NEWBIE
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 have no idea how bad or good the STO will go. I don't know how bad or good the sale of the software will go. I can only speculate.
CyptoDefender is a product based on GuardedID, it is intended for protecting bitcoin wallets. It is a different product and was only recently released, so I guess technically it is a new product. I don't know if the product works or not since I have not bought it. I do know the product it is based on does work. I would speculate this one does also.
Once again, Currently can SFOR products be sold to the government using channel partners?
That would depend on how much BlockSafe makes.
I they make $1m a month then $138k will not be bleeding them dry.
If they make $100k a month, yes that will hurt BlockSafe, but it would also take 10 months before they would have to start paying SFOR.
They also said they plan on generating $35m from the STO and $5m of that is only 14%. and as long as the people buying the tokens knows that they are going to pay SFOR the $5m that should be factored into the investors decision to buy the tokens or not.
As far as the relabeling, I have no idea how the sales will go, but considering they are the first to market with Bitcoin wallet and exchange protection, I think they have a good shot at doing well if they keep up the conferences and spreading the word.
So, again. Currently can SFOR products be sold to the government using channel partners?
Already answered here: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=143313689
I am only here to research this stock for myself. I have found the best way to do that is it look at what everyone claims and decide for myself what is true and what is not. IF there is a unsupported claim or a claim that I know is false, I question it.
And maybe my post may help others get information they did not know before to allow them to make better decisions on their own investments. But that I not my goal.
All I can really say is SFOR is well worth the risk for me. The potential upside is WAY to good to pass up.
I am only guessing here. You need to ask Mr Kay if you want the real answers.
First, I am not sure if you are referring to BlockSafe or CSI, so here is an answer for each.
CryptoDefender is a different product than GuardedID. They are focused at two different markets (with some of the same functionality). I speculate they renamed it to ease confusion.
For ACS/CSI channel partner, well that is the same as Trustwave rebranding Duo. I guess channel partners like to make it look like their own products.
Did that answer your question?
I have answered every question anyone has asked me (if i saw them or they were valid SFOR questions or I had not answered them multiple times before). Ask me a question that i have not answered and i will either link to my response or answer it now.
Will you answer the question? "Can SFOR products be sold to the government using channel partners?"
Nope. The 30 June 2018 financials only said that BlockSafe was not currently selling any products. BlockSafe started selling on or about July 13th or can you point to where the financials says GuardedID is not being sold?
I never said there were deals. I am just asking if the product can be sold using channel partners.
So again, Please answer the Yes or No question: Can SFOR products be sold to the government using channel partners?
Also, https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=143299607
"refute my argument with actual DD" - which argument? I will refute it if it is incorrect.
Please answer this one question.
Currently can SFOR products be sold to the government using channel partners?
Yes or No is all I am looking for. (Please, No rants about the past)
No, because that would make no sense to me. If they hurt BlockSafe they are only hurting SFOR execs and shareholders.
What would be the point of financing the creation of a subsidiary only to bleed it dry. The ONLY benefit would be to steal the money from the 20% that is not SFOR shareholders (49%) or execs (31%). And if that is the case, we get 49% of the ill gotten gains of the 20%.
Can you think of another reason for them to do this?
(Note: I will not respond until tomorrow...maybe)
"But demanding monthly 6 figure payments once their funding hits a certain number, to pay them back 5x????" - Demanding? Where do you see it was demanded? It was agreed to.
It is roughly $138k a month for 3 years after BSAFE makes $1m. So if they never make the $1m then SFOR never gets paid. If they do then the SFOR stockholders get about 49% cut after operational expenses. Sounds good to me.
If they do something "illegal" then we as shareholders can sue. Shareholders can see what happens inside a publicly traded company, it just is only every 3 months when the fins come out.
I have read the fins, the patents, and a ton of other material. I know what this company could become and it is a risk that I am willing take.
I have made no excuses, I just give my interpretation of what I see. Right or wrong, they are my opinion and my opinion only. Believe or don't, I DON"T CARE.
BSAFE is 80% SFOR. SFOR wants a return on their investment. I own SFOR stock, I have no problem with SFOR making money off of a subsidiary since they are using SFOR offices and personnel (and probably other employee benefits).
I DONT KNOW and I DONT CARE. Until they are available on the market they mean nothing. I am not trusting anyone. I don't trust tweets, email, resumes, podcasts, interviews, or anything that is not official legally binding documents. yes, some will claim that tweets are legal documents, but I sure don't trust them.
Agreed, we have not seen any of the contracts. That is not what this discussion is about. The discussion is CAN SFOR products be sold to the government. Yes, through channel partners.
Note: SFOR has had a SAM in the past and they should be able to get it again IF/WHEN they need it.
SFOR has no govt contracts
SFOR not even eligible for govt contracts
SFOR does not "own" push notifications
There "other software", like GaurdedID? I have owned that since December 2016 and it works. I have re-subscribed 1 time so far and will pay again pretty soon (5 licenses). So, it is selling. The product does exactly what it says it does.
Note: Please, don't bring up "where is the money" because I don't know, Ask Kay. I trust it will show up at some point. If not, that would suck. I am willing to take that risk.
Marketing has nothing to do with SFOR getting funds from BSafe. Also remember that BSafe is part of SFOR. The SFOR shareholders own 49% of BSafe. BSafe is not a separate entity. We will know exactly where the money goes that BSafe generates.
