECN to the front-pages if such a thing would start.
Nobody is pumping here as I can see on the contrary, they are inviting the sellers with visible open bids on a daily Basis but rather interested on falling Prices as visa-versa. Have never seen in my life somebody pumping it's entry ticket up. After having been filled with almost 720 Mio shs since the start of 2015 they are still inviting sellers to get out, maybe not at 4 or 3 but certainly now at 2 and so to satisfy their demand.
Frankly, as AAPT was considered a worthless entitiy, the sellers should be thankful to those buyers for getting something which is valued nothing. Could it be, that there is a charity trust being build to help everybody clean his Portfolio?
The question is, when do they give up: 720 Mio shs would present roughly 40 % of the estimated outstanding if and when promissory notes would have been converted. And once they are satisfied, what will they be doing with AAPT?
Questions after questions which as a matter of fact should be answered by you, as you must be Close to the Management and you must know them personally, compared to me, who never meet nor spoke to them. So from being far a way of the Picture I can only speculate that even a Charity Trust wants to earn a return on it's Investment and therefore I would guess,that AAPT "the Name" is by no means dead - but then as we know from other companies with a past of being worthless, it is the future that Counts. Living too Long in the past is missing the present and the future. Darwins Theory may have something; From time to time the weak ones survive and not the ones as looking as the fittest. . (The Dino's could confirm that)
An interesting observation from 2 other boards about the subject:
How much of the shares are possibly in control of some bigger Players?
Total of reported in recent filings: 6.1 Mio
Then one comment states: He knows more than 12 people isolated and not as group who control between $ 150.000 and $ 250.000 in DECN shares.
If we take an average this would amount up to 12 Mio shs.
Then another one in an U.K. forum writes that in his circle they are in control of even more shares. If so, we would have 6 Mio plus 12 Mio and 12 Mio and this would give a figure of 30 Mio shs plus or 66 % of the known O/S
One even writes, that those shares are held by professionals who finance(d) their purchases with proceeds from Options-Strategies playing the J&J stock. Means: Writing naked puts and naked calls and cashing in the high premiums.
I will try to go into this, to see, if there is some possible truth to all.
I for may part have no problem to believe them. What would be their benefit by playing figures if it would be otherwise.
1.) What is true, the options premiums in trading J&J shares are very attractive for professional writers. Comes to it, that J&J for the last 3 years was a options-traders paradise. The return on such collar strategies for the last 3 years where 38 % per year. Based on this, a simple margin of $ 500.000 up to $ 1 Mio would have returned $ 190.000 up to $ 380.000. So if this people are playing this market and in this case J&J and channelling the proceeds or part of the proceeds into DECN, then actually what the writer wrote sounds more than plausible.
2.) It is a known fact, that a lot of volume in the Penny-Stock market comes from such kind of sources
3.) Does the traded volume in DECN support this kind of statement done on 2 other boards.
You bet it does: The 3 months average volume of the last 3 months was 5.8 Mio shares and for 12 months 22.6 Mio shs. This shows, clearly that DECN is controlled by some bigger hands and has nothing to do with the small retail client. And if one is looking at the WEEKLY Accumulation/Distribution indicator, it is more than confirmed. The biggies have enough liquidity to average down and following the dilution part and they can do it by acting in a very disciplined manner, which can be seen on Level 2 and even better on level 3. The small retailer mostly gives up and sticks with the position or if frustrated is leaving the party, while the bigger ones simply follow the market down and with it their average. Of course, this kind of strategy is only employed if those doing it, see the value now and in the future.
Last but not least: The present capitalisation may be at discount versus the amount which was offered by J&J but refused by DECN. One does not have to be smart to understand, that this rejected offer will not run away on the contrary, the chances to get more out of it are rather substantial, otherwise – and this is my guess – some large shareholders would not have given signals to the management not to go for it.
And finally here a weekly chart which again shows, that there is certain kind of discipline and one get’s the feeling that some of the biggies are in perfect control of the pattern. Is it of any help short-ter? Certainly no. But I prefer to share the bed with some smarties and if they feel well being in the stock and even accumulate more, then I have no problem, not to stay with them.
