LOL! "The OS increase was from an acquisition."

Oh, and NTEK just forgot to disclose the supposed acquisition and the terms in a PR, 8K, or any of their disclosures - including the annual report which does mention and list the minimal stock issuances for acquiring Magic Screen (Mitch's Lowe's failed biz) and the Ice Sculptor's biz, but just skips over the "big acquisition" for 89,000,000+ newly printed shares (and still counting with EVERY TA update!).

Yeah, sure - the stock issuances of OVER 500,000 EVERY TRADING DAY on average for the last 8 months was for a "secret acquisition" that is being kept under wraps despite securities laws.

How utterly preposterous.

Especially when Jeff Foley has claimed the stock dilution was due to "employee stock".

The secret acquisition is even a secret to the CEO! Or is he LYING?

Maybe David forgot to tell him?

Yabutt, don't discount the huge value of the old Lucas Tanner episodes to the collection (if David Foley can get the Lucas Tanner episodes for a few hundred thousand newly printed NTEK shares).

Then it's on to "The Ropers" and the immortal "Joanie Loves Chachi" in "near lossless, kinda sorta 4K almost as clear as 1080p with blocky, choppy playback".

After that, "Manimal" and "Cop Rock" are just waiting to join the Sammy VHS tapes, "Hot Tuna", "Moonshine Kingdom", and the hugely in-demand 15+ Polish films that will soon be subtitled in English and Spanish.

Ultraflix will be the "go-to" source for failed TV series in just-sub-1080p 4K. Well, assuming Ultraflix launches by Superbowl Sunday.

The share O/S and free-trading numbers are from the TA (Stalt Inc.). You can reference this post:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100973913

Go to the BIG Orange Facebook page and in the upper left you'll find people who called the TA on Friday and verified this. One person even got an email from Jeff Foley trying to spin this dilution as "employees exercising options". But options require 12 months to BEGIN vesting and vest over 48 months. So much for Jeff the Iceman's story.

Or you can call or email Stalt.

I'm sorry that the dilution is shocking - but one must face the fact that those are the actual numbers - as crazy as that dilution is for a company that CLAIMS to be profitable based on an insane unaudited Q posted on OTCmarkets.com that claims $4.4 million in "media" revenue (likely from the 250,000,000 NTEK shares issued to Nanotech Media, Inc. - D SHOAF, President, Treasurer, Secretary, and sole Director - with the Nanotech Media shares held by the Foley Family (proof is in the OTCmarkets.com financial disclosure of December 2013). That's the "Media revenue" of $4.1M.

Yet with a claimed $4.4M in revenue, NTEK's Q lists only $53k in cash and only $44k in accounts receivable. RIDICULOUS. Pure fiction from David Foley.

But call or email Stalt and you'll find that the 89,000,000+ new shares added in the last 8 months is FACT. And that is shocking!

Around 11 or 12. But there are a lot of enclosure parts, so one can just buy a MOJO and put the NP-1 enclosure on it to make more.

... it's not too difficult to see where the NTEK "revenue" is coming from.

11,000,000 new printed FoleyShares every single month and 13,525,154 restricted shares EVERY SINGLE MONTH on average being dumped into the free-trading market for 8 months! What a dilution machine the FoleyFamily has got running here. No wonder the PPS is tanking - that's more than 500,000 newly printed shares EVERY TRADING DAY and more than 675,000 newly delegended, previously restricted NTEK stock shares that needs to be absorbed into the market each and every trading day on average for the last 8 months!!!!!.

That's a money-printing, share printing and distribution rig job, insider enrichment scheme of the highest order.

All by selling promises, unfulfilled, and excuses, piled high, while printing and selling 500,000-675,000 shares EVERY SINGLE TRADING DAY on average for 8 months now!!!

And now with VFIN showing up on the ask, it suggests that NTEK has one or more convertible notes out that have not been disclosed to shareholders - and the noteholder is selling against the note to lock in his sales price given that the exercise price is typically well below market. Even MORE dilution in the Stinky Pinkie's PIPE.

And delivering ... NOTHING. Not even soap-infused sponges.

OH WHAT A SCAM!!!!!!!!!!

From the TA (Stalt, Inc.):
As of the close of business on 08/14/2013, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc.

Authorized Shares 990,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 464,292,868
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 388,027,287
Restricted Shares Outstanding 76,265,581


As of the close of business on 4/21/2014, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc
Authorized Shares 740,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 553,446,094
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 496,228,523
Restricted Shares Outstanding 57,217,571

GET THE FACTS! The numbers from Stalt don't lie.

If NTEK is profitable and paying a dividend, then why are they printing over 500,000 new shares every single trading day on average for 8 months and diluting shareholders to dust??? Why would NTEK be issuing convertible notes to toxic financiers if they truly were profitable and paying a dividend out of profits (which they have never said, BTW)???

Selling convertible notes to finance dividend payments is another sign of a penny stock SCAM.

Dude ... for crying out loud ... it's not too difficult to see where the NTEK "revenue" is coming from.

11,000,000 new printed FoleyShares every single month and 13,525,154 restricted shares EVERY SINGLE MONTH on average being dumped into the free-trading market for 8 months! What a dilution machine the FoleyFamily has got running here. No wonder the PPS is tanking - that's more than 500,000 newly printed shares EVERY TRADING DAY and more than 675,000 newly delegended, previously restricted NTEK stock shares that needs to be absorbed into the market each and every trading day on average for the last 8 months!!!!!.

That's a money-printing, share printing and distribution rig job, insider enrichment scheme of the highest order.

All by selling promises, unfulfilled, and excuses, piled high, while printing and selling 500,000-675,000 shares EVERY SINGLE TRADING DAY on average for 8 months now!!!

And now with VFIN showing up on the ask, it suggests that NTEK has one or more convertible notes out that have not been disclosed to shareholders - and the noteholder is selling against the note to lock in his sales price given that the exercise price is typically well below market. Even MORE dilution in the Stinky Pinkie's PIPE.

And delivering ... NOTHING. Not even soap-infused sponges.

OH WHAT A SCAM!!!!!!!!!!

From the TA (Stalt, Inc.):
As of the close of business on 08/14/2013, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc.

