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.
Rio, according to the Court clerk, as of 10:07 a.m. EST, today, NO ORDER has been entered in the docket. Even as Cantor has been desperately trying to get the Judge to sign some kind of order yesterday, the truth is, there is nothing to support milchip's claim.
Viking65, I have no idea about any "submission to the Court". Do you? I thought the Court was clear and specific about the steps to be taken in the distribution/exchange process.
wallstone, I don't know. There was a time when I was TOSing some posts and they were removed. But later, I realized that Matt comes to this board and cleans out the garbage. In the last cleaning even some of my own posts were gone. But I don't complain, as long as it adds to a civil discussion. You can be sure that some posts will go. But if they don't, they will speak volumes about the poster. And Rio will never delete a single message that goes against me.
Art, yeah, I am calling the shots and I delete my own messages, right. Man, any excuse is good for you as long as you don't have to admit that you are incapable of posting without insulting or calling names. I don't even know why you still post here when you have the DD dictatorship board where difference of opinion is not allowed under penalty of expulsion. Thank God that board is not more than an insignificant speckle of tyranny in this wonderful America.
Art, this is a discussion board, where everybody is welcome to discuss anything related to our investment, and where difference of opinion is encouraged as long as it is done in a civil manner. If you all have left this board is because you do not tolerate any opinion that does not fit yours and you cannot discuss anything without attacking or insulting those who have a different opinion than yours. Of course, you are free to post or not to post. But this is a free and civil board, and will stay that way. It is a big relief not to have uncivil posters expressing offensive opinions.
No distribution, no registration, no news. What else is new?
After months of not hearing anything, you have planted a seed of hope in the hearts of shareholders. I honestly believed you will actually do something and place the power of decision in the hands of the shareholders. You say you called the attorney? Why would you call the attorney that have held shareholders hostage for months, and proved by his inaction that was not to be trusted? Even worse, you agreed to be part of another action by the same incompetent attorney. What power did he used to convince you to forget what you have promised shareholders who supported you, and become part of his play? And why didn't we hear an explanation of your sudden twist and turn from your own declared movement to force the demands of the Derivative Action? We trusted you with our investment and you decided to join those who have held us hostage for many months. Why?
"After calling the attorney who was leading the derivative suit, I was asked to serve as a plaintiff on a class action suit, apparently because of the fervor for which I communicated the needs of Loch Harris shareholders."
Did you call the attorney on your own or was told to do so? And why would someone that is so disappointed with an action that was going nowhere call the attorney that was to be blamed for the "no action"? Your explanation is not quite as "plain and simple" as you want to put it. If that would have been the case, you would have been the first to explain it to all the shareholders who placed their trust and hopes in you. You either had a "different agenda" before becoming a plaintiff, or after. But you certainly did have an agenda. What was it?
Bitbull, agree. Many should read and understand your post and stop blaming me for their misfortune or bad choices.
Raiderman,
What happened with the movement you started late last year to mobilize shareholders in order to take some kind of action in view of the failed Derivative Action that was taking us nowhere? You were very active in gathering support, you even created an e-mail address for shareholders to find out more about your plans. What happened there? Was capnmike again who cut your wings and made you abort the movement? You have never come out clean regarding your intentions and the reason you turn your back on the shareholders that supported you.
Raiderman,
"There IS a COURT ORDERED SETTLEMENT that will result in Loch shareholders receiving shares of CDEX."
That you don't know regardless of the best effort and intentions you have put into it. And even if that is true, in what will it change your situation as investor? There is still no products ready for market, there are still no contracts, there is still no registration, there is still a long way for CDEX to overcome all the hurdles and complications in a very competitive market where many other companies that were non existent or were not developing similar technology, are now already getting well established and their products are being well accepted.
There is no need to change my way of thinking. I am a nobody. But the truth that we all see and hear are confirming my fears.
Reasoning, logic and common sense are still on my side. The outcome is still very uncertain. Your optimism is based on pure hope. My "pessimism" is based on verifiable and incontrovertible facts of historic and chronological failures on all parties involved.
