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.
Well, if they didn't want it, then why the f*ck did they give away all those millions of shares and let the stock tumble to .008?
You simply CANNOT give management a free pass here. They are either completely inept, criminals, or both.
I keep telling you guys that the MM's will continue to drop the price because there is no buying pressure (yeah we all know why so no need to rehash it). So I'm not sure why anyone is surprised that the stock keeps going down. This is how the game has always worked.
Why did Fullbridge leave out his last position at Atrinsic?
You do realize that with the dilution this scenario would value the stock right where it's at now.
And that's where we come in. The resolve of this shareholder base will prevail in at the very least finding out the truth, with or without lawyers. We have rights, recourse, and remedies.
Even though they've gone dark, why are they not updating their affiliate website? The link to Spyder goes to a Wordpress template and the Summit announcement for last month is still there.
Either they want the share price to tank, they're restricted from saying anything "new" or current, or going down the drain (which makes no sense to me).
If they were merely getting their house in order, restructuring, cutting expenses, etc., they should still be keeping their site up to date. So by process of elimination for some reason they are restricted from giving out any new/current info. Why?
The float is so locked up there isn't much stock to trade. Longs are holding strong and MM's will try to shake out a few more today as I expect a test of the .05 support.
LOL, the next 8K will be "we just raised enough money to power the new air compressor for a week".
This has happened to me with various posters several times, still haven't figured out why.
Because in order to go private they'd need to buy all the outstanding shares that are locked up by those who know the value of the company is much higher.
A "consulting controller" is not a temporary consultant! Geez, before people make wild-ass assumptions learn what you're talking about.
Awesome find chade! Consulting controllers don't come cheap especially in NYC, he has to be making over 100K/year. Now this is solid information. Well done.
I agree. I'd love to admit I was wrong, but I don't think Facebook has any interest in ATRN unless it was packaged with BD and/or Kenshoo. Hmmm....
2 things still give me hope:
1. The BOD appears to remain intact
2. Many key executives appear to still be with the company, unless all of them decided to stop updating their LinkedIn accounts all at the same time
LOL yeah they read this board and don't give a sh*t! They know they're facing legal action and a very bad public relations fiasco yet they continue to ignore. You reap what you sow.
Yep, I'll take .20 at this point.
chade, I agree. But it's also possible they already made a "deal with the devil" for a much lower price (25 to 35 cents per share). We just don't know but I'm 99% certain we'll find out before that May 31 deadliine.
It all depends on what kind of news comes out. In order for this to get to $1.00+ it'll have to be news that shows the company is continuing operations, increasing revenues and decreasing expenses. Then the sky is the limit.
Of course, they could have already done this when the stock was around .35 but instead they chose to do something that makes no sense to any of us. We need to know why.
The float is pretty well locked up, however, everyone has their sell price in mind. If the stock gets to .15-.25 I would expect at least 1/3 of current holders to sell; another 1/3 at .25-.50, and the last 1/3 at .50-$1.50.
It's not "thin" to $1.00, there are millions of shares just waiting to be sold on the way up. If it ever goes up.
MM's are playing their usual games, drop the offer just below a sizable block to try and induce the seller to sell at the bid.
Your DD is superb. However, we still have rights and resources, and if they think we're going away without a fight they're crazy. We'll use every legal recourse available to us to find out the truth.
Well, I keep coming back to the same question: why is the BOD still intact including Goldfarb who resigned as CEO but stayed on as a Director, and why are the key executives still hanging in there if things are so bleak?
And the FB speculation leads me back to Doc's question: why didn't ATRN just sell shares to pay down the debt instead of issuing millions to BD?
And finally, why go dark and DEREGISTER the remaining shares that could have been used to pay down more debt or raise funds to continue operations assuming the company was in serioius financial trouble.
Perhaps ATRN/BD/Kazaa are part of a package deal for FB and these guys are waiting for the payoff? The non-essential personnel are gone, other overhead and expenses have been cut significantly, and going dark allows them to clean up whatever other pending matters there are without wild speculation by the marketplace.
There is a compelling case for a buyout/merger even without the FB angle, but enter FB and the things guys like buck and Nikolai have found lately and the case is even more compelling. What else makes sense when you consider all the evidence?
I should have put "sinking ship" in quotes because I was being somewhat facetious when I wrote that. My dilemma is that "if the ship is sinking, why are the board and all the key executives still intact, and why did Goldfarb stay on the board after resigning"? It makes no sense to me IF the ship is indeed sinking (which I don't believe).