One never knows - until one finds out; one way or another.
I agree with you. There was a time, they better would not have communicated and those who are "trying" to turn the Company around or better said: Having plans to create a new AAPT will certainly have given them a "muzzle".
My take is that the buyer(s) are not throwing Dollars out of the window for nothing. Up to know, I guess they spend already $ 300.000 by buying up those Shares. But this means as well, that they intend to stay public, why else would you buy Shares?
What is missing is of course the Company being back filing so at least those Status would be activated and then I would guess, more News could come Forward.
In a closed Forum in UK a guy who pretends to be an ex Janssen (from his comments covering the Pharma-Sector it sounds credible) talked about a settlemend offer figure which was clearly higher than the present capitalisation.
Whatever the range then would be is open to debate and why he would know this of course as well. But one Thing I learned in life: there are no secrets within corporation channels which would not find a way outside of the room. But then the same guy wrote, that some big shareholders gave word (Support) to the Company not to accept the offer and they would back them. Well, this Statement I would Support, as a Management usually cannot ignore the voice from large shareholders.
If so; then those shareholders who have a certain Portion invested in the Company may be of the belief, that over time DECN could get much more Money out of a Settlement on one Hand and on the other Hand must see a big potential ahead for DECN if and when the execution of their plans starts.
I would then say, that this part of the press-release may present what they could have in mind.
The company, more importantly, is announcing that the preparation for an expected explosion of product demand following legal victory has already begun. Solicitations for interview and quotation have been circulated to various internationally certified and FDA approved manufacturers for the contract manufacture of GenStrip™ 50. The time frame for tooling creation, first article part delivery and full product production is expected to fall within a five to seven month timeframe, following the final selection of an international contract manufacturer. Concurrent to the fulfillment of supplemental GenStrip™ 50 manufacturing, that selected manufacturer will simultaneously be charged with the completion of a new product that has been under internal development for nearly a year. Several of these manufacturing candidates are currently manufacturing second generation, FDA cleared, embryonic versions of the company's (3rd generation) product concept.
Well, if you believe so, you are in for a heavy disappointment.
There is no inside deal going on, because a non-reporting Company cannot issue Shares and then get cleared. No Broker would do this anylonger.
My guess: Part of the Shares came from promissory notes conversions that were already part when AAPT was en current with their filings, so such a conversion of course could be cleared and would reduce debt then.
The rest is certainly coming from some who bought outright in the market at all Prices and are happy to get some Money for it and the rest may come from old Reg-S deals who take the loss and are happy as well to be out.
The buyer(s) at the end must be proud to control the whole float. Once they have achieved that and AAPT is back with the filings, the dust will settle.
Well Shasta can admit and settle what they want with reference to those patents, we are talking about patent 7.250,105
Major Claims in J&J Lifescan Patent 7,250,105 Ruled "Unpatentable" by Three Judge USPTO Panel
On August 6, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board has sustained, in a final ruling, the company's challenge to Johnson & Johnson Lifescan's Patent 7,250,105, specifically "claims 1-3 ... for obviousness, ... by a preponderance of the evidence." These three claims are used by J&J Lifescan as the foundation of their patent infringement lawsuit against DECN and Pharma Tech. The USPTO Judge Panel has ruled these claims as "unpatentable."
The August 6, 2014 ruling marks the third ruling by a higher court on this same J&J Lifescan Patent. Previously in August 2013, in a preliminary ruling, the same USPTO three judge panel determined "that Pharmatech has demonstrated that there is a reasonable likelihood of its proving the unpatentability of claims 1-3 of the '105 patent by a preponderance of the evidence.' In November 2013 the Federal Circuit Court, reversed an earlier ruling made in late March 2013 by a District Court judge in Northern California, and ruled that the J&J Lifescan patent rights (under patent 7,250,105) were subject to the doctrine of patent exhaustion.