What would have been, what could have been and what should have been has given us today the Homeland Security Department of our government. What would have been, what could have been and what should have been are guiding us every day of our lives to learn of our past mistakes and strive to not repeat them again. Of course, you cannot change the past, but you learn much from it. Everything you are, know, have or hope for is strongly based on your experience acquired during many years in your life, and most decisions are based on past experiences. The more experience you acquire, the better position you are to take the right decision today.
We build today on the foundation we laid many years ago. The past cannot and should not be ignored lest we fall into the same mistakes we did.
But you and so many others are so tight up financially to this investment, that the past represents a very disturbing and even dangerous consideration. It is, of course, your choice, and yours alone. We must learn to live with the consequences of our actions or for that matter, inactions.
If and when you all have your CDEX shares in your accounts, if and when CDEX gets registered, if and when CDEX starts trading, if and when CDEX produces any marketable product, if and when CDEX nails one or several revenues producing contracts, if and when the PPS of CDEX will reach a level that will allow investors to recover their investment and even perhaps make some profit, I WILL BE THE FIRST ONE TO CONGRATULATE ALL OF YOU AND PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I WAS WRONG.
I still hope and pray for a good outcome, because I never had nor do I have any other interest.
JH, you are not doing a good job disguising your frustration, but, go on, throw it all on me, I can take it.
"You should have backed up your words in court in May."
Somehow I got the feeling you are still very disappointed for me not being there, as if you would have preferred the Settlement to be overturned. Rather than rejoicing for my absence, you keep bringing up the issue almost in an angry way. You know well that if I were there, I may have caused at least more delays if not a defeat of the Settlement.
I wonder what side of the fence you really stand on.
JH, I had a chance to speak my mind and so I did. Austin is irrelevant. I would have said in Austin the same thing I said in my letters and posts. Redundant.
But you are very wrong and arrogant in assuming that you speak for 99.9% of shareholders. Perhaps for the couple of dozens that post on the board, maybe. And you are very wrong if you assume that I say anything on this or any other boards to gain credibility. I couldn't care less if anyone believes what I say or not. I KNOW that I sleep in peace at night, and that I spend all of my days with that kind of peace that surpasses all understanding. I have learned years ago to live without the money I invested in Loch Harris, and my life goes on. Couldn't say the same about many posters that, despite all attempts, cannot disguise their uncertainty, fear and anxiety about this investment.
But one day you will learn that I never was nor am the enemy of your investment and will surely know who was and is your enemy.
JH, what do you want me to stop? Exposing the wicked and one sided Settlement Agreement? You are right, I will never stop, because that's the way I see it and no one so far can prove me I was wrong. You don't want to look back, fine. But the time will come when you will have to, in order to understand what has, what is, and what will be happening to your investment in Loch Harris.
Raiderman, thank you for your well written answer to my post and for your passion towards benefit of the shareholders.
However, I disagree with you in a few aspects.
1. Shareholders had a couple of very good chances to remove the BOD of Loch Harris in 2001, and both chances were opposed and destroyed by shareholders, one of them even a plaintiff of the Settlement. You surely remember the effort started by Robert Stewart to mobilize the shareholders and remove the BOD, even before the Asset Purchase Agreement was signed. His movement failed miserably with the timely intervention of capnmike. We never knew why, but the events that took place afterwards may show some reasons. I believe it would be a little naive to discard the intervention of Malcolm Philips behind Stewart's work, especially as I provided a clear and unequivocal proof of the very close relationship between them at that time. Was Stewart's movement Malcolm's idea? I believe it was. And many, many shareholders supported the movement. Why then did capnmike appeared in the play and destroyed it? Why so little time afterwards the Service Agreement was signed between Loch and Phillips? Why the Asset Purchase Agreement?
Mike never came clean about his intervention, which is suspicious enough as to not trust his work and intentions. Shareholders had a very good chance to take the company from the Boys and place a shareholder friendly BOD in their place. It never happened. Why? Either you know the answer and don't want to talk about it, or you don't know.