Despite the very good due diligence (both positive and negative), I just have one nagging question:
Why is the Board of Directors still intact? No one has resigned, no one has been forced out, and Goldfarb stayed on the board after he resigned as CEO. Even key players like Rifkin, Fong and Baker are still there.
The ship is sinking yet all the captains are still on board (no pun intended)? This fact continues to intrigue me.
Doc, there are several posters here who have done a lot of DD on the relationships amongst the board members and other executive management. Hopefully one of them has that answer at their fingertips.
Each member of a corporation’s board of directors owes a fiduciary duty to the corporation and its shareholders. That duty fundamentally has two obligations: the duty of care (directors must perform their jobs diligently and competently) and the duty of loyalty (directors cannot use their positions of trust to further the private interests of any third party – including themselves). Under both these duties, but especially the duty of loyalty, the interests of the corporation and its shareholders must always come first.
As part of the duty of loyalty, directors and officers (as well as controlling shareholders) are required to act with “inherent fairness” to the corporation. That especially relates to any contracts that the board is called upon to approve. It can
sometimes be the case that contracts would be between the corporation and one or more individual board members. Any such contract must be fully disclosed and approved by a majority of board members who are not themselves contracting with the corporation. If approval is not given in this way, the contract may be considered void.
In California, so long as certain requirements are met, a contract or other transaction between a director or officer and the corporation is “neither void nor voidable” simply because of the director’s or officer’s interest in that contract. However, if those requirements are not met, the transaction covered by the contract will be upheld only if the director or officer can prove its “fairness” to the corporation.
A. What Constitutes an “Interested-Director” Transaction:
(1) Contracts between a director and the corporation: ANY contract or transaction directly between the corporation and one or more of its directors is subject to the requirements described in Part B below. The director involved in such a contract is called an “interested director,” and it is presumed that the director’s interest is material.
Typically, a material interest includes compensation arrangements, stock option agreements, buying or selling assets, leasing property or similar actions that produce a financial benefit for the director.
(2) Contracts with another company in which the director has
“material financial interest”: A contract or other transaction with another entity is also subject to the requirements below if a director has a “material financial interest” in such a firm. An example would be a company board member who is also an executive of an investment group, such as a private equity firm, that has taken an ownership stake in the company.
People in a position of trust or fiduciary relationship, such as officers, directors, high-level employees of a corporation or business, agents and brokers, owe certain duties to their principals or employers. Fiduciary relationships, which are by their very nature relationships of good faith, may involve a variety of obligations depending on the exact circumstances.
Fiduciary duties require that the fiduciary acts solely in the best interest of the employer/principal, free of any self-dealing, conflicts of interest, or other abuse of the principal for personal advantage. Thus, corporate directors, officers, and employees are barred from using corporate property or assets for their personal pursuits, or taking corporate opportunities for themselves. More traditional fraudulent conduct, such as thefts, acceptance of secret commissions, and conflicts of interest also violate the duty of loyalty, and may be prosecuted as such in addition to or instead of the underlying offence.
A breach of fiduciary duty is often easier to prove than fraud. The claimant does not need to prove criminal or fraudulent intent or the other elements of fraud. To prevail, the claimant must show only that the defendant occupied a position of trust or fiduciary relationship as described above and that the defendant breached that duty to benefit personally.
A breach of fiduciary duty claim is a civil action. The claimant may receive damages for lost profits and recover profits that the disloyal employee earned. In some instances, it may even be possible to recover the salary paid to the employee or agent during the period that the fiduciary was in breach of his duties. The claimant may recover profits earned by fiduciary even if the claimant did not suffer an actual loss.
Fiduciaries who act carelessly or recklessly are responsible for any resulting loss to the corporate shareholders or other principals. Damages may be recovered in a civil action for negligence. Corporate officers who carelessly fail to enforce controls, or to pursue recovery of losses might breach their duty of care.
I'll let Doc speak for himself but I think he's willing to see this thru to the end if ATRN's BOD and management breached their fiduciary duty to shareholders, no matter how long it takes and even if there is nothing gained other than seeing them prosecuted (if a crime was committed, I'm still giving them the benefit of the doubt).
Thankfully there are still some folks who won't let the rich and "powerful" walk all over them.