And here even something from the Intellctual Property Magazine, that refers as well to Patent Nr. 7,250,105 and nothing else.
http://www.sughrue.com/files/Publication/e2102668-3eea-4779-a633-7f1e6fb30230/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/8c039f86-839c-40f0-a1ef-80c0f7be1b16/90003000SuanPanMay2014.pdf
It is recommended to read the whole article.
And here what Patent 7.250.105 is all about
(USP 7,250,105) 1. A method of measuring the concentration of a
substance in a sample liquid comprising the steps of:
providing a measuring device[,] said device comprising:
• a first working sensor part for generating charge carriers in
proportion to the concentration of said substance in the sample
liquid;
• a second working sensor part downstream from said first working
sensor part also for generating charge carriers in proportion to
the concentration of said substance in the sample liquid wherein
said first and second working sensor parts are arranged such
that, in the absence of an error condition, the quantity of said
charge carriers generated by said first working sensor [ ] part
[is] substantially identical to the quantity of said charge carriers
generated by said second working sensor part; and
• a reference sensor part upstream from said first and second
working sensor parts which reference sensor part is a common
reference for both the first and second working sensor parts, said
reference sensor part and said first and second working sensor
parts being arranged such that the sample liquid is constrained
to flow substantially unidirectionally across said reference sensor
part and said first and second working sensor parts; wherein said
first and second working sensor parts and said reference sensor
part are provided on a disposable test strip;
• applying the sample liquid to said measuring device;
• measuring an electric current at each working sensor part
proportional to the concentration of said substance in the sample
liquid;
• comparing the electric current from each of the working sensor
parts to establish a difference parameter; and
• giving an indication of an error if said difference parameter is
greater than a predetermined threshold.
I do not know what all this second guessing should be and why somebody can come up with the word toxic. (If preferred Shares are considered toxic, then 85 % of all NYSE companies have a toxic share-structure. The wording preferred has a clear meaning and certainly nothing to do with the word toxic) But be it as it may. All well explained in the filings and all this by the way is an integrated part of the known O/S (based on the recent filings with reference to increased Holdings from Inst. Investors.
From the 9/30/2013 DECN Form 10-Q filing....
During September 2013, the Company initiated a unit offering memorandum to sell shares of its $0.001 par value common stock to private accredited investors. The unit offering offers two (2) shares of common stock and one (1) warrant convertible on a 1:1 basis, warrants into into shares of $0.001 par value commons stock. As of September 30,2013, the Company had subscriptions receivable totaling $1,900,551 of which $1,539,301 was receivable for 2,798,728 units pursuant to the offering memorandum. Cash totaling $1,539,301 was received from the subscribing shareholders during October 2013.
And last but not least but out of Fairness. DECN as a matter of fact got a fantastic Price for their subscriptions:
The price for DECN in September 2013 was: $ 0.2 and 0.9. So the monthly average as a matter of fact was $ 0.55 (See Chart) and this is as well the price paid by the subscribers.
For those playing the discount fiddle, I would respond, the subscribers paid a premium of 175 % versus the low price of $ .20 against the bashers theory that they got a discount of 50 % from the high of $ .90.
But there is neither nor, as a matter of fact, they paid exactly the monthly average price. Everybody knowing who to handle a calculator could have found this out by calculating the ratios based on the filings as of September 30.2013.
And another point: When they opened for subscription it was certainly not September the 30th when the stock was paid at the high of $ .90 but they rather started the subscription around before middle of September and therefore fixed an excellent price for the company and as well for the shareholders as the discount reporach is a laughable as would be, if somebody would say, they paid a huge premium.
Conclusion: The $ 0.55 level was fair value for all. For the company and for the subscribers and for the rest of the shareholders, as it reflects exactly the middle average of the monthly price of September. And a final word: Every “expert
“ would actually know, that so-called subscription prices are based on a monthly average and voila, we return again to the $ .55 Price.
Would they have done it, just 1 month before, their average Price would have been roughly 0.25 instead of $ 0.55.
I know, you did not have in mind to Support the DECN bulls, but actually you just did it. Those filings confirm rather a lot and I am happy to present it.