Authorized Shares 990,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 464,292,868
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 388,027,287
Restricted Shares Outstanding 76,265,581


As of the close of business on 4/21/2014, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc
Authorized Shares 740,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 553,446,094
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 496,228,523
Restricted Shares Outstanding 57,217,571

GET THE FACTS! The numbers from Stalt don't lie.

If NTEK is profitable and paying a dividend, then why are they printing over 500,000 new shares every single trading day on average for 8 months and diluting shareholders to dust??? Why would NTEK be issuing convertible notes to toxic financiers if they truly were profitable and paying a dividend out of profits (which they have never said, BTW)???

Selling convertible notes to finance dividend payments is another sign of a penny stock SCAM.

"IMHO they have executed extraordinarily well; they HAVE THE GOODS technically and wrt good management IMVHO. I'd challenge anyone to PROVE otherwise."

They've delivered NOTHING.

Ultraflix was supposed to launch on Superbowl Sunday with 75+ features. To-date, Ultraflix is not online and selling even a single 4K item. Zip. Nada. It's almost 3 months past Superbowl Sunday. Nothing on Ultraflix - can't even see the catalog.

What management sends out notifications that it will ship a product in 7-10 days and then, on the 10th day announces that it's sending the product back to the factory for a software update that should be able to be done online? And they didn't know that 10 days earlier?

This is the exact opposite of good management, but then again this is a stock dilution and distribution scam by the Foleys, so that's not surprising.

No independent testing and reviews. Fake FCC stickers that use the MOJO FCC report AND the MOJO's own MODEL NUMBER on the sticker (which is obviously faked - just look at the corners alone).

Printing over 500,000 new shares each and every trading day on average for over 8 solid months!

And this is good management? Wow, I'd sure hate to see what gets called "bad" management.

NTEK is such an obvious Stinkie Pinkie insider (FoleyFamily) share printing and distribution scam that it is incredible that anyone would consider this "good management".

None of them showed up.

VFIN is the mark of dilution death for pennystocks. History is what it is. CHDN, VNDM are known insider stock selling brokers - CHDN specializes in microcap insider sales, VNDM sells shares for insiders and also toxic financiers - like Joe Canouse.

But VFIN is the mark of death by toxic convertible financing.

VFIN riding the ask is the macropapular rash with blisters filled with opaque fluid that marks fatal cases of smallpox.

When VFIN rides the ask, the horse is heading off the cliff.

The PAINFUL FACTS: 11,000,000 new printed FoleyShares every single month and 13,525,154 restricted shares EVERY SINGLE MONTH on average being dumped into the free-trading market for 8 months! What a dilution machine the FoleyFamily has got running here. No wonder the PPS is tanking - that's more than 500,000 newly printed shares EVERY TRADING DAY and more than 675,000 newly delegended, previously restricted NTEK stock shares that needs to be absorbed into the market each and every trading day on average for the last 8 months!!!!!.

That's a money-printing, share printing and distribution rig job, insider enrichment scheme of the highest order.

All by selling promises, unfulfilled, and excuses, piled high, while printing and selling 500,000-675,000 shares EVERY SINGLE TRADING DAY on average for 8 months now!!!

And now with VFIN showing up on the ask, it suggests that NTEK has one or more convertible notes out that have not been disclosed to shareholders - and the noteholder is selling against the note to lock in his sales price given that the exercise price is typically well below market. Even MORE dilution in the Stinky Pinkie's PIPE.

And delivering ... NOTHING. Not even soap-infused sponges.

OH WHAT A SCAM!!!!!!!!!!

From the TA (Stalt, Inc.):
As of the close of business on 08/14/2013, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc.

Authorized Shares 990,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 464,292,868
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 388,027,287
Restricted Shares Outstanding 76,265,581


As of the close of business on 4/21/2014, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc
Authorized Shares 740,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 553,446,094
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 496,228,523
Restricted Shares Outstanding 57,217,571

GET THE FACTS! The numbers from Stalt don't lie.

If NTEK is profitable and paying a dividend, then why are they printing over 500,000 new shares every single trading day on average for 8 months and diluting shareholders to dust??? Why would NTEK be issuing convertible notes to toxic financiers if they truly were profitable and paying a dividend out of profits (which they have never said, BTW)???

Selling convertible notes to finance dividend payments is another sign of a penny stock SCAM.

Form T explained:

BigBake1 Member Level Wednesday, 08/14/13 09:55:23 AM
Re: FedUpToHere post# 48522
Post # of 66055
Form T’s

I find it funny how these are so poorly understood to the point of making up myths like “manipulation” and proof of large players “buying”. Although entertaining they are far from the real truth as to what is happening. Obviously everything that occurs during trading hours is to be reported within 30 seconds of the transaction occurring, that is per FINRA and their rules. Now not all trade transaction occur during market hours, those would not be your typical trade transaction, but market hours are from 9:30 to 4:00. A little unknown fact is that transactions that do not involve the market can occur up to 8pm and can be as early as 8am on the following day.

There are two distinctions here in the OTC Market. Premarket Form T can occur for two reasons, late reporting of a transaction from the day before, which is very rare to see and actual pre market trades if allowed by the broker. Rarely are these ever pointed out because they are usually a sign of buying up before the market opens. Never mind they rarely occur that frequently, typically during huge promotions you will see premarket trading activity in the OTC. The premarket Form T is quit boring since they do not conjure up MM manipulation of the PPS since typically the PPS is rising before the market open.. lol

Now as we all know there isn’t afterhours trading in the OTC, NONE and because a trade transaction gets recorded to the consolidated tape after market close does not make it an aftermarket trade. There are several causes of after market close transactions, the most common is the missed “Paint” attempt at closing the security higher. These individuals try to time their trade right at the last few seconds in hopes of sniping the close in a positive direction. They sometimes fail as latency is a real bitch in the matter, their network, their brokers network speed and various other factors create these issues and well, there it is, a Form T for 100 shares to hide the ugly that just missed. Because the transaction was executed during market hours but could not be posted during market hours it is reported in a Form T.

Nothing too crazy yet as far trading, pretty standard stuff, but now we will dive into an area that is not so well known. Large Form T’s reported after the closes are something completely different, you will see this in exchange traded securities also on a daily basis. The standard theory has been that this is just the MMs settling their books at the end of the day, somewhat true, but here in the OTC it is a specific action that is occurring. The OTC has changed over the years and contrary to popular belief MMs do not buy and sell these securities for their own principle account, instead they use Riskless Principle transactions.

