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.
Oh, they could have, but they wasted enough time with Bill, a simple contact from the company to ask him to stop using their name was sufficient. If tpac falls any further it will be at no bid, Timken has a ways to go before that happens to them.lol
Why would they release a PR? It doesn't affect them or their shareholders, they placed an order, the order was never received, no money was exchange, end of relationship. If Bill could produce what people here think he can I would think Timken would be working with him, they already have a footprint in China.
Which press release was it canceled after? 1st, 2nd or 3rd? It was also a 9k order that timken said it never received parts for, not really a good move if you want a good name in the industry.
5 years and they are still "pursuing" customers, that should tell you something. A good businessman would have had orders lined up as soon as the qualification process ended, with all their connections how couldn't they have orders.lol
Bill says he had every thing in writing but after the pr they canceled the order. That email from timken didn't sound like it was in tpac favor , most want to dismiss it as a call center employee having a bad day. If Bill can't handle stress, he's in the wrong business, my shop is trying to play catch up on a job gone bad and could bankrupt our company in the mean while trying to get brand new customers jobs out on time. Owner said to work at least 65 hrs a week until further notice and more if we can. Too much stress.lol
They must have one heck of a clean shop, every shop I have worked at when we were slow we cleaned , cleaned and cleaned. With no work what else would the employees be doing??? Lol tpac doesn't need timken ...that's funny right there
So I'm assuming Bill is charging Timken for time & material on this po he was given the green light and already started then canceled. Goodwill doesn't pay the bills in this industry , years ago I worked at a mold shop that did work for Ford, when they canceled a tool we charged them for all work done plus extra. I would expect the same from a company with no revenue.
Sounds like bs to me, I think I'll belive a billion $ company over a sub penny stock ceo anyday. He got a "verbal" po and no written communication on an order...yeah right.lol
Timken has a "All Timken News Releases" tab on their investor page... tpac news us not on it, which is strange considering tpac has a monopoly on the areospace bearing market in China
That's why there was no revenue for that po from the parts...they never shipped them, not...we just gave them some parts we had in a warehouse.
Timken may be in bed with berlin shorts, that would explain it. I knew this didn't pass the smell test by the pictures he was posting, wasn't much substance there....why post a picture of an empty building in a vacant industrial park and claim they have room to expand.lol
I contacted 5 or 6 law firms via email, but never got a response back from any of them. That's as far as I got, don't have the time to sit on the phone during the day at work.
At least they have Snoop Dog on this one.lol
Deep thinker passed away shortly after this went to $hit , I'm assuming that's why he no longer post.
http://fortune.com/2015/06/26/fracking-manufacturing-costs/?scid=brand_20150702_48419336&adbid=10153436396664770&adbpl=fb&adbpr=12707004769
“Made in the U.S.A” is becoming more affordable. The reason? Fracking.
You don’t need to a Nobel Prize in economics to know that the fracking revolution has been good for the U.S. What’s not so well known is just how competitive cheap oil and gas has made American manufacturing. BCG, the Boston consultancy, estimates the average cost to manufacture goods in the U.S. is now only 5% higher than in China and is actually 10% to 20% lower than in major European economies. Even more striking: BCG projects that by 2018 it will be 2% to 3% cheaper to make stuff here than in China.
Manufacturing Cost Index Part of the reason for the narrowing gap is that wages have been rising in China. And American companies have been boosting their productivity faster than many of their international competitors. But perhaps the single largest factor is that fracking has helped dramatically drive down the price of oil and gas that’s being used in energy intensive industries such as steel, aluminum, paper and petrochemicals. BCG calculates that U.S. industrial electricity prices are now 30% to 50% lower than those of other major exporters.
“A 5% price discrepancy in manufacturing between China and the US doesn’t amount to much,” says BCG’s David Gee, “when you consider that US manufacturers face the risks of delay when shipping from China, the threat of port strikes, and the local investments and partnerships that Beijing often requires of foreign companies doing business there.”
Lower energy prices can also open up new opportunities such as a using natural gas to power fleet vehicles and trucks, which would reduce American dependence on foreign oil and cut greenhouse gases. Natural gas can also be converted into hydrogen to power fuel cells like the ones in Toyota’s TM -0.76% Mirai passenger car. (The Japanese car giant will start taking orders for the Mirai in California this summer.)
Over the last few years, cheap energy has encouraged players in various industries to earmark $138 billion for new U.S.-based investments. This spring, for example, the petrochemical giant Sasol SSL 4.25% started construction on an $8.1 billion ethane cracker at Lake Charles, La. And energy companies like Cheniere LNG 0.52% are building multi-billion LNG terminals on the Gulf of Mexico to export overseas, where natural gas can be three to four times more expensive than it is in the U.S.