But before starting: YOU WRITE:
I don’t believe Frenkel was issued preferred, instead I believe he was issued a “special deal” to receive two DECN shares for each paid share and possibly 3 for 1 if you include the warrant.
My reply to this: What kind of Due-Dilligence is this? Imagine a lawyer in court would say: Well I believe he did it but of course cannot prove it; I guess the judge would ask him to be seated and silenced.
But let me now go down to the facts of your supposed discount deal of 50 % to 60 % based on the filings as of Sept.30.2013.
The price for DECN in September 2013 was: $ 0.2 and 0.9. So the monthly average as a matter of fact was $ 0.55 (See Chart) and this is as well the price paid by the subscribers.
For those playing the discount fiddle, I would respond, the subscribers paid a premium of 175 % versus the low price of $ .20 against the bashers theory that they got a discount of 50 % from the high of $ .90.
But there is neither nor, as a matter of fact, they paid exactly the monthly average price. Everybody knowing who to handle a calculator could have found this out by calculating the ratios based on the filings as of September 30.2013.
And another point: When they opened for subscription it was certainly not September the 30th when the stock was paid at the high of $ .90 but they rather started the subscription around before middle of September and therefore fixed an excellent price for the company and as well for the shareholders as the discount reporach is a laughable as would be, if somebody would say, they paid a huge premium.
Conclusion: The $ 0.55 level was fair value for all. For the company and for the subscribers and for the rest of the shareholders, as it reflects exactly the middle average of the monthly price of September. And a final word: Every “expert
“ would actually know, that so-called subscription prices are based on a monthly average and voila, we return again to the $ .55 Price.
A speculator is a Person who observes the future, and a acts before it occurs. From this Point of view it is wise to look ahead, but difficult to look further than one can see and presently we see only the volume and the traded size.
So the question in the room: Who is buying all the float up and why?
One Thing, however should be clear. The buyer(s) is not an art collector interested in worthless certificates so there must be more to it. Show me the filings and I guess from there one the curtain would be lifted.
What is going on is very obvious. The whole float is being bought out. Since start 2015 roughly 550 Mio shs.
The only question being asked is, when will AAPT "partly" fullfill what has been said here?
But then I would like to add something: The Management certainly should not include Barry Schwartz. There should be brand-new People taking Charge with a strong Executive Summary and thougher control mechanism. But from my Point of view they could use Lisa Bershan for contacts to retailers.
And finally: To start new: The financials should be out then as well.
If this happens; the stock will have it's days and those buyers may certainly be Aware of this.
October 30, 2014
All American Pet Company, Inc. announces new officer appointments.
LOS ANGELES, CA--(Marketwire – October 30, 2014) - All American Pet Company, Inc. (OTCBB: AAPT) All American Pet Company, Inc. announced today that it has appointed former President, Lisa Bershan as Chief Executive Officer, effective immediately. This appointment follows the transition of Barry Schwartz as the company's Chief Executive Officer to the new position of Chief Operating Officer with production responsibility for all brand and product lines. The company is securing financing to move forward with its business objectives. An executive search is under way for a Chief Financial Officer and it will complete its outstanding SEC filings shortly.
Well Shasta can admit what they want with reference to those patents, we are talking about patent 7.250,105
Major Claims in J&J Lifescan Patent 7,250,105 Ruled "Unpatentable" by Three Judge USPTO Panel
On August 6, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board has sustained, in a final ruling, the company's challenge to Johnson & Johnson Lifescan's Patent 7,250,105, specifically "claims 1-3 ... for obviousness, ... by a preponderance of the evidence." These three claims are used by J&J Lifescan as the foundation of their patent infringement lawsuit against DECN and Pharma Tech. The USPTO Judge Panel has ruled these claims as "unpatentable."
The August 6, 2014 ruling marks the third ruling by a higher court on this same J&J Lifescan Patent. Previously in August 2013, in a preliminary ruling, the same USPTO three judge panel determined "that Pharmatech has demonstrated that there is a reasonable likelihood of its proving the unpatentability of claims 1-3 of the '105 patent by a preponderance of the evidence.' In November 2013 the Federal Circuit Court, reversed an earlier ruling made in late March 2013 by a District Court judge in Northern California, and ruled that the J&J Lifescan patent rights (under patent 7,250,105) were subject to the doctrine of patent exhaustion.