Why is it that the distribution was never included in either the Derivative Action and the Class Action demands?
Why is is that the shareholders meeting with the purpose of removing the Boys WAS included in the two actions and never followed through?
You say that the Settlement was the best deal you were able to negotiate with the Boys. Good for whom? We are two months after CDEX has been in existence for over two years, and there is no sign of registration, contrary to what Malcolm Philips has promised in his CEO statement.
Your assumption that any legal battle against the Boys would have delayed CDEX plan for years is false. The Legal action in no way were disturbing CDEX or Malcolm Philips. They were never in any danger of being dragged into the litigation, so they were safe and free to do with the technology what they wanted to. If they didn't so far, has nothing to do with the legal actions of Loch Harris and its shareholders. Malcolm Philips has miserably failed to honor (once again) his word. And that is the person you all are hoping to save your investment. In November last year I offered myself to Malcolm Philips to initiate a solid public campaign to promote the technology and its applications. He refused saying that as of January 2003, CDEX will start an aggressive campaign in the media. That never happened either.
I don't want to take away your merits for the effort you have put into the Settlement. But you either know more than the rest of us and refuse to say it, or you are also another victim of the manipulation and the scheme of the Boys, the attorneys and Malcolm Philips.
capnmike, it says "why didn't we do something when we had a chance to take things in our hands?" It says "why did we allow personal issues get in the way of our unity of purpose and interest?" It says "why did we chose to sit on our hands and allow others that have not gone through what we have, to decide the outcome of our investment?"
It says many more things but I don't want to cause more anguish and anxiety where there is enough of it already.
Crow3, it's not easy to be in the limbo. Not easy to silence that voice in the head saying "what if we were all had?". Silence is the worst enemy, but then it's an answer too.
princss, you can click on "Knobias Quote, News, & Profile" link on this board as a start.
Rio, Ms. Finke evidently did not read the Final Judgment, otherwise she would not have said that Loch was dissolved as of 8/15/2003.
"120. After the share exchange is completed, consistent with the Settlement Agreement the Court will address dissolution of Loch Harris upon submission by the parties."
The share exchange is not completed and Loch Harris has not yet submitted the dissolution request.
Loch Harris is still trading.
Building on a solid Foundation. WLDI is on the right track.
Aug. 18, 2003
Engineering and Design Leadership in Automated Passage Control.
Weapon Control Systems
Passage Control Systems
Asset Protection Systems Pedestrian Pedestrian Traffic Monitors
Passage Monitors
Pedestrian Counters
Digital Occupancy
"Tomorrow's Technology for Today's World"
HISTORY CHANNEL VIDEO SHOWS ISOTEC PRODUCT
A recent broadcast of the History Channel presentation:
"Modern Marvels - Security Systems" described the history of the development of security systems. The 50-minute videotape is available for purchase from the History Channel. Within the section of the video describing high technology security protection at Livermore Laboratories, an Isotec entrance portal is seen, showing an employee negotiating the access point and security devices to gain entry.
James Alexander, CEO of World Am Communications - the parent company of Isotec, on learning of the product's part in the History Channels Modern Marvels - Security Systems video, said, "It came as a pleasant surprise to realize that our product was featured in this high quality presentation by History Channel. We are also pleased to be recognized for our contribution to national security at the very important location mentioned in the video".
Copyright © 1999 - 2003 Isotec, Inc.
All Trademarks and Service Marks are the property of the company.
Isotec, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of World Am Communications, Inc.
www.world-am.com
(BW)(CO-WORLD-AM)(WLDI) World Am Communications, Inc. Subsidiary Receives $100,000 Plus Multi-Unit Order From Federal Agency
WESTMINSTER, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 18, 2003--World Am Communications, Inc. (OTCBB:WLDI) www.world-am.com, whose wholly owned subsidiary, Isotec, Inc., conceives, develops and markets state-of-the-art security systems, announced today that it has received a multiple unit order for Isotec www.isotecinc.com access control portals.
