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.
Nothing-accomplished-just-statements-suggesting-attempting
Just plain PR BS, nothing credible accomplished, similar to FDA PR's....
The PR only states the company is attempting/applying for something, not that anything has really been accomplished.
Total PR BS to stimulate additional speculation among uninformed investors looking for a lottery ticket.
You-have-no-way-to-know-how-much-money-may-have-been-diverted
RE: After all, the people who gave money to Biel have not recovered their money yet.
There is no way to assess how much or if money has been diverted away from company efforts and instead allocated to funding family & friends standard of living.
The fact the SEC has suspicions of illegal actions the door is open to discovering that the toxic dilution strategy has not benefited the company in the manner expected from investors.
Whats even worse is now, investor capital will be diverted to responding to the SEC legal filings instead of funding the critical efforts with the FDA.
See-the-light-the-correct-methodology-is-to-seek-Institutionalized-investors NOT setup single family member companies to derive what are fictitious loans to facilitate stock dilution schemes through.
If there were the slightest merits to the companies objectives there would be large institutional investors lining up to help bring the companies products to market.
Ever heard of beach front property in Nevada, well at one time there were believers in this investment/scheme as well.
Successfull-companies-do-not-setup-single-family-member-companies to facilitate the toxic stock dilution strategies.
SEC has similar opinions as represented in this nationally filed document: http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
For the benefit of the unsuspecting public to evaluate while the legal proceedings progress.
Opinions-matter-ideally-company-would-not-have-these-types-of-blemishes
The fact the filing has even occurred is enough to negatively impact all efforts as now focus is diverted. Focus includes human and monetary implications. All the same focus could have been on delivering viable results and data to the FDA. Aint going to happen now, will take all the companies remaining time and energy to respond to SEC allegations.
Suspecting TKO and those mentioned are 100% focused on deriving information that will avoid incarceration.
Assumption being will not be private monies utilized to defend against these allegations, will be drawn from company assets which we all know are less than zero, thus any investor monies at this time will be diverted to legal proceedings and not moving the product forward.
Reality-is-that-we-need-different-company-leadership-to-bring-product-to-FDA-USA-Retail SEC efforts would tend to support this opinion as noted in http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Interpretation from SEC proceedings are that current company leadership have diminished to near zero any investor confidence and botched past/current FDA efforts to the degree many investors have and will continue to be negatively impacted and the integrity of the company is now essentially questionable or in doubt at best.
Only-from-opinions-stated-and-general-internet-searches
Do you have any insights ;)
Again, more transparency from the company would bring considerable investor confidence in the integrity of participants at question. SEC action(s) seem to indicate there are suspicions worthy of following up on.
No-but-the-comparison-is-irrational-given-the-scales-involved
The analogous would be Monsanto having a SEC investigation regarding funding the company by selling shares to a single family member held company as well incorrectly reporting sales of more than 50% of the companies revenue.
To even suggest there is a corollary to a multi billion dollar international conglomerate is just plain fodder.
Transparency-from-company-would-buy-trust-and-credibility
Have no way of reconciling your opinions with company as company has provided zero transparency where it really counts.
Gotta win the hearts and minds and this company has failed at that by chasing the money instead of the dream behind the product.
Maybe-those-with-fiduciary-responsibility-to-the-company should have reduced their standard of living and placed more revenue into the company, then we would not be where we are today.
FDA is not the problem, the problem is the data presented to the FDA was botched and those in decision roles at the company violated FDA rules by selling the product retail when not approved. Thus ended up in the longest queue for every possible process. Now are in a even longer queue, potentially a never ending queue at this point.
IE: Mess up at the DMV and end up at the end of the longest line.
Actually-mathematically-can-go-down-to-0.0001 Probabilities given state of affairs more likely to reach this 0.0001 area than anything above ALL TIME LOWS which is vicinity of where we are now.
SEC-has-similar-opinion-others http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
quote --> They were all self serving and the same actions resulting in investigation in his own company 'YES' only verifies his shadiness
You may have missed it but the SEC seems to have similar opinions of those mentioned in this filing. Many corollaries in this filing, just names have been revised to reflect accordingly.