And here even something from the Intellctual Property Magazine, that refers as well to Patent Nr. 7,250,105 and nothing else.
http://www.sughrue.com/files/Publication/e2102668-3eea-4779-a633-7f1e6fb30230/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/8c039f86-839c-40f0-a1ef-80c0f7be1b16/90003000SuanPanMay2014.pdf
It is recommended to read the whole article.
And here what Patent 7.250.105 is all about
(USP 7,250,105) 1. A method of measuring the concentration of a
substance in a sample liquid comprising the steps of:
providing a measuring device[,] said device comprising:
• a first working sensor part for generating charge carriers in
proportion to the concentration of said substance in the sample
liquid;
• a second working sensor part downstream from said first working
sensor part also for generating charge carriers in proportion to
the concentration of said substance in the sample liquid wherein
said first and second working sensor parts are arranged such
that, in the absence of an error condition, the quantity of said
charge carriers generated by said first working sensor [ ] part
[is] substantially identical to the quantity of said charge carriers
generated by said second working sensor part; and
• a reference sensor part upstream from said first and second
working sensor parts which reference sensor part is a common
reference for both the first and second working sensor parts, said
reference sensor part and said first and second working sensor
parts being arranged such that the sample liquid is constrained
to flow substantially unidirectionally across said reference sensor
part and said first and second working sensor parts; wherein said
first and second working sensor parts and said reference sensor
part are provided on a disposable test strip;
• applying the sample liquid to said measuring device;
• measuring an electric current at each working sensor part
proportional to the concentration of said substance in the sample
liquid;
• comparing the electric current from each of the working sensor
parts to establish a difference parameter; and
• giving an indication of an error if said difference parameter is
greater than a predetermined threshold.
This is very old News , they are Long gone.
I am interested in the future not in the past.
During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company issued 1,250 shares of our preferred series “C” stock to our patent attorney
for prepaid patent defense legal fees valued at $1,250,000.
Preferred series "C" stock, $0.001 par value, 10,000 shares
authorized, 2,735 shares issued and outstanding as of September 30,
2013 and 1,250 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31,
2012, respectively
Sometimes being far away allows a closer look at what happened yesterday.
As a matter of fact, the expected.
We have 4 Defendants and the weakest one of course was Shasta Technologies.
On April 16, 2014, DECN announced that Pharma Tech Solutions acquired Genstrip from Shasta Technologies.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/decision-diagnostics-subsidiary-acquires-genstrip-131500757.html
From this day on of course, Shasta was by it’s own. With no money to pay legal expenses I would guess that they took with both hands what has been offered to them so as to close this chapter.
However from now on, J&J or Lifescan will have to deal only with DECN and this is the place where the biggest damage was done.
It is not over, rather the beginning of the poker play. Wondering what is next to be heard.
Smart: - increasing the Position in DECN. Bravo
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=65514535
Based on this we know then that DECN has roughly 45 Mio shs O/S
Wasn't wrong with my assumption when I based my calculations on the Basis of the O/S being higher than 40 Mio.
But this means more to all "pros" of DECN. Those behind did their Due Dilligence and this is what Counts. Both parts control roughly 13.6 %
The rest will take care of itself shortly
Health is the most precious commodity. Keep up and fight with my best wishes.
It is actually higher: As per last filings
Common stock, $0.00001 par value, 4,900,000,000 shares authorized. 4,123,525,556 and 4,692,470,000 outstanding
The authorized is 4.9 Billion and outstanding 4.1 Billion.
What do we make out of DECN?
On one hand we have a hard-core group involved with the company for years, then we have some who entered late 2012 (like my part) and we have some who tried to get some bucks out of the swings that where expected to come based on rumours or based on court decisions. Swings we got but of course not the expected big upswing after the first big boom, but the slow downtrend interrupted from time to time from smaller reactions.