A U.S. Government Agency has ordered multiple Isotec custom access control portals to help secure its facilities. The access control portals ordered are intended to significantly reduce the possibility that unauthorized personnel will enter protected areas within the facilities. Isotec has installed similar systems for the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Federal Reserve, and the U.S. Air Force Nuclear Weapons storage facility.
"The amount of this order exceeds $100,000 and represents what we believe to be a trend for such systems in government & public buildings. The amount of quotations and requests for proposals indicate that some government entities are now making significant investments in security systems," said Mitchell Vince, Isotec CEO. "We are told these portals are part of a program to upgrade security at certain facilities. This multiple unit repeat order underscores this agency's confidence in our products."
Isotec is best known in the security industry for its "Transparent Security(TM)" systems, which it conceived and developed.
Transparent Security is a registered trademark of Isotec, Inc. All other company or product names are registered trademarks or trademarks of their respective owners.
Certain statements in this news release may contain forward-looking information within the meaning of Rule 175 under the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 3b-6 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and are subject to the safe harbor created by those rules. All statements, other than statements of fact, included in this release, including, without limitation, statements regarding potential future plans and objectives of the company, are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.
CONTACT: World Am Communications, Inc., Westminster, Colorado
Investor Relations, 303-452-0022
worldamir@netzero.com
Rio, you are misleading shareholders by stating that Friday was the last day of trading. You have nothing to support your statement, and for fairness, you should qualify it as your opinion only.
World Am Subsidiary, Isotec -- Establishes New Division
WESTMINSTER, Colo., Aug 14, 2003 (BUSINESS WIRE) --
World Am Communications, Inc. (OTCBB:WLDI) (www.world-am.com), whose wholly owned subsidiary, Isotec, Inc. (www.isotecinc.com), conceives, develops and markets state-of-the-art security systems, announced today that Isotec has established a new division to service its current and future commercial clients.
Isotec's CMD, Custom Manufacturing Division, will offer state-of-the-art design and manufacturing services to clients for their facilities utilizing customized Isotec products integrated with other security measures.
Isotec is also pleased to announce they have moved into their new fully operational manufacturing facility. The final phase of implementation of their new manufacturing software will begin within the next few days.
World Am is also pleased to announce the signing of Mitchell Vince to the position of CEO & President of Isotec Inc.
Jim Alexander, CEO of World AM says: "During the past 10 weeks, Mr. Vince has helped us tremendously. He and the Isotec team are transforming Isotec into a more complete manufacturing company that will enable us to quote on larger orders and expand into new markets in the very near future."
Mitchell Vince, 36, brings over 10 years of experience in helping small companies expand into new markets while controlling their internal costs and maximizing their return on investment. Mr. Vince attended the University of Kansas and has served as Sales Manager, Operations Manager and President of different manufacturing and distribution companies during the last 15 years. He brings to Isotec Inc. extensive knowledge, experience and contacts in the electronics industry, all branches of the U.S. Military, various government Departments including the FAA, GSA, Department of Commerce and USPS.
Isotec is best known in the security industry for its "Transparent Security(TM)" systems, which it conceived and developed
Transparent Security is a registered trademark of Isotec, Inc. All other company or product names are registered trademarks or trademarks of their respective owners.
Certain statements in this news release may contain forward-looking information within the meaning of Rule 175 under the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 3b-6 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and are subject to the safe harbor created by those rules. All statements, other than statements of fact, included in this release, including, without limitation, statements regarding potential future plans and objectives of the company, are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.
SOURCE: World Am Communications, Inc.
World Am Communications, Inc., Westminster, Colorado
Investor Relations, 303-452-0022
worldamir@netzero.com
BALDLEOO, nobody wants to post here because personal attacks, insults and name calling are not permitted. Other than that, this is quite a civil and informative discussion board.
Investors, call your brokers and make sure they did send out the Claim Forms to the Transfer Agent. Friday, August 15, at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time, is the dead line when the Transfer Agent must have in its possession the certificates and Claim Forms, in order to qualify for the exchange.
"All Loch share certificates not received by the Exchange Deadline (except for class members who opted out) shall be canceled and the rights and value associated with the canceled shares shall cease to
exist."