Not-similar-scenario --> www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Review the details
o setting up family member single individual companies,
o establishing loans for said single family member companies,
o selling shares through these single family member companies
During the relevant period, respondents BIEL, IBEX, St. John’s, Whelan
and Kelly Whelan effected the offerings as follows: when BIEL needed funds to continue
its operations, IBEX sold hundreds of millions of unrestricted BIEL shares in dozens of
unregistered transactions, at the request of Whelan, directly to third party purchasers at a
discount to then current market prices. IBEX retained a percentage of the money obtained
from the sales but funneled the rest to BIEL, and, in return, BIEL provided both a
“convertible loan” to IBEX and a new grant of unrestricted shares which, in effect, replaced
the shares IBEX sold. When each of these “loans” came due, after one or two years’ time,
BIEL “renegotiated” them by providing IBEX with additional purportedly unrestricted
shares in return for extending the loan’s due date. BIEL never repaid any of the “loans” in
cash. These transactions were not registered with the Commission.
Starting in mid-2010 and continuing into at least early 2012, BIEL used
St. John’s to provide financing using the same type of transaction. BIEL raised over a
million dollars through these offerings in approximately 17 transactions. These
transactions were not registered with the Commission.
All-crminal-proceedings-begin-with-a-claim-of-innocence
The criminals are not going to stand up and say , oop's, dang, you got me.
Joke-70M-on-the-buy-thats-$35k-total
That is not big money, that's a cumulative of unsuspecting amateur investors getting taken to the cleaner.
If "Big Money" were interested they would just buy the company.
There is a reason why this company has never been offered a purchase price they would be willing to accept.
Details required for a purchase to be completed would result in the purchaser determining the valuation is near zero.
Significantly-higher-probability-of-those-mentioned-in-SEC-opinion will be behind bars and investors left with 0.00000
Karma-for-years-of-duping-unsuspecting-investors
LOL-your-response-speaks-volumes
SEC-has-issued-strong-analytics-based-SELL-report --> www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Review the details
o setting up family member single individual companies,
o establishing loans for said single family member companies,
o selling shares through these single family member companies
During the relevant period, respondents BIEL, IBEX, St. John’s, Whelan
and Kelly Whelan effected the offerings as follows: when BIEL needed funds to continue
its operations, IBEX sold hundreds of millions of unrestricted BIEL shares in dozens of
unregistered transactions, at the request of Whelan, directly to third party purchasers at a
discount to then current market prices. IBEX retained a percentage of the money obtained
from the sales but funneled the rest to BIEL, and, in return, BIEL provided both a
“convertible loan” to IBEX and a new grant of unrestricted shares which, in effect, replaced
the shares IBEX sold. When each of these “loans” came due, after one or two years’ time,
BIEL “renegotiated” them by providing IBEX with additional purportedly unrestricted
shares in return for extending the loan’s due date. BIEL never repaid any of the “loans” in
cash. These transactions were not registered with the Commission.
Starting in mid-2010 and continuing into at least early 2012, BIEL used
St. John’s to provide financing using the same type of transaction. BIEL raised over a
million dollars through these offerings in approximately 17 transactions. These
transactions were not registered with the Commission.
ROFLMAO-ddls-opinions-have-been-exonerated-by-this-gov-agency
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Soon to be substantiated by DOJ
IMO-No-wait-for-0.0001-and-DOJ-to-also-weigh-in
Could-have-done-that-year-earlier-Before-SEC-weighed-in
Now on its way to 0.0001
ROFLMAO-IMO-Assume-you-are-please-buy-all-you-can-invest-everything-you-own
Dont wait for 0.0001 buy now while you can.
You-honestly-think-Biel-execs-did-not-know-this-was-coming --> www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Review the details
o setting up family member single individual companies,
o establishing loans for said single family member companies,
o selling shares through these single family member companies
During the relevant period, respondents BIEL, IBEX, St. John’s, Whelan
and Kelly Whelan effected the offerings as follows: when BIEL needed funds to continue
its operations, IBEX sold hundreds of millions of unrestricted BIEL shares in dozens of
unregistered transactions, at the request of Whelan, directly to third party purchasers at a
discount to then current market prices. IBEX retained a percentage of the money obtained
from the sales but funneled the rest to BIEL, and, in return, BIEL provided both a
“convertible loan” to IBEX and a new grant of unrestricted shares which, in effect, replaced
the shares IBEX sold. When each of these “loans” came due, after one or two years’ time,
BIEL “renegotiated” them by providing IBEX with additional purportedly unrestricted
shares in return for extending the loan’s due date. BIEL never repaid any of the “loans” in
cash. These transactions were not registered with the Commission.
Starting in mid-2010 and continuing into at least early 2012, BIEL used
St. John’s to provide financing using the same type of transaction. BIEL raised over a
million dollars through these offerings in approximately 17 transactions. These
transactions were not registered with the Commission.
