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.
Are you basing this statement on any facts?? Or are you just stating what you would do? Lol
"That doesn't count what Vinnie and his close relation is dribbling out to gullible weeders."
Nah, maybe they are just maturing as a company.
Of course!!! No matter what it's still a fraud, BJ, PB&J, with rainbow sprinkles in top. What a farce!
Read your own posts. Direct Reimbursements!
"The Company utilizes Kind Clinics, LLC, a related party, and 100% owned by an
officer of the Company for marketing services. During the period ended March
31, 2013, the Company incurred $123,613 in direct reimbursement payments to
third parties on behalf of the Company."
Fair enough. It is business and it does happen unfortunately. It appears they found out sooner rather than later which will hopefully lend itself to a swift resolution.
Again, clarified in the footnotes. Pretty simple actually.
Nothing in the terms of that agreement implies a "death spiral deal with MedVend".
Great! More "death spiral" predictions. Hey, how'd the missing $1.04m accusation turn out?
This board is fun!
Not quite. Companies rely on warranties within the document for cover in these situations. The majority shareholders of MedVend warranted that they had minority shareholder approval within the first few paragraphs of the purchase agreement.
It's called a disclosure. From the looks of it, the peeps at MedVend weren't allowed to sell or transfer the asset without minority shareholder approval. How is Medbox to blame when they are apparently the victim of fraud?
"In May 2013, the three members of Medvend Holdings LLC were served and
named in a lawsuit by that entity’s minority shareholders alleging improper
conveyance of the three members’ ownership interest in Medvend Holding LLC
to the Company. In May 2013, Medbox filed suit against Medvend Holdings,
LLC and the three members of that entity that were involved in the transaction."
Not by a long-shot. No evidence to support that.
"This one is bound to follow suit in time. They both have some of the same garbage behind them."
Hey, how'd that missing $1.04 allegation turn out? It seems that's covered in the footnotes quite clearly.
Sorry, you have yet to make a case that the financials were "fraudulent". That is a very strong word and there is no basis for it here.
They have no filing requirement with SEC until June 10th when they are deemed fully reporting. We've been over this, remember?
Incorrect. If you look a every prior filing the same CPA was used, Anguiano and associates. The funky auditor is no where on this report.
I haven't seen a single post here pumping the stock. Most would agree its overvalued but the company has certain positive qualities that are hard to ignore.
Not sure about FDA approval. Pot has no federal approval. I think what you are referring to is the MedVend machines that dispense traditional pharma in Doctor's offices. Interesting model but that company only has a couple placements from the looks of it. Lots to do before that becomes a revenue generator for MDBX though. Interesting technology though.
Ok, lets go there.
Audited financials.... Happened.
Form 10..... Happened.
Fully Reporting.... Happened.
Receivables of over $2m paid.... Happened (so they state)
Leadership role in a new industry... Happening.
National Press and Interest from the media.... Happening.
Ridiculous share price..., still happening (god knows why)
I'm impressed... And I know some others are too.
.
Again, news agencies do DD on what is real and what impacts a company directly. If there are shareholders or clients of this company that have a bone to pick that is newsworthy. Not allegations or "fraudulent financials". This is the real world here and the stakes are high.
Does your definition of scam involve the company not wanting to take money raise referrals from strangers that call in? As for the bogus financials, that just isn't accurate. This company voluntarily filed with the SEC after they were already a success. Your SCAM label just doesn't fit no matter how many times its said.
How many times a day do you think Bloomberg and other news outlets get leads for stories that can impact a public company's stock? Now find a shareholder or client of Medbox that directly dealt with the founder and is screaming bloody murder and THAT is worthy of a story!!!!
Oh look, Bloomberg did do a follow up story.
It's called Sarcasm
Is this another fortune cookie? I'm having trouble reading this one! Lol
I'm sure the company is shaking in their boots. Lol
The company has no requirement to file with the SEC yet. Form 10 not deemed effective until 60 days from filing. Can this be any clearer.
Wow, they filed a notice that they will be filing Q1 results shortly!
Smoking gun!!!!!!!! Lol
Grain of salt... Lol
MB, your initial instincts about this company are spot on.
Pathetic and transparent pretty much sums it up
What is it you claim was being promoted here?
Can you cite some posts please?
The link in the story to the DEA comment is from 5 years ago. Are you kidding me with these fear-tactics from the writer. Unreal!
This article looks like it was written by a Highschool Junior.
You did call when you offered unsolicited referrals to fund raisers right?
You should call Vincent and ask him directly what that's all about and if the matter has already been dismissed. I already know the answer. 800-762-1452
Do you have a copy of this purported document? Actually, sales to accredited investors don't need a PPM. FYI
"MDBX raised private placement funds with the use of fraudulent financials that were included in the legal document, the Private Placement Memorandum."
Show us anyone within this company convicted of 30 felonies?
Bloomberg does background checks on all their subjects. Maybe the founders priors weren't newsworthy in their opinion.
Don't you mean shorter and not shareholder?
"I know and ex shareholder contacted Brian Grulen"
"There was a great very successful fund and an IR firm that I told him would be good"
Wow! I mean wowwwww!
"resigned CEO when that fact was outed"
Wow, even with all the evidence stating that the founder gave up his CEO rank at the subsidiary back in January you still post this. Unreal...