As far as we know that’s a product that doesn’t work
Sorry, what? I think I am missing something. Can you explain this more? "There is no EVIO rally that shouldn’t be sold" Or was there a misspelling that I am not catching (like "rally")?
That is why I read both boards, to get as many opinions as I can.
If they post something that you don't agree with, then post it here with your rebuttal. Just PLEASE show your proof they are wrong and don't just say they are wrong.
As much as no one want to admit it, I would guess a majority of people read both boards. People on this board seem to read the other one a lot.
Oh, you mean the board that actually posts links to their DD so readers can follow and judge for themselves what is accurate and what isn't?
(Note: I am not saying that any of it is correct, but at least I can decide for myself)
Since they have not been released/issued/sold there is no way of proving anything one way or the other.
You do know that bitcoin works similar to stocks and a STO even more so? There is an exchange that keeps track of everything including what the tokens are for. IF somehow "fake" tokens make it into the market, it should be pretty easy to tell and report them.
This isn't like buying a stereo out of the back of a van, this is going to a BestBuy or Fry's to buy.
Look at the date where you saw that. Jun 30 correct? Cryptodefender was released in July. So on Jun 30 when the fins came out they did not have a product.
https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/blocksafe-technologies-cryptodefender-launches-crypto-wallet-cybersecurity-suite/
Yes, each token has a hash. If the hash on the token is not part of the ones SFOR sell, it is "fake". The ledger also has to have the tokens with the correct hashes. I don't know a lot about bitcoin, but I understand how it works and how the ledger works.
My side of the guy leaving is just as valid as yours. Unless you can prove he left because he "saw something he didn't like". The difference is the "personal reason" was what was listed in the PR. I am not saying it is true, but I am not going to just go to the dark side.
Per their website they are selling it. Remember, it is just a rebranded product and the product it is based on works, I have owned it since December 2016.
Until the tokens are sold, who cares what wallet they are in. The "fake" ones have no bearing on the real ones. They all have unique number/codes. If BSAFE releases more than they say they will, then I will have a problem.
They have products: https://cyberidguard.com/shop/encryption/blocksafe-cryptodefender-5-pack/
They are still planning on selling the tokens.
As soon as Blocksafe raises $1,000,000 they owe SFOR $5,000,000
https://seekingalpha.com/filing/3700624
On September 18, 2017, the Board of Directors approved to amend the Corporation’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation so as to reduce the Authorized Shares of the Company from 1,010,000,000 to 110,000,000, and to submit the Articles Amendment to the Corporation’s stockholders for approval at the next Annual Shareholders Meeting or Special Meeting, whichever is to occur first.
Upon stockholder approval, the Chief Executive Officer will determine an effective date, which must be within 12 months of the meeting date, at such time the number of authorized common shares will be 100,000,000 and the authorized preferred shares will be 10,000,000.
Not sure this will help but...
No numbers given:
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2017/09/15/1123227/0/en/EVIO-Labs-to-Dramatically-Reduce-Authorized-Shares.html
Reduction from 3b to 1b A/S:
https://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=75274364
and
https://www.barchart.com/story/stocks/quotes/SGBY/4218213/evio-inc-announces-effectiveness-of-name-change-and-reverse-stock-split
Still looking for the 100m info.
Mentioned in PC Magazine. Well, this should be good exposure.
https://www.pcmag.com/article/363274/note-to-it-blockchain-isnt-magic
"Blockchain doesn't have any security. It's just a ledger app," explained George Waller, CEO of Blocksafe Technologies, which makes security products for blockchain implementations.
I am a bitcoin novice. I understand blockchains and how they works, but that is about it.
How are other companies preventing this kind of thing? I don't think this would be a new issue to be solved. I would guess in the mean time, only buy for BlockSafe.
hmm, that is the 12.4m tokens. I will wait to hear what he says. I have was thinking those were for the Seed round. I guess not.
I thought the fake ones were the ones that took the count to 340m tokens?
Can you post the "fake links"?
Wait and see. Good night.
For some shareholders and potential BSAFE token owners, yes he needs to clarify his tweet.
I don't need clarification because I know how to research and figure out high probabilities using logic.
(No I am not a statistician or a bitcoin expert)
Because only 120m will be sold to the general public in the STO the other 100m are for the Pre-STO buyers.
If he would have said 220m then people would complain there are only 120m are released to the public.
Here is your answer. Those are the ones I suspected are for the STO and the other 100m are for the Pre-STO.
0xA659f537db8cd64292736E9Ef4B9c917db0253a6 = 100,000,000.00 BSAFE (Speculation: @ $.35 = $35,000,000 for Pre-ICO)
0x14fDA3B1e131ad2d40E98CfF2722e7D22B96F88e = 120,000,000.00 BSAFE (Speculation: @ $.50 = $60,000,000 for ICO)
As long as the tokens don't move until the STO I DON'T CARE about a tweet.
Ok, found it. https://twitter.com/StrikeForceTech/status/1030478397372125184
In that Tweet he only says 120m. Take that as you want to. You know how I feel about none legal documents. I will not comment about that tweet anymore.
All I can find was this:
“@Cloverscrosses Blocksafe created 120million coins called BSAFE. We received many seed investments where they receive coins as well.”
Where did Mr Kay say there were 120Million. Can you post a link? I would like the vet the original statement from Mr Kay. I will also see if I can find it?
Please see https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=142157709
Note: The 12.4 million other coins I think were the initial seed round.
Basically. 220,000,000 total tokens and none had been issued as they were still developing them at the time.