Great find chunky, that needs to be stickied!
Doc hit the nail on the head when he said that Atrinsic could have sold a small amount of shares (relatively speaking) in November to easily pay down their debt. So why didn't they, why did they dilute so heavily to force the stock price down instead?
It smells like self-dealing amongst Dyne and his cronies when one considers the fact that these "players" have been involved with one another as colleagues and competitors over the past 10+ years, with some complex deals having been executed. Also consider how some of them rotate amongst the various entities that Dyne & Company control.
The Deal Maker could very well be orchestrating another big deal involving ATRN. Let's hope it's a fair deal for shareholders, because if not someone will be answering a lot of questions (no matter how long it takes).
Oh, the shorts are gonna sh*t now! Absent a buyout/merger, they're doing exactly what they should be doing operationally - building their transactional business and cutting expenses. And we know the transactional business was growing.
And Spyder has been working for a year and is producing revenue! Now maybe they'll update their website to reflect that.
The A-Train is about to leave the station and it's heading uptown!
I posted earlier today that the login page is still up:
http://spyder.atrinsic.com/
As I said last week after my associate visited their offices, they'll be out of the 7th Ave. location for good soon (if not today).
The login site is still up http://spyder.atrinsic.com/ as is the promo of Spyder on www.atrinsic.net
I posted this over at Doc's place, might as well stir up some discussion here also:
"The best-laid schemes of mice and men, often go astray"
Let's analyze this based upon the assumption that the information Doc received a few weeks ago was true - that ATRN was pissed about so many millions of shares being held by pennystock players and they wanted to shake them loose.
I could envision a scenario such as this, keeping in mind that ATRN, BD, Dyne, Goldfarb, and many others involved in this company and industry have all been in bed together at one time or another over the past few years:
- ATRN issues millions of shares to BD
- BD sells them into the market turning them into cash
- The stock tanks to .008 and as it tanks pennystock holders buy up millions of shares
- The company with the help of certain MM's (NITE in particular) tries to shake shares loose, but most of the traditional penny flippers are not flipping, they're holding strong because they know the fair market value of the company is over $1.00/share. Basically they've (we've) become investors which the company did not count on
- Now let's assume there was an agreed-upon deal late in 2011 for a certain share price, under the premise that so many millions of shares would be able to be bought on the open market at a bargain-basement price saving the buyer millions of dollars
- Enter Doc's group and a few iHubbers holding these millions of shares and threatening to take legal action if the company tries to screw shareholders
- If I'm Dyne, Goldfarb and the buyer (BD?), I'm thinking "what the f*ck have we gotten ourselves into, and how do we get out of this mess?"
- And it's possible this is why they went dark, because they need to find a way to straighten this sh*t out without putting themselves in legal jeopardy and causing damage to their reputations. They don't want to issue any "positive" news because they know it would make the stock run well above the agreed-upon price which would only compound their problems
Of course, what I just said could be complete fantasy, it's just a theory. But if I were Dyne and this scenario were reality, I'd feel like Gordon Gekko when Bud Fox asked him:
"It's two minutes to closing, Gordon. What do you want to do? Decide."
It depends. If they're in the middle of finalizing a buyout/merger type deal, and they're not ready, then they'll decline Dr P's (actually Lilifar's) request.
But chade was told they would report material events, and the debt payment deadline is a material event.
However, based upon what I believe I don't think we'll be waiting that long. That is my opinion only.
When I say imminent, I mean before the May 31 deadline for the debt to be paid. I don't have a specific date in mind but I will be VERY surprised if we don't hear anything before then (keyword VERY).
Only thing that I could see bringing it up to 10 cents is some unexpected news...since the company is dark, I doubt that is coming.
The puzzle pieces are filling in nicely and it's almost complete. I have no doubts in my mind that we'll hear something soon.
rek, your technical analysis has been excellent. However, I don't believe this is just a technical bounce, there are too many big buys coming in. Doc's group has put a tremendous amount of pressure on the board of directors to uphold their fiduciary duty to shareholders. I think they're going to, this company is in the wrong sector to go completely dark, they have to speak up at some point assuming no buyout/merger, and I see it happening soon.
Disclaimer: This is pure speculation and opinion only!
But I believe news has leaked and is imminent based on today's action. The company is under too much pressure to disclose their current financials and operational status. The board has to do something to preserve what's left of the company's reputation and their own.