But then why is one in DECN? Because of their business or because one sees inner value due to the litigation case? From my point of view it is the latter part that attracted me and then of course as well the speculation that it won’t take years to clear the table and therefore DECN would then be a cash-rich company ready to execute their business plan.
Has anything changed. As far as I can see no. Do we have to lower expectations when it comes to Dollars being paid and accepted. Maybe – maybe not. But what is then actually built into the price:
If I guess that DECN has approx.. 40 Mio shs outstanding then the capitalisation is $ 8 Mio.
Is this a too speculative figure for some to imagine, that such an amount could be forwarded? If so, then I would guess the whole case is not understood.
J&J is in a very weak position and the know this. Apart from a ruling from the district court in favour of J&J, the Federal Circuit reversed this decision quickly, using guidance set forth in Quanta. And then we have the very clear wording of the USTPO rulings. One can hate the company and even ridicule the company, but one cannot deny, that DECN is in an excellent position and as a matter of fact one could say: The doctrine of J&J to stop the enemy at the gate, ended in a terrible defeat and opened the gate very wide. Comes to it, that J&J’s strategy to have their case heard failed as well when it came to light, that they presented a “notorious fake-witness” . So not only they were brought down by the law but gathered additional damage through their fake expert.
The compensation game of course is another story then but even if one would say: let’s walk away with the 12.5 Mio bond and forget the whole case, nobody could come and say, that this amount is too high and being so, then we can certainly attach a value on DECN. If the compensation would be that low, it still would add $ 0.30 cash to the stock and with this cash I would guess the market would not have any problem to pay $ 0.60 per share. I have seen turn-key situations in Europe and USA were part of the amount being paid was used by the companies to repurchase shares in the market and the rest was used to expand the business. I would guess, DECN would implement the same strategy here if the compensation is in surplus of the needs.
Being down at 0.20 is a fact and actually does not surprise me any longer. We are in the stage on non-reporting which of course keeps away some buyers, then there is not much out there newcomers could orient on and so we entered the frustration cycle, were people give up and go elsewhere (which happens every day in the market) and others convinced that the invested dollars will give a nice return, stay or even accumulate in a very orderly manner.
Then something as well to think about. There are institutions holding DECN and they even filed and everybody can find them under Edgar. But this is not of interest to me. Of more interest are those off-shore portfolio managers who hold shares below the reporting obligation and I would say, that together with those who filed and the latter group they could be in control of close to 70 % of the company. In Wealth-Management you have accounts they are operated like a basket. If you have a litigation basked you put in there 25 companies with the same amount-allocation and if you have a bio-tech basked you do the same and if only 5 of those companies succeed you outperform. It is like in the Junk-Bond market. The returns are extremely high if and when successful and as we all know, the upside is unlimited whereas the loss limits itself.
It is within that group that somebody could put pressure on a company for higher compensation, although I am personally against such kind of strategy.
Conclusion: The present stock price has build in a compensation of way below $ 8 Mio. So from this point of view, everything higher than this will of course end up in a higher price. Comes to it, that no premium is build in for future business.
And, not to be forgotten: Once DECN is up to date with their filings I would guess, that then as well some on-shore portfolio managers will look at the stock.
It always depends what you understand under "failure" and judges can make a difference between public opionion and law. Thanks god.
In the meantime I have seen, the bid side was present in size even on this cold Friday session. Seems to me, the buyers are not yet satisfied with their core-position. But the year is still Young.
There has been talk about a possible shareholder derivative suit.
From my personal point of view, a shareholder derivative suit would not bring anything in this case. I mean, when J&J sued DECN for patent infringement, we knew that this will cause harm to the corporation. And it caused harm. DECN as a matter of fact could not feel free to execute their business on all fronts despite the USTPO rulings and besides not being in a position of doing the business they had in mind they had their costs.
And we know, closing business with retailers or closing business with those interested in private label deals want to sign a contract with a company that does not have a Damocles sword behind their neck.