So lets say you were given 200,000,000 shares of stinky MDIN as part of your debt deal to them, now it takes a specific broker that will accept the deposit of these newly issued free trading shares. You are not going to Etrade, Scottrade, Schwab…etc with these shares as they will not touch them. This “boutique” broker charges a deposit fee, typically 10-15%, which is a good rate considering the NSCC would charge you 20% on the same shares. Now you have them on deposit and you want them sold, you don’t just say sell them all on the market at once. This action would crush the market and instead your broker will advise you to piece it out with the market volume throughout the day.

So the broker will sell at the market price all day long based upon volume moving in and out, you typically see these broker on the offer, VNDM, VFIN, VERT, BKRT, BMAS..etc.. with undisclosed offer sizes because it is a “BLOCK POSITION”. They sell to retail all day long at market and at some point they will post a transaction for all the shares they sold, this sometimes is below the current Bid and it will be a large transaction. Now these are often reported after market close but they do occur during the trading day also. These Weighted Average Transactions are the Broker buying for the sales they sold throughout the day, so for example:

200,000@ .0017
1,000,000@ .0017
3,500,000@ .0017
2,000,000@ .0017
300,000@ .0017


These were the transactions recently on a security last week, these are the individual transaction on the consolidated tape. Now 4 minutes after market closed a transaction for 7,000,000@ .0016 shares was reported to the consolidated tape in a Form T. This is a Weighted Average Trade Transaction, the MM sold all day long at market, which in this case was a PPS of .0017, these shares were sold short because the MM already has a Block Position to work from of actual shares. The MM at the end of the day has now purchased the cover from the block position less their commission for the transactions at .0016.

Here is a FINRA example:

Quote:Section 404: Weighted Average Price/Special Pricing Formula Transactions

Q404.1: Member BD1 executes multiple trades to satisfy a customer order and then trades with the customer at a price equal to the volume-weighted average cost of the original trades plus a net difference in accordance with a net trading agreement with its customer. How should BD1 report the trade with its customer?

A404.1: The original trades and the customer leg of the transaction should be reported to the tape, and the report of the customer leg should include the weighted average price (.W) modifier. For example, member BD1 receives an order from a customer to buy 5,000 shares of ABCD security and accumulates the shares through five separate trades. Each of these five trades is reported to the tape. BD1 then sells the 5,000 shares of ABCD to its customer at its volume-weighted average cost with a net difference to reflect the compensation agreement between BD1 and its customer. BD1 should report the sale of 5,000 shares to its customer to the tape with the weighted average price modifier.



In this example it is talking about buying, but reverse the process for selling, the idea is to not to significantly affect the market by displaying a massive block of shares and also slowly bleeding the shares out on the market.

Essentially when you see an undisclosed block position on the offer and the notorious VNDM, VFIN, VERT, BKRT, BMAS, SUNR… and large Form T or even large block trades during trading hours below the current Bid are going off it is 100% dilution occurring.

FINRA frowns upon late reporting for transaction that occur during market hours that are not reported correctly, Form Ts are not a problem. If one is really interested in Trade Reporting I highly recommend these two sources to learn about it:

http://www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/Guidance/p038942

http://finra.complinet.com/en/display/display_main.html?rbid=2403&element_id=4410

As you can see there is nothing mysterious about them, and when you see these huge million share lots being reported after market close it is 100% dilution related and nothing else.

Fracking has released untold reserves of hemp oil and sinsemilla from previously unextractable tight underground reservoirs.

You know that many of the doofuses (doofi?) that buy into these obvious pennystock scams would believe that crapola.

These pennystock bagholders will just piss their money away on something else stupid when the pennystock scams they buy into are shut down.

These people are doomed to lose their money and impoverish themselves by their intractable stupidity.

As the old saying goes - you can't fix stupid. Or in Marion Morrison's immortal words: "Life is hard. It's harder when you're stupid."

When you realize that these people can vote, you understand why democracy is doomed. Idiocracy is merely a precocious documentary.

In the OTC, after hours Form T trades are almost without exception "late prints". They are the result of accumulated buys or sells handled on a "not held" basis through block desks. They have nothing to do with short selling in particular, but with buying and selling in general.

Let's say you are an insider, promoter, or finance guy and who has a large block of shares you want to liquidate (the most common reason for Form T trades, in my experience). You can tell your broker (who in the penny market is usually someone who specializes in this kind of work) that you want to sell "up to XXX million shares at the best price possible". He turns the order over to a market maker (it may be one from his own firm or it may be a market maker with whom his firm has an order flow agreement). In other cases, the seller may instruct his broker to "sell up to 10% of the day's volume at a positive average weighted price". The broker usually monitors the progress of the order throughout the day.

At the end of the day, the market maker handling the order will place a T-trade print on the tape for an accumulated total at the average price at which the shares were sold if there was still a balance left to sell. If the entire order had been completed during trading hours, the print will go on the tape normally.

You can pretty much tell whether the Form T trades are from large block buyers or sellers by looking at the price at which the trade was entered."

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66719500</i>;;;

OK - I wasn't even arguing anything about MDBX, just responding to some poster claiming that issuing shares without consideration is "illegal".

I'm not following MDBX at this time. I'm more interested in seeing the sentences of Jim Bolt, Steven Moskowitz, and Foley's current imprisonment. Pus every time I turn over a rock on the NTEK scam, I find more festering pus and pockets of infection. The odor of gas gangrene is bellowing out of NTEK at every turn in the road.

I can't focus time on the weed stocks now - even though I will love to see SKTO blow up in Jeff Benz's face.

Welp, Monday should bring Foley's latest lawyer's reply brief to the USA's Opposition to Motion for Bail on Appeal. I believe he as another 3 days to file an opposition brief to the USA's Motion to Dismiss Appeal.

If the FoleyLawyer manages to introduce new arguments or evidence into the reply brief, then I believe the Ninth Circus will grant the USA 7 days to file a sur-reply/sur-rebuttal brief directed only at the new evidence and argument. Then the written submissions for the bail appeal are done and the Motions Panel of the Ninth Circus can either rule on the submissions for the bail matter or schedule an oral hearing.