Bid .012 - Ask .030, volume almost a million.
Quite some healthy volume the last few trading days. I wonder how will Loch shares perform after almost 500M shares are taken out of circulation?
MrTGRich, thanks for posting the information. Seems like each broker will handle the exchange according to the Court instruction, with some minor variations. Hopefully 9 days from now it will all be settled.
Loch Harris is alive and well.
News:
(BSNS WIRE) World Am Communications, Inc. subsidiary, Isotec Installs First O
erseas Units
World Am Communications, Inc. subsidiary, Isotec Installs First Overseas Units
Business Editors/High-Tech Writers
WESTMINSTER, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 5, 2003--World Am
Communications, Inc. (OTCBB:WLDI) www.world-am.com, announced today
that its wholly owned subsidiary, Isotec, Inc., www.isotecinc.com
recently installed the first two portals of an order for nine access
control portals from an overseas dealer. In addition, three more
portals were recently shipped to the same dealer for delivery and
installation as part of the original order.
The order originally called for an initial production run of six
units that was increased to nine portals, five have been shipped to
date. It is planned that the remaining four units will be shipped and
installed before the end of this year. The dealer also recently
notified Isotec they would require at least one additional security
portal each month after the initial order has been filled.
Isotec is best known in the security industry for its "Transparent
Security(TM)" systems, which it conceived and developed. The security
measures are unobtrusive and non-threatening.
Transparent Security is a registered trademark of Isotec, Inc. All
other company or product names are registered trademarks or trademarks
of their respective owners.
Certain statements in this news release may contain
forward-looking information within the meaning of Rule 175 under the
Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 3b-6 under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, and are subject to the safe harbor created by those rules.
All statements, other than statements of fact, included in this
release, including, without limitation, statements regarding potential
future plans and objectives of the company, are forward-looking
statements that involve risks and uncertainties. There can be no
assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate and actual
results and future events could differ materially from those
anticipated in such statements.
CONTACT: World Am Communications, Inc., Westminster, Colorado
Investor Relations, 303-452-0022
worldamir@netzero.com
KEYWORD: COLORADO
INDUSTRY KEYWORD: TELECOMMUNICATIONS E-COMMERCE INTERNET SOFTWARE
HARDWARE MARKETING AGREEMENTS
SOURCE: World Am Communications, Inc.
Today's News On The Net - Business Wire's full file on the Internet
with Hyperlinks to your home page.
URL: http://www.businesswire.com
scarednomore, nobody will get the boot as long as there is mutual respect among all posters. There is no need to take any argument anywhere else, because there is no argument here, there is free exchange of opinions. But those who cannot express an opinion without every other post throwing in some insults and personal attacks, must be responsible enough and accept the consequences of their actions. This is a Loch/CDEX board and we discuss issues related to Loch/CDEX, not the personal life of posters. Benito Juarez said once: the respect to the other person's right is peace (el respeto al derecho ajeno es la paz). So, if we want peace, we are to respect the other person's right to express himself, even when we don't agree with his opinion or view.
Ignoring the past and failing to learn from it, is a sure way to repeat the same mistakes, over and over again.
This is and will continue to be a civil board as long as issues, both pro and con, are discussed in a civil way. At least that is what I understand from what Matt is saying.
INET6, we had a prototype of ELF demonstrated on the Capitol Hill lawn. Where is it now? We had a working EM-1, doing QA work in Taiwan. Where is it now? We had a FS3 tested and proven 100% reliable. Where is it now? Are you going to wait one year and then ask: we had a Safe Pill system a year ago, where is it now? We had promises and promises for over four years now. Where is the beef? For four years I hear that "we don't know what they know" and so, we decided to wait. Here we are years after, still waiting. We heard: 2001 is the year, then we heard 2002 is the year, then we heard 2003 is the year. Some already are saying that 2004 is the year. If someone dares to ask questions, is labeled a basher. Being a true long means looking for and finding all kinds of excuses for the lack of performance or for incompetency.