Now, what would then be the argument of the shareholder or the shareholders group starting a shareholder derivative suit. Arguing, that DECN did not act against the party (J&J) that allegedly caused harm to the corporation? Of course DECN acted and this is what is going on now for 2 years.
So with what kind of arguments those shareholders would satisfy the various requirements to prove that they have a valid Standing? That DECN should be squeezing a higher amount from J&J? This would be laughable.
In short: DECN has taken all measures against the “wrongdoers” J&J and for this reason, there is no new Argument to Support such a derivative suit.
And last but not least: It is costly, time consuming and for what: To get at the end all eggs over the face?
My advise: Settle and go back to business.
You want to say, you saved some Dogs from leaving this earth early?
But then why at that time in Charge you were full of praise for the product.
You Need a Quote: “I believe that AAPT has developed quality products, and I believe that the company might be successful in the future, and I do not believe that that success would be possible with the current set of officers/directors.
Sound different, doesn't it.
Actually E.Grushkin should be thankful for AAPT. Because of all he learned there he can now use as experience to build up his small company. And of course why should he be afraid of AAPT as competitor, the market I would say is so big, that everybody finds a niche in there. And what has he all learned by AAPT.
- Issuing statements about the products, the customers and how well all goes
- Being in constant contact with shareholders
- Being in charge for preparing all important documents that would then be of importance of the filings
- Learning how to play Machiavelli – means telling some shareholders some good things that would lift the stock and telling some friends some insider information what later on would hit the stock.
All this he can now use in the private industry. Although not a public company, one can find ways and means to manipulate the public, being this by writing comments about the products and so and more. And besides that finding time to entertain AAPT followers . Being an animal lover and former controller of a pet company, what is then closer as to choose the name of a dog breed.
But all this of course, does not explain who is buying all those Shares and why. And we all know, nothing can make People more crazy than watching something and not knowing what is going on.
Did it already. Fantastic: Hotel, Restaurants and Agricultural Property. At least this Company has something as a hedge against Money-printing. Must be smart People.
But have not seen on their list that they are as well involved in the Pet-Industry. Chickens maybe yes because you can roast them and then serve them in the Restaurants.
Dream on with JRB and I am wondering who put you this "baer" on your nose.
Well it always depends what you understand under
" winning prestigious industry awards "
Such Awards are given away by all Kind of organisations and online publications. Nothing new about this. Being this in Europe or the USA.
It is a deep-pocket Business. Please Show me the Background of the so-called Pet-Product Industry News Organisation. And don,t mix it with Pet Product News. This I already can say, although I only hold horses.
You said it not me.
I quoted a text from E.G. Webside and you replied to it as follows:
Pitt Bully Tuesday, 02/03/15 04:32:22 PM
Re: Leirum post# 79196
Post # of 79259
you only read fluff from scams
The stock will have to do some work to repair the damage it has done, but important Levels and I talk here about closing Levels are 21.5 and 26.5.
From my POV - the stock is actually building a Formation which is more bullish than People can think but let the pattern work itself in an orderly manner. No Spikes and Hypes and the stock will be at the early start of a perfect Long-Lasting bull run based on my understanding.
The fundamentals may confirm it later on I would guess. And as always, if all pieces fit, the big Boys will be back at a certain day.
If you call this worthless:
The sellers cashed in up to now roughly $ 160.000 and therefore the buyers invested as well $ 160.000
So for the seller it was not worthless and for the buyer it seems to me, it is not worthless either.
At least this is what I see from my humble POV.
You write:
Mr. Grushkin will not accept a mutual release
I am very keen to see a letter supporting this. If so, then it is obvious that the lawyer from E.G. informed the court about this.
Thanks for forwarding it.
From a neutral Corner I would say: The bid is interested in the size of the supply and as Long the Float presents himself in size over the ask, why would they chase? Accumulation can take a Long way this we know from other cases. Once the supply is depleted then we will see, if they would lift the bid.
The question is, what is the Overall Float. We have a certain figure at Hand and then we add to it those Shares from the promissiory CV and so we can start to speculate: 750 Mio up 1 Billion?
Money-wise Peanuts as we are talking about $ 300.000 - $ 500.000