How long will America’s advantage last? Harvard Business School’s Michael Porter, who along with BCG issued a new report in June called “America’s Unconventional Energy Opportunity,” says that America has about a 15-year lead on other nations when it comes to fracking. The most telling number to make that point? The U.S. has 101,117 fracked wells, followed by Canada’s 16,990. By contrast China has 258.
If those numbers are correct the OS should be about 3.2 billion with Carey owning half of that and the other insiders owning 24% which would make the float around 850-900 million range. It's been 6 months since they shut Gander down, hopeful we see a new direction soon. With Carey owning 1.6 billion shares we may not see a r/s, but the AS would still be 12 billion still plenty of shares to dilute but a low enough float to make a nice run if they hold off for a while.
Someone keeps buying, hoping this does something soon, but not holding my breath.
NO, they put out a PR stating they took on their first order (not prototype) in Mar 2014. Now all the sudden it's changed to...we just gave them parts lying around in a warehouse for testing.lol
http://tpacbearings.com/news/trans-pacific-aerospace-announces-its-first-sale-spherical-bearings
March 27, 2014 11:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time
SAN MARINO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Trans-Pacific Aerospace Company, Inc. (“TPAC” or the “Company“) (OTCQB:TPAC), a manufacturer of spherical bearings for the commercial aerospace industry, through its China-based subsidiary, is pleased to announce its first purchase order of the Company’s spherical bearings.
TPAC has received an order from a US customer, which shows that the US market is accepting of the Company’s parts, which are qualified to the stringent requirements of SAE-AS81820 and SAE-AS81934. TPAC is the only manufacturer in China to obtain these approvals.
“We have a very short lead time on the order, as compared to industry standards and are confident that we will deliver superior quality parts well within the committed lead time,” said Bill McKay, Chairman and CEO of TPAC. “The order shows confidence in our manufacturing processes and the performance of our products. The significance of the first order cannot be overstated. TPAC is committed to exceeding customer expectations in every aspect of its business and we look at this order as the first of many to come.The Company has additional quotes outstanding, some with major industry players. While there is no guarantee, we are nevertheless optimistic that our team’s marketing expertise and strategic contacts will result in additional orders from both US and Chinese customers.”
Then, they'll have to re-certify that facility and machines? Yes?
I'm sure China has a billion $ market for that, and with the rational on the board that would mean straight money for tpac. They would have to test the potatoes for a few years first.
Making chips/ throwing chips is a Machinist term. The material that is cut/ milled off the part is called a "chip". It still sounds like no po's though, the sales pitch at the conference must not have gone as well as they'd hoped. Lo
Lol.what a joke this has become.
I highly doubt Boeing is doing business with a mom & pop joint that currently has never sold a bearing on the market but, believe what you want. It still sounds like they don't have any po's . What the status with the prototypes they were making anyone know?
Can anyone honestly say Boeing is going to walk into that assembly plant and be impressed.
The stock had promos on it, bill had prs to put out and the board overhyped this that's why it shot up. If you look at the fundamentals it's like any other pinky. The fact is this company has not sold a single bearing in 5 years.
How is this company debt free? the 10-k disagrees with you.
Well, everyone knows the promos are over now it's jump the ceo left to pump this one or be a bag holder.
ok, promting your company not a bad thing but, TPAC's twitter page looks more like Bill's personal page...very unprofessional. I think he likes all the pats on the back and feeling like a rock star...kinda sad really.
https://www.otcdynamics.com/tag/tpac-stock-promotion/
http://www.cloverstocks.com/tag/tpac-stock-promotion/
https://www.hotstocked.com/article/3712/trans-pacific-aerospace-company-inc-otc-tpac.html
FROM 2010
Trans-Pacific Aerospace Company, Inc. (OTC:TPAC) has been climbing up at full speed since last week. Over the past couple TPAC_chart1.pngof days, the stock bounced up higher and its traded volume already exceeded four million shares. Will the gain continue during the next days, or is it a matter of time to cut off the bullish trend? Looks like Trans-Pacific has been constantly re-ensuring its market position.
As already reported on hotstocked.com, two days ago TPAC was the biggest promotion of the day, worth approximately $24 thousand paid for the whole campaign. The stock appeared in twelve promotional newsletters, while Trans-Pacific was releasing positive announcements on its activities. Yesterday, the company continued the good news series by confirming its eligibility to receive $2.2 million business development grant from China.