You are right, I don't know, and you don't know. And that is precisely where the problem resides. And those who know will continue to keep us in the dark, as they did for many years. Therefore:
INET6, my eight posts were as a continuation of the reply to trout Back, who was doing a good job in posting a lot of information regarding the Homeland Security. The eight posts were to encourage shareholders to ask questions regarding the status of the technology after years and years of testing and no marketable product. When other companies that 3 years ago were not even in the field, receive government grants and orders for their products, while CDEX is holding back a technology that apparently was tested and proven almost 4 years ago, someone should start asking some serious questions and demand serious answers. If people rile up against me for asking valid and reasonable questions, that is their problem. If they chose to continue living in ignorance, that is their problem. It is ridiculous that, after almost 4 years of proving the technology, we still have to ask ourselves whether or not CDEX has any marketable products. While posting on the RB boards, Malcolm Philips was very vocal about the enormous potential of the technology. Today we still get the same enormous potential answer from him.
INET6, now you are calling CDEX website information asinine? What next?
INET6, he did the job he was paid for to do, wrote a report and sent it to CDEX. Hardly a reason to sue him. Plus, I don't see anywhere he is bragging about anything.
Results of tests conducted on April 18, 2002:
The testing was conducted in ten segments or trials. The conduct of each trial and results are reported in the attached test procedure. In summary, tests of the EM-1 included fifty opportunities to detect targets containing explosives including a simulated (defused but containing explosives) VS50 antipersonnel mine. The system detected each explosive without failure. In addition, where the target contained no explosives, there were no false positives. Tests of the FSSS-1 included fifteen opportunities to detect explosives and five opportunities to detect a pistol, all contained in different pieces of common luggage or personal baggage (e.g., briefcase or backpack). The FSSS-1 detected the handgun each time and detected the explosives on fourteen of the fifteen opportunities. It was felt that the one miss was a result of problems with the test process and not failure of the technology to detect an explosives. However, in accordance with the test procedure, the failure was recorded without explanation. In addition, during the forty shots where the target contained no explosive (e.g., contained other items such as sausage, cheese, chocolate, and Listerine), the FSSS-1 recorded no false positives. As indicative of at least some of the explosive signatures in the CDEX database, the explosives used during the testing were TNT, C4, C1, RDX and SEMTEX.
Based on the testing, the IVT concludes that the EM-1 and FSSS-1 are capable of consistently detecting explosives with few, if any, false positives under the conditions tested. These findings are consistent with and in some instances more severe than test results associated with the EM-1 and FSSS-1 published on the CDEX Web Site (e.g., the integration time used in IVT testing was less than generally reported in previous testing and the range of explosives and materials tested was generally greater than previously reported). While not a part of the test procedure and not independently confirmed by the IVT, we observed a demonstration of a laboratory model chemical detection device using a UV energy source that detected various substances (e.g., explosives and drugs). From our testing of the EM-1 and FSSS-1 and the UV demonstration observed, if there is successful translation of the CDEX chemical detection technology into the field, it will have a substantial impact in a number of areas critical to the world community, including the wars against terrorism and illegal drugs. Attached to this final report is the completed test procedure used and information on each of the IVT members.
Letter of Dr. Salzman and Mr. Murray dated 16 April 2002
Mr. Timothy Shriver
Senior Vice President, Operations
CDEX, Inc.
4565 S. Palo Verde Road
Tucson, Arizona
Dear Mr. Shriver:
Thank you for inviting me and Mr. Jim Murray, of the Tucson Police Department, to observe a series of demonstrations of the capabilities of the Explosive Mobile 1 (EM-1) System and the Fixed Security Screening System (FSSS). While I am writing this Report to you based on my observations and conclusions, Mr. Murray has authorized me to state that this Report also reflects his own observations and conclusions. I am very impressed by the systems and their potential to significantly improve our national security as well as to disarm former mine fields. I will describe my observations below, but let me say at the outset that I observed a total of some seventeen trials, mostly consisting of five "shots" each and I observed 100% accuracy. That is, there were no false positives and there were no false negatives and each trial produced an unambiguous and definitive result.