On Thursday, I believe the FoleyLawyer's Opposition Brief opposing the Motion to Dismiss is due. Then there will be 7 days for the USA to file a reply brief. If the USA raises new issues or evidence in the reply brief, the court may allow 10 days for the FoleyLawyer to submit a sur-reply/sur-rebuttal brief directed only at the new matter. Then the court could rule on the motion or schedule an oral hearing.

With the appeal brief due on May 5th, I am forecasting that the Motions Panel will defer oral hearing and ruling on both matters (motion for bail and motion to dismiss appeal) until a date after May 5th so they can rule on both matters with the Appeal Brief in hand - and possibly the USA's reply brief to the appeal brief.

Then they shut it all down - denying the appeal, thus mooting the bail motion. David Foley then gets either taken into custody or is told to report to Lompoc within a few days. Then the steel doors clank shut and he cries himself to sleep for the next six weeks on a top bunk.

When VFIN is doing T trades on a stock, massive dilution follows. The are the mark of death - like plague buboes or the last death rattle and rales of a terminal cancer patient.

Where VFIN is dumping and using T trades to square up the accounts at VWAP for the day's sales, watch for a deluge of new shares to pour into the market. Somebody has a large toxic convertible note and they're selling against the box.

"I can be issued shares based upon nothing at all."

"If you were it would be illegal. A consideration MUST be given."

Umm.. while your comment (in red) is generally the case, it is not strictly true.

Generally, other shareholders can sue the company (and directors and officers) if the company issues shares for less value than the fair market value for the consideration offered. This is why companies that do not want to be sued by irate shareholders pay for and get a fairness opinion drafted by third-party legal counsel and a non-affiliated banker. The fairness opinion provides an MBA-level analysis of why the stock issuance is deemed economically fair to existing shareholders. The company and its officers and directors then have this fairness opinion to rely upon when there is a shareholder suit. In the VC world, existing VCs usually request a fairness opinion before agreeing to a new series of stock issuances that would bring in new investors. Well, in the legitimate VC world anyway.

Now for pennystocks, there are rarely if ever fairness opinions rendered, as the companies typically have little to no book value or enterprise value and toxic financiers can extract extortionary financing terms without real fear of shareholder suits, as no institutions own crappy pennystocks, only the suckers of the world who can't finance a shareholder suit typically. Contingent-fee class action shareholder lawsuit firms won't waste their time on suing a worthless pennystock, as these scams simply declare bankruptcy and the crooked management and directors often do the same - and rarely do they have D&O insurance for the class action lawyers to gorge upon.

It is not technically illegal for a corporation to issue stock as a gift. Just as McDonalds can give money to Ronald McDonald House charities, it is not per se illegal for the corporation to issue stock as a grant or gift without financial or sweat equity consideration. Of course the shareholders can object and file a lawsuit to contest the grant(s), but as I've said it is rare for pennystock scamvestors to ever do that. On NTEK, who has contested the 25,500,000 shares issued to a Philip Foley in Massachusetts? Nobody. The scamvestors believe the company hype and view it as counter to their financial interest to ever file a shareholder suit, plus they are unsophisticated rubes who would never even think of this let alone know how to file a shareholder derivative suit.

Neow, I'm not a securities lawyer so I'll defer to my colleague CGardner if this is wrong, but I don't see that issuing shares as a gift is per se "illegal". I doubt the SEC would take action simply because a public corporation issued shares for no or insuficient value consideration. It would be a right of action for shareholders to contest, in my view, and not a power granted to a governmental authority like the SEC or state securities policing agencies.

Just as McDonalds can give cash to a charity, they can also gift stock issued to the charity. If BillyBob LLC, the CEO's brother's "non-profit" charity organization is granted a bajillion shares of ScamCo, I believe the only parties with standing to contest that are existing ScamCo shareholders in a shareholder lawsuit. I would also expect that ScamCo management and directors would cook up some explanation and rely on the business judgement rule to justify their decision.

But I will await CGardener's expertise on this matter. My expertise areas do not include the fine points of the securities laws, only a general knowledge and some picked-up real world experiences.

No need to wait for the NP-2 now that there is a much better set-top box that David Foley can pirate this year - much better than last year's Madcatz MOJO:

"ZTE has launched of its 4K p60 Ultra HD set top box (STB), the ZXV10 B803, at Mobile World Congress (MWC) 2014 in Barcelona."

Davey can just make a new enclosure for the ZXV10 B803 motherboard and voila - NP-2 - all ready for another year of smoke-and-mirrors (and zero independent tests and reviews) of FoleyFollies, carried on by one of the Foleys - Phil or Steve - while Davey is "out of the office" for a couple of years.

"Moonshine Kingdom" is a guaranteed Oscar winner - probably multiple Oscars given the $400M box office take.

And "Hot Tuna" by Rick Rosenthal is a blockbuster. That Weed State project grossed tens of millions just in its opening weekend in the Van Duzer Theatre at Weed State. Rumor in Hollywood is that this flick will be huge for the Pitcairn Island distributor.

Plus the 15+ Polish films that the world is just dying to see once the English and Spanish subtitles are done. They didn't do so great in Poland, but that's just because they didn't have the English subtitles yet. Plus they're gonna be so much better in "near lossless 4K" - it improves the plotline and character dialogue.

On top of that you have the Sammy Davis Jr. VHS videotapes in "near lossless 4K" (a fuzzy, blocky, choppy version of 1080p). I was just having breakfast in the UC-Berkeley cafeteria "The Den" last week and the students could not stop talking about how the retro Sammy craze is spreading throughout the younger folks culture. Everywhere I listened, somebody was chatting about Sammy Davis Jr.

Ultraflix has the film library and electrolytes that plants crave!

And so highly compressed that they often look better than your Dish Network signal in a massive downpour or when your converter box overheats because you put a pizza box over the air cooling vents.

NTEK is a scam. It's a share-printing stock distribution scam to enrich insiders and dilute the stock using a phony tech story and COTS hardware and software for smoke-and-mirrors demos implying the company has some revolutionary tech as bait for the investors to buy the insider shares. I never questioned the dividend - so don't accuse me of that. Paying a nominal dividend is not an uncommon feature of pennystock scams.