Along with the on-going promotional campaign, the optimistic announcements by TPAC have additionally ensured its stock price. Apparently, investors' interest has been constantly fueled up and TPAC kept the up move. However, the promotions were scheduled for two days (until Jan 19) and now it's interesting what's next.
Trans_Pacific_logo.jpgToday the company continues with the good news, announcing a $19 billion deal and hoping it will hold the up trend longer. And while Trans-Pacific is still in the process of qualifying its Guangzhou China manufacturing facility producing test parts for certification by the U.S. Navy, its revenues remain optimistic projections. In the meantime, let's repeat the pure facts.
The quarterly report of Trans-Pacific shows more assets than liabilities, however, the deficit accumulated during the development stage period totals over $2.5 million. Apart from the huge deficit, as of end-July 2010 the company has an increasing net loss from continuing operations and much higher operating expenses than the year before. Besides, no revenues were generated last year and TPAC still has no sufficient cash to cover the losses. In that case, how much time will Trans-Pacific need to get profitable?
His intent over the past couple of months has been to sell stock and promote his company
No, you missed my point, he could sell bearings just not NAVAIR approved, which they have been since 2013. In 5 years he has not set up any contracts...he has had 5 years to get contracts lined up for after approval. He could sell the Chinese bearings, any kind of bearings to produce revenue but has failed to do so. 5 years to set up sales and has nothing.
There is a huge difference, they can't legally sell a product without FDA approval, there is nothing stopping Bill from selling a bearing to anyone.
Reading the AS81820 Approval Slide, looking at the tolerance .003 and .006 ... that is hilarious, I think i could keep those tolerances on the pos manual lathe we have here at our shop. Why does he have to explain what the AS81820 approval means to industry insiders?
Sure, you got me. I already got out of this POS but did make a nice chunk of change. Too many red flags, I just don't think this company can get the contracts it needs to survive, the "consulting fees" along with Bills wife being a part of this and the other 2 women will keep me from getting back in.
The fact that Boeing already has parts made in China has nothing to do with TPAC, you are drawing very dangerous conclusions for other investors. TPAC has not had a single revenue contract in 5 years with ANYONE much less a industry leader like Boeing.
Where is TPAC in those links? Boeing and TPAC have no deals so those links mean nothing.
Do the names Betty and Tina sound Chinese to you?
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1422295/000101968713001281/transpacific_8k-040513.htm
On April 5, 2013, Trans-Pacific Aerospace, Inc. (“Company”) entered into separate Securities Purchase Agreements with Tina Kwan, Betty Li and Harbin Aerospace Company, LLC (“Harbin”), each of whom are holders of the capital stock of Godfrey (China) Limited (“Godfrey”), the Company’s 25%-owned Hong Kong subsidiary engaged in the development of the Company’s production facility in Guangzhou, China.
Pursuant to the Securities Purchase Agreements, Tina Kwan and Betty Li each agreed to transfer to the Company 150,000 shares of the capital stock of Godfrey and Harbin agreed to transfer to the Company 50,000 shares of the capital stock of Godfrey in consideration of the Company’s issuance of 2,000,000 shares of its common stock to each of Ms. Kwan and Ms. Li and 800,000 shares of its common stock to Harbin. In addition, the Company agreed that in the event all of the stock holders of Godfrey sell 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of Godfrey for cash, the Company will pay to Kwan, Li and Harbin the cash amount they would have received had they retained their Godfrey shares. The Godfrey shares transferred by Kwan, Li and Harbin represented all of the shares of capital stock of Godfrey held by them.
Upon the closing of the transactions under the Securities Purchase Agreements, the Company will increase its ownership of Godfrey from 25% to 55%. The transactions under the Securities Purchase Agreements will close subject to and upon the recording of the transfer of the Godfrey shares with the appropriate governmental agency in Hong Kong, which is expected to occur shortly.
Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company had issued 4,000,000 shares of its common stock to Ms. Kwan and Ms. Li, which as of June 21, 2013, the acquisition date, the shares were valued at $368,000 based on the closing market price on that date. The 800,000 shares to Harbin were valued at $73,600 and were issued during the quarter ended April 30, 2014. On June 21, 2013, the transactions were approved by the Hong Kong SAR Government. The acquisition increased current liabilities from related parties by $179,053 and incomes taxes owed to Hong Kong by $322; offset by an increase in impairment expense of $528,101, and a decrease in non-controlling interest of $70,774. The impairment was immediately recognized due to the fact that Godfrey has not produced any revenue in its operations and lacks sufficient capital to implement its business plan. As Godfrey’s statement of operations was not significant to the Company’s, no pro forma information will be presented below.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=67364879