Why-is-this-post-not-stickied www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
SEC-Disagrees --> www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Review the details
o setting up family member single individual companies,
o establishing loans for said single family member companies,
o selling shares through these single family member companies
During the relevant period, respondents BIEL, IBEX, St. John’s, Whelan
and Kelly Whelan effected the offerings as follows: when BIEL needed funds to continue
its operations, IBEX sold hundreds of millions of unrestricted BIEL shares in dozens of
unregistered transactions, at the request of Whelan, directly to third party purchasers at a
discount to then current market prices. IBEX retained a percentage of the money obtained
from the sales but funneled the rest to BIEL, and, in return, BIEL provided both a
“convertible loan” to IBEX and a new grant of unrestricted shares which, in effect, replaced
the shares IBEX sold. When each of these “loans” came due, after one or two years’ time,
BIEL “renegotiated” them by providing IBEX with additional purportedly unrestricted
shares in return for extending the loan’s due date. BIEL never repaid any of the “loans” in
cash. These transactions were not registered with the Commission.
Starting in mid-2010 and continuing into at least early 2012, BIEL used
St. John’s to provide financing using the same type of transaction. BIEL raised over a
million dollars through these offerings in approximately 17 transactions. These
transactions were not registered with the Commission.
LMAO-Focus-on-details-contained-within --> www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Find one of the companies cited that is
o setting up family member single individual companies,
o establishing loans for said single family member companies,
o selling shares through these single family member companies
The analogous from the uncola's post is like saying look at all these companies also selling stocks to investors.
Would any of these companies even consider something like the following as cited from the gov agencies filing:
During the relevant period, respondents BIEL, IBEX, St. John’s, Whelan
and Kelly Whelan effected the offerings as follows: when BIEL needed funds to continue
its operations, IBEX sold hundreds of millions of unrestricted BIEL shares in dozens of
unregistered transactions, at the request of Whelan, directly to third party purchasers at a
discount to then current market prices. IBEX retained a percentage of the money obtained
from the sales but funneled the rest to BIEL, and, in return, BIEL provided both a
“convertible loan” to IBEX and a new grant of unrestricted shares which, in effect, replaced
the shares IBEX sold. When each of these “loans” came due, after one or two years’ time,
BIEL “renegotiated” them by providing IBEX with additional purportedly unrestricted
shares in return for extending the loan’s due date. BIEL never repaid any of the “loans” in
cash. These transactions were not registered with the Commission.
Starting in mid-2010 and continuing into at least early 2012, BIEL used
St. John’s to provide financing using the same type of transaction. BIEL raised over a
million dollars through these offerings in approximately 17 transactions. These
transactions were not registered with the Commission.
Encourage-RE-assesment-based-on-gov-agencies-opinions cited here: www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016
To-ensure-unsuspecting-investors-are-not-mislead: www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Ok-reference-your-posts-where-you-helped-to-inform-unsuspecting-investors
Why-is-this-post-not-stickied www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Disagree-sympothise-with-the-unspespecting-investors
Those "gamers" should openly admit the harm they have contributed to as openly as they mislead those unsuspecting investors with speculative opinions and tones of confidence that feed into dreams of seeing great returns from a pink stock investment
If this was easy to see, the applicable gov agency would have shut it down years ago.
This companies lack of transparency is what contributed to the inability of common investor to make an informed decision and instead have to rely on speculative PR's
ddls-opinions-have-been-exonerated-by-this-gov-agency
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
ROFLMAO-Missing-2016-Accomplishmets
Suggest updating accomplishments to reflect this gov agencies documentation of historical accomplishments
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Also, may want to revise 2016 projections
Suggest-updating-analysis-to-reflect-this-gov-agencies-opinions
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Suggest-informing-this-gov-organization-regarding-your-legal-opinions
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2016/33-10036.pdf
Possible there may be rewards beyond comprehension
IMHO-Gig-is-up-TKO
The-list-that-matters-is-a-total-of-nine
The "Retail Distribution" with 9 entries is the list of interest.
Also, having a channel to sell into does not suggest volume of product being sold into said channel. Without volume of units sold into those channels it is analogous to the person standing out front Wal-Mart selling tacos or widgets and then marketing that his company has a relationship with Wal-Mart.
;) IMO
Good-to-see-you-formed-an-opinion-based-on-personal-evaluation
Which is what is expected, there is not intent to do harm, only sharing information that is publicly available. Some will derive that there may be a correlation others will derive your same conclusion.
In the end the choice to invest in this company if based on individual conclusions, hopefully derived from publicly available information.