Usually they do it by issuing a stock dividend for a phony spinoff company or the like - sometimes, less commonly, cash if they are using fake financials and people are questioning them - the nominal cash is a distractor that lets the pumpers claim that the ScamCo is financially profitable. Pennystocks that issue dividends claim that it will force those invisible shorts to buy stock or have to pay the dividend, which in the form of a new stock that is not buyable on the market, can't be acquired. These ploys ALWAYS, and I mean ALWAYS fail - because there is no significant short positions in pennystocks, other than insiders shorting against the box (if you don't know that term, you have zero business trading pennies).

Neow, for the cash dividends used to bolster the claim that a ScamCo filing fake financials is financially solid, that storyline is ruined when the ScamCo is printing over 500,000 new shares every single trading day on average for the last 8 months - no financially solid and profitable company dilutes its stock that badly unless they are selling stock to raise cash constantly - usually by selling convertible notes to toxic financiers - like those that sell short against their notes to lock in their profits via dumping via VFIN and VNDM.

Hmmm ... both of which have been selling NTEK on the ask for weeks now - along with the insiders selling via CHDN (which specializes in microcap insiders selling out and does not take retail accounts).

But don't worry, I'm sure NTEK will be the very first penny stock I've ever posted about that turned out NOT to be a total scam.

Bwahahahahahahaa!!

I've never figured out how Tommy's Burgers became a chain. Their stuff sucks. The worse quality chili (tastes like bad dog food smells) on the burgers, soggy bun from the cheap chili, a total mess to eat, and it is low quality beef for the patty.

It just out-and-out sucks. Only salvations are (1) the pickle slices that somewhat kill the taste of the dog food chili, and (2) once you eat one, you're not in the mood to eat anything else for 12 hours, so you don't feel hungry, just vaguely sick for 12-18 hours.

We stopped at one down in Santa Clarita a couple of weeks ago so my wife could try one (my son and I had experienced the Tommy's Burgers horror show previously at the Van Nuys location and wanted mom to see the disaster burger we had told her about).

There are two mysteries about Tommy's Burgers:

(1) how did this dump ever have enough business to expand into a chain that spans from Sandy Eggo to the Grapevine; and

(2) do they rely on regular repeat customers, and, if so, why are these regular customers not just buying discount Alpo and putting it on a Whopper Jr. - and/or how do these regular customers continue living unless they have their own dedicated gastric lavage pumps?

The PAINFUL FACTS: 11,000,000 new printed FoleyShares every single month and 13,525,154 restricted shares EVERY SINGLE MONTH on average being dumped into the free-trading market for 8 months! What a dilution machine the FoleyFamily has got running here. No wonder the PPS is tanking - that's more than 500,000 newly printed shares EVERY TRADING DAY and more than 675,000 newly delegended, previously restricted NTEK stock shares that needs to be absorbed into the market each and every trading day on average for the last 8 months!!!!!.

That's a money-printing, share printing and distribution rig job, insider enrichment scheme of the highest order.

All by selling promises, unfulfilled, and excuses, piled high, while printing and selling 500,000-675,000 shares EVERY SINGLE TRADING DAY on average for 8 months now!!!

And now with VFIN showing up on the ask, it suggests that NTEK has one or more convertible notes out that have not been disclosed to shareholders - and the noteholder is selling against the note to lock in his sales price given that the exercise price is typically well below market. Even MORE dilution in the Stinky Pinkie's PIPE.

And delivering ... NOTHING. Not even soap-infused sponges.

OH WHAT A SCAM!!!!!!!!!!

From the TA (Stalt, Inc.):
As of the close of business on 08/14/2013, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc.

Authorized Shares 990,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 464,292,868
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 388,027,287
Restricted Shares Outstanding 76,265,581


As of the close of business on 4/21/2014, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc
Authorized Shares 740,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 553,446,094
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 496,228,523
Restricted Shares Outstanding 57,217,571

GET THE FACTS! The numbers from Stalt don't lie.

If NTEK is profitable and paying a dividend, then why are they printing over 500,000 new shares every single trading day on average for 8 months and diluting shareholders to dust??? Why would NTEK be issuing convertible notes to toxic financiers if they truly were profitable and paying a dividend out of profits (which they have never said, BTW)???

Selling convertible notes to finance dividend payments is another sign of a penny stock SCAM.

Any processor can DO h.265, but they cannot do it FAST enough to decode highly compressed video with fast motion and high complexity content without significant image quality degradation.

Tegra 4 is obsolete. Even the Tegra K1 apparently doesn't have enough power, even though it is 4 times more powerful than the older, lowly Tegra 4. That's why the WCCF Tech articles states:

"Scoring a rock solid 60fps in an off screen 1080p Benchmark it fares significantly better than the Tegra 4. The predecessor to this chip can only manage a measly 16fps (at only 1080p!) so you can see for yourself how great a difference this is."

Read more: http://wccftech.com/tegra-k1-superchip-benchmarks-revealed-4-times-faster-tegra-4/#ixzz2z0JmFTXS

The Tegra K1 is only able to do realistic 60 fps at 1080p resolution, and the old Tegra 4 is only about 1/4th as powerful as the new K1.

Probably better to wait for a more powerful chip that has the horsepower to to the job on fast motion and high image complexity video with 60 fps at much better than just a 1080p level image quality that the new K1 does.

As long as NTEK is sending the mythical NP-1 unicorns back to the "factory" for software upgrades and new motion sensing hardware for the controller, may as well have the "factory" use a much more capable, newer GPU than the old, weak Tegra 4. Or maybe NTEK should just rebrand the ZXV10 B803 if that really has the ability to do a good job decoding HEVC at better than 1080p quality levels and better than 30 fps. And doesn't require progressive downloading but can stream a continual long video of fast motion and high image complexity. The Broadcom chip may or may not be powerful enough, although one manufacturer claims it is:

"The ZXV10 B803 is designed based on the Broadcom BCM 7252 chip, and supports the 4Kx2KP60 decoding capability, which can decode Ultra HD video with the maximum resolution of 3840×2160. In comparison to traditional HD Internet STBs, the 4K UHD STB can display more vivid and precise images to significantly enhance the user experience.

4K video technology (also named as 2160p) is a new type of resolution standard. Its UHDTV specification can deliver a resolution of 3840×2160 pixels, and the maximum Full Aperture 4K specification reaches 4096×3112. In comparison to the current mainstream 1080p resolution of 1920×1080, 4K can provide over four times the image definition quality. In the future, 4K HD TV sets will be very popular, and the 4K HD and HEVC decoding technologies will help raise the HD market tide. However, in the current market, 4K chips are mainly 4KP30 – only a few chips can support 4KP60. The ZTE ZXV10 B803 STB uses a 4KP60 chip, making it one of the first HD STBs to support 4KP60.

Fang Hui, Deputy President of ZTE, said: “As a global leader in the IPTV market, ZTE offers a complete series of Internet STB products across the range of available resolutions, and is focusing strongly on the development of high-end STB products. This 4KP60 HD STB product will help build our presence in the high end market.”

The ZTE ZXV10 B803 also supports the H.265 format. H.265 is the next generation super HD code transmission specification, which delivers encoded video using half the bandwidth of the previous generation (H.264), with the same quality. The H.265 standard will gradually replace H.264 to become the mainstream standard of the next generation of video transmission.

The ZTE ZXV10 B803 also has a powerful CPU with a processing capability of 10k DMIPS (Dhrystone million instructions per second), enabling faster processing and a better user experience in comparison to current mainstream HD Internet STBs."

Read more at http://benchmarkreviews.com/13009/zte-zxv10-b803-4k-p60-ultra-hd-set-top-box-launched/#h48CwhXTZMCq5tAU.99

"ZTE has launched of its 4K p60 Ultra HD set top box (STB), the ZXV10 B803, at Mobile World Congress (MWC) 2014 in Barcelona.

The ZXV10 B803 is designed based on the Broadcom BCM 7252 chip, and supports the 4Kx2KP60 decoding capability, which can decode Ultra HD video with the maximum resolution of 3840x2160. In comparison to traditional HD Internet STBs, the 4K UHD STB can display more vivid and precise images to significantly enhance the user experience.

The ZTE ZXV10 B803 also supports the H.265 format. H.265 is the next generation super HD code transmission specification, which deliversencoded video using half the bandwidth of the previous generation (H.264), with the same quality. The H.265 standard will gradually replace H.264 to become the mainstream standard of the next generation of video transmission."

http://www.voicendata.com/voice-data/news/209836/mwc-zte-launches-4k-p60-ultra-hd-stb#sthash.HcvQdZTZ.FtezOjwf.dpuf

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=100650811

The Tegra 4 can't do the job on HEVC with real content like Saving Private Ryan or sports - not even close.

And NO software can fix that because HEVC is the encoding/decoding method and the data packets are dictated by that and the decoding requires 50 percent more computational power than h.264.

The Tegra 4 and even the Tegra K1 which is 4 times more powerful BOTH lack the ability to decode HEVC in realtime for real content like a TV show, sports, or a movie.

It's a hardware limitation that cannot be fixed by software. The limits are imposed by the content complexity, the HEVC codec, and the chip architecture and capability limitations.

Just like no amount of software tweaking will get a 4.77MHz 8088 to run Windows 7 acceptably - or even a 16 MHz 80386.

The hardware is simply incapable, and it's not even a close call. It is over an order of magnitude (more than 10x) underpowered - maybe as much as 500x underpowered.

"NUVOLA NP-1 using H.265-VP9 delivers in 3-6 MBPS"

Maybe an unmoving picture of a white cat on a field of snow.

Not anything like watchable content. And not in any quality level that is watchable.

You can get an old 486 box to decode a h.265 file, but it can't do it fast enough for realtime replay of a complex image or fast motion. Neither can a Tegra 4 unless the signal is extremely simple - like unmoving white-on-white.

You can't get around the fundamental limitation that the Tegra 4 is not even close enough to the power needed for the job for HEVC-encoded real content - like say Saving Private Ryan combat scenes or a football game - or even a simple episode of NCIS.

The Tegra 4 can't do it and neither can the 4x more powerful Tegra K1. Just read the posted link I gave a week or so back from CNET.

It already is available. At Fry's. Look under "MOJO". $159.99. Do the free firmware upgrade (no need to ship it back to "the factory").

It does not matter where the Tegra 4 draws power from, it's computational limits are dictated by power dissipation (correct me, DangFool, if needed) and the overall clock speed that the other components like the DRAM can run at (their switching speed has limits due to trench capacitor discharge/charge rates plus they have heat dissipation limits). Plus increased temps lead to electromigration and premature failure (much lower MTBF).

Tegra 4 is not powerful enough to handle the computational load of h.265 at the rate needed to stream complex image or motion video in 4K. Even the 4x more powerful K1 can't do that.

Too many cycles to decode those highly compressed data streams.

Just a fact. Read the reviews - I posted one link on here a week ago or so of the K1's limits in this area and the even worse (1/3.75 as powerful) Tegra 4.

Now, for something a little different:

In the mid-90s, one of our clients was Hyundai Electronics Industries and they were engaged in entering the DRAM business. They had just built a $3.2 billion fab facility in rural South Korea and were sampling 16Meg DRAM on 300mm wafers. Micron, IBM, TI, NEC, Lucky-Goldstar, Toshiba, Samsung, and few other of the DRAM industry cabal (lol - chaebol sounds like cabal) did not particularly want to let HEI into the DRAM market and had stacks and stacks of related patents that could be asserted against an HEI DRAM product (or mfg process - or even starting materials like novolac resin for the masking). So HEI needed to put together a whole lot of licensing agreements with these titans in order to buy their way into the DRAM market (there were a few other gambits that were used by HEI for negotiating leverage and for buying down the consideration cost by cross-licensing, but that's another topic).

We were tasked with pulling off all these mostly simultaneous and often multi-party licensing agreements, sometimes supply agreements, and almost always settlements or covenants not to sue which had to comport with antitrust laws in the US and EU even though they were basically a club of DRAM/semicon producers legally enforcing an anticompetitive IP monopoly guild using an overwhelming patent stack to exclude new entrants that they did not want in the DRAM club.

Now, the interesting part. The Hyundai execs told us that "the big Mr. Chung" (one of the Hyundai founder's family who were very senior execs in the Hyundai conglomerate) was coming over to have us present the strategy and progress for buying into the DRAM market. The lower Hyundai execs asked us what "entertainment accomodations" we had made for Big Chung (I omit his full name and initials intentionally - there are several Big Chungs in the Hyundai chaebol) when he arrived. We had planned a dinner and a round of golf at the Olympic Club. The HEI execs frowned and said "no, you misunderstand, 'entertainment'" - what they meant was prostitutes for Big Chung.

Uh well that's illegal in the USA and asking a lawfirm to arrange for prostitutes is not a client service that is normally expected. But, as HEI was a huge billing-insensitive client, a solution was found. One of the firm's associates was from the Central Valley and had worked for a Japanese semiconductor manufacturer as the second-in-command at a large DRAM fab in Roseville before going to law school. One of the things he did in his job with that DRAM maker was to make such "arrangements" for visiting Japanese executives. So he had contacts and they told him about a "love boat" that specializes in taking visiting Asian businessmen out on the Bay for an evening of wick-dipping safe from police raids and prying eyes with cameras. The "love boat" left Pete's Harbor and was a floating mini-brothel for mostly Asian businessmen.

We had the associate "inform" the junior HEI execs of this 'entertainment for Big Chung' and help them make arrangements so that the firm was not directly involved in pimping or pandering and had no direct knowledge of what was arranged. How it was paid for is something I don't know but I'm sure it involved some creative accounting or paying an intermediary for "Bay cruise" or something legit sounding.

Big Chung arrived and while he did seem to enjoy the dinner and golf at the Olympic, word came up that he especially enjoyed the "bay cruise" and the HEI execs wanted to know if it was OK to tell other Hyundai executives about the "love boat" in Pete's Harbor so that when they came over to the Bay Area, they could also avail themselves of the "Bay cruise".

When the firm later sent the associate to Korea to visit the HEI DRAM fab at their invitation, he checked into the company-owned hotel next to the fab and was informed that there was an excellent restaurant right next door to the hotel where he should simply leave his room number as payment and also a block away was a "health spa" where he had full privileges all paid for, courtesy of HEI. The health spa was the HEI-owned and operated brothel for entertaining visiting guests. The HEI execs invited the associate to visit the HEI facility and the health spa in reciprocity for his magnificent work in assisting Big Chung's visit to the Bay Area and making them and the firm (which was their choice) look good in the eyes of Big Chung.

Now, the guy who ran the love boat out of Pete's Harbor has an interesting story, but that's for some other day and forum.

The associate got an excellent extra-special bonus that year and earned a lot of juice that helped him get over the partnership vote later on. A fellow with those intangible skills is always useful. He is a bit like the Michael Clayton character. He now has his own boat and takes Asian clients out for fishing trips (or so he claims). Then he writes it all off as an entertainment expense. All I know is that he has a good number of very happy Asian clients that keep his originations and collections healthy.

"Sounds awfully pretentious to me."

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning on that. Are you saying that dressing formally to meet someone is a sign of respect and failing to do so is disrespectful or an "alpha male" move?

I don't take it that way at all. I take it as someone who is here to focus on business and content, not appearance. Nobody took umbrage at the i-banker who showed up in a golf shirt and leather jacket for an initial large group meeting. He was a very matter-of-fact and no-bullshit guy and I suspect he simply doesn't/didn't wish to wear a costume (suit) for the purpose of wearing a costume. He was not dressing down for pretense or as a power move - if he was, I don't think anyone took it as such.

Do you also find it pretentious when a male shows up with a day or a couple of days of beard growth? Do you interpret this as a sign of disrespect? I don't and I suspect most guys don't.

Maybe this is one of those Mars/Venus issues.

It really just depends on how well you know the person(s). For initial meetings with a new person, monkey suits are donned (in the office or in the bathroom usually). But for folks you work with a lot, everyone usually is informal about it. For example, I've worked a lot with Bruce Dallas of Davis, Polk on deals/IPOs and he is pretty informal so we would meet in our "daily casual" garb - even whole teams that work together a lot - another example - Wilson has a lot of folks who are everyday casual even when meeting new clients. Especially transactional practice folks.

SOME i-bankers are stuffy, but not as much as you'd think. I've had i-bankers come from top-tier underwriters who show up in a golf shirt, slacks, and a leather jacket. Even ones from NYC. I think they are used to the Silicon Valley casual style and if they're are familiar with the people or firms involved in a transaction/underwriting they dress accordingly.

Century City is more formal, but not as much as you might think. Behind the scenes at places like Irell, Hogan & Hartson, Bingham, folks are casual dressers unless they are in a fishbowl conference room and/or meeting with clients or other lawyers that they are not familiar with.

The monkey suit thing is all posing, and once people become familiar with each other, it is kind of a cultural symbol to show your fraternity with each other by dropping the pretense. It makes for a better spirit of collegiality, IMO. Now, that said, this is definitely a male thing. But most tech law (other than copyright and trademarks) in Silicon Valley is very male-dominated, as you may have experienced. There are some female securities lawyers, and *surprise* they often acclimate to the male ethos and will adopt the casual dress when the rest of the team is doing that.

You dress to pose for the expectations of the people you meet with. Oftentimes the conference room will start out with suits, then the jackets go on the chairs, then at lunch the ties come off and the collars open. Within a day or so, everyone is coming casual. That's the common pattern. (Not universal, but pretty common.)

The younger set of i-Bankers seems to be a lot less formal in many respects. But my experience is limited to the West Coast and contexts where legal teams do a lot of repeat business with the same banks.

Someday, I'll write about the deals done in the old Wagon Wheel tavern in Mountain View or - gasp - in the Brass Rail in Sunnyvale over their lunch buffet - with term sheets written on napkins on-the-fly. Then there are the less interesting stories from Old Pro's.

Yepper, and I agree with you. It's not right, but it is the way it is.

Business suits and ties don't make anyone smarter (arguably they make many dumber), but the East Coast establishment still require those as the uniform of the day. Silicon Valley, not so much.

Even Silicon Valley lawfirms are mostly populated by folks with polo shirts and jeans (a monkey suit and tie hanging on the back of the office door in case an East Coastie shows up for an appointment doing DD on a transaction.

I even know a managing partner of one of the biggest Bay Area law firms who pads around the office in his socks.

But yea, CEOs and even CFOs have to be media darlings and need to do the Anchorman routine. COOs notsomuch. CTOs/CIOs - not at all - I've seen them wear shorts and sandals.

And there are the vanguard CEOs like Steve Jobs and his blue jeans and turtleneck (which I am told he sometimes didn't change for several days in a row - I also heard his feet stank up his office), Zuckerberg and his hoodies, and the younger dotcom/social media CEOs.

DEAD CAT BOUNCE.

Can't beat the price:

Price Size Mkt Time
z $0.00 10,000 OTO 04/01
$0.00 10,000 OTO 03/25
z $0.00 3,500 OTO 03/20
$0.00 21,000 OTO 02/24
$0.00 100,000 OTO 02/12
$0.0001 300,000 OTO 02/12
$0.0001 180,000 OTO 02/12
$0.00 80,000 OTO 01/27
z $0.00 7,000 OTO 01/24

Looking at the coloration differences on his lid, I almost think that ponytail thingy is part of a hairpiece. Either that or he's got a hairstylist doing some very interesting dyeing of only the hair on the top of his dome.

His video is confidence-shattering. He would melt like an eskimo pie in Death Valley in August if he were subjected to a video deposition or live testimony in court. He just has that "I'm constantly dissembling and it depends on what 'is' is" demeanor/aroma.

I could see him stating "I don't recall my name, but hypothetically, allegedly, my name could possibly be Sterling Scott - Scott with two T's. But I have no specific recollection at this time."

Ballmer might have broken this trend though: http://business.time.com/2011/09/08/do-fat-ceo-faces-equal-fat-profits/

"Has the No Tech NP1 been shipped?"

It's at your local Fry's store under "MOJO" - you will need to download the new firmware update for 4K.

Or, for $139 you can get the nVidia SHIELD, which is slightly different but also can do 4K if you have the codec.

Mind you that none of these Tegra 4 boxes can do 4K well, but if you don't mind just watching butterflies on fuzzy backgrounds - go for it.

And just don't try H265/HEVC because the Tegra 4 (and even the K1) can't handle the computational load at high bandwidths. Better to just buy a 4K smart TV.

The PAINFUL FACTS: 11,000,000 new printed FoleyShares every single month and 13,525,154 restricted shares EVERY SINGLE MONTH on average being dumped into the free-trading market for 8 months! What a dilution machine the FoleyFamily has got running here. No wonder the PPS is tanking - that's more than 500,000 newly printed shares EVERY TRADING DAY and more than 675,000 newly delegended, previously restricted NTEK stock shares that needs to be absorbed into the market each and every trading day on average for the last 8 months!!!!!.

That's a money-printing, share printing and distribution rig job, insider enrichment scheme of the highest order.

All by selling promises, unfulfilled, and excuses, piled high, while printing and selling 500,000-675,000 shares EVERY SINGLE TRADING DAY on average for 8 months now!!!

And now with VFIN showing up on the ask, it suggests that NTEK has one or more convertible notes out that have not been disclosed to shareholders - and the noteholder is selling against the note to lock in his sales price given that the exercise price is typically well below market. Even MORE dilution in the Stinky Pinkie's PIPE.

And delivering ... NOTHING. Not even soap-infused sponges.

OH WHAT A SCAM!!!!!!!!!!

From the TA (Stalt, Inc.):
As of the close of business on 08/14/2013, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc.

Authorized Shares 990,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 464,292,868
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 388,027,287
Restricted Shares Outstanding 76,265,581


As of the close of business on 4/21/2014, the following is the outstanding information for:

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc
Authorized Shares 740,000,000
Total Shares Issued & Outstanding 553,446,094
Free Trading Shares Outstanding 496,228,523
Restricted Shares Outstanding 57,217,571


If NTEK is profitable and paying a dividend, then why are they printing over 500,000 new shares every single trading day on average for 8 months and diluting shareholders to dust??? Why would NTEK be issuing convertible notes to toxic financiers if they truly were profitable and paying a dividend out of profits (which they have never said, BTW)???

Selling convertible notes to finance dividend payments is another sign of a penny stock SCAM.

But wait, Ultraflix debuts for Superbowl Sunday with 75+ feature-length movies, including the blockbuster "Moonshine Kingdom" and the Weed State student project "Hot Tuna", plus over 15 Polish movies and Sammy Davis Jr. VHS tapes in 4K. Oh and all those Multicom gems that people are clamoring to see - lining up around the block.

Ultraflix is the King of Content. Plus I'm sure they'll commission David Foley to use a Handycam and do remakes of "The Shawshank Redemption" and "Escape from Alcatraz" that they can upscale to 4K and add to the Ultraflix lie-berry.

The real key is here: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101055688

Restricted shares only come off restriction if the shareholder demands that the legends be removed and requests the company to agree and supply documentation to the TA and outside legal counsel. It's not something that happens automatically.

Which brings up another point about the scam called NTEK.

The company HQ is in San Jose, where the Bay Area is packed with quality securities lawyers - Wilson, Sonsini or Cooley Godward, or Fenwick, or Gunderson, Dettmer, or any of two dozen satellite offices of East Coast and Midwest megafirms.

But who does NTEK use as their securities lawyer?

A solo practioner from Baton Rouge, Louisiana who advertises one of his specialty areas is offering Rule 144 delegending opinion letters for restricted stock "within 24 hours"

http://www.steverobertslaw.com/rule144.html

Yeah, that's how a legit Silicon Valley tech company selects securities law counsel - find a solo practitioner 2500 miles away in backwater Louisiana who advertises a specialty in delegending restricted stock - and within 24 hours!


How can anyone not see all these SCAM red flags EVERYWHERE on NTEK?

With VFIN now selling NTEK, the shareholders should demand at the shareholders' meeting that the company disclose all convertible notes and the terms of those notes.

VFIN is a well-known diluter which sells into the market representing convertible notes - usually toxic financing - to lock in a sale price before the notes can be converted at a predetermined exercise price well below the current market.

If the company admits they have one or more convertible notes out, then with the dividend you will know this is just a raw, out-and-out scam, which I what I have concluded long ago.

Shareholders should demand full disclosure of all convertible notes, their amount and exercise price(s).

VFIN is bad news.