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.
Ok, so being ever the optimist, I saw this bit of news over at ONCP:
"Errol Stone, CEO stated: “We are pleased to make this contribution of 310,000,000 shares. It represents tangible value to our shareholders as it substantially reduces the issued and outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock.”
so I wonder if the recent activity with SPOOZ represents a stock buy back. Mr. Strickland has mentioned such a thing in the past.
I'm a little speechless. I can't imagine spending $25,000 on Spooz. The short selling idea has to be the reason.
"they will come for them too here..and their helpers."
........and their little dog too!
I can understand why Darryl gets a little terse with some of the questions he receives off this board. I was puzzled why they did some things but considering what is going on in the rest of the financial world, being open to try a variety of approaches is only sensible. I mean really, hands up who predicted the demise of Bear Sterns or the failure of Lehman Brothers. The model of a trading company will change with the times and there is a possibility that Spooz will be a part of that change. As for these guys being crooks, well catani where were you for all the people who invested with Madoff?
That's a very interesting interview. A while back some one was looking for a small ray of hope for SPOOZ and I mentioned that SPOOZ owns 120 million shares of Cap 141 almost half joking. The fact is these two companies are intertwined and the success of one depends on the other. So, they are taking their $18,000 and using it somewhere else????
"*120,000,000 restricted shares of common stock are held by Spooz, Inc. "
We still own a chunk of ONCP, I wonder if they were converted.
Traderfan, are you sure it was the company that sold those shares, it could have been me.
"unverified fantasy figures of 20% in a month"
catani, are you trying to imply that Barclay's and Autumn Gold are now part of this "scam"?
$1,000 invested in...
Diamond Fields becomes $41,708
Hixon Gold becomes $21,175
Disc Inc. becomes $10,868
Colony Pacific becomes $43,506
Hampton Court becomes $39,000
CompuSoft becomes $8,880
Western Pacific becomes $20,451
Change, here are just a few examples of some penny stocks that made money.
Actually, you don't have to protect intellectual property. The copyright is implied. I make them on photoshop and have never registered one of them. And it takes much longer than 5 minutes.
A trademark does not need to be registered to be considered copyrighted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark
and yes I'm freakin' hilarious, I can maintain my sense of humour even after reading this:
http://www.spooz.com/pdf/AuditedFinancials.pdf
So, I don't really need anyone telling me how bad things are over and over and over again, it's all there in the audit, now would people running a scam post that on their website? Really?
catani, I hardly know where to begin.......
http://www.spooz.com/images/corp_logo2.gif
this is called a trademark!
catani, let me try this again. You have alleged that SPOOZTOOLZ does not exist, no patents, no software, nothing. So, my question is, what are they using to trade at ONCP?
Thank you, for taking the time to post back, and in a well thought out reply.
Catani, I have a question for you. You said:
"What you also have here is that not a single negative fact was good enough for a discussion from the pumper side. Not a single one. No patents,no software,no launch,no revenues but lies. Sometimes, it is simple."
So, the question is, if SPOOZTOOL doesn't exist, what software is Capital 141 using to trade? Suggestions?
So, a number of people have posted worried threads about "the conversion". What I'm curious about, why should I convert my preferred shares to common stock? Why would I take what Wikipedia calls a "higher ranking stock" and exchange them for common shares? I remember the time a this scuffy, hippie friend of mine, back before there was the computer, went to a broker to trade in some shares to buy a piece of land. Did that broker's demeanor ever change when he found out the kid was talking about thousands of class A preferred shares of McMillan Bloedel.
MC, the idea of a book has occurred to me as well. It's one of the reasons I'm lurking on this board so much. You just can't make this stuff up!
OK but if you click on the "we use SPOOZ" link at Capital 141 it takes you to the SPOOZ website and guess who is quoted right there on the home page....... go figure.
"even in pauls profile at 141 you do not find a relation to spooz, thats not normal !"
so, what do you want as far as a relation to SPOOZ? His profile begins:
"Mr. Strickland is currently Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of SPOOZ Inc " isn't that enough of a relation????
I'm doing good worm, thanks for asking. My glass is half full.
See, this is where I get confused. A Pink sheet company doesn't have to tell us anything either. So, when they come out with an announcement about a Contract and the contract is with a company like Bloomberg do I believe the Pink sheet company or do I listen to anonymous posters on the internet? Posters who may or may not understand English. Posters who may be disgruntled ex-employees of the given company or disgruntled investors. or even people trying to undermine the companies products to advance the products of a competitor. A number of the posters here have come up with very elaborate explanations of what they believe is fraudulent activity on the part of the owners of the company. Do want me to give more credence to someone who might turn out to be a 14 year old in his parents basement who has a strange idea of fun or the principles who have put their names and reputations on record? I'm just trying to get to the truth here.
Kaitrade have said on their website "John Unwin commented, "This is an exciting partnership that combines the strengths of KaiTrade and Spooz and presenting new opportunities for significant revenue and value growth." KaiTrade's first priority will be to install SpoozToolz at Spooz's first major customer." Why should I not want to believe that they are trying to do just that? And if there is a NDA in effect is it unreasonable to think that John Unwin wouldn't discuss Bloomberg's business in his blog? I think we all need to step out for a beer.
So how do you explain this statement that is still on Kaitrades website?
"Under the agreement, Spooz will retain all of the product and intellectual property rights. Mr. Strickland added, "By taking these steps, Spooz is endeavoring to meet today's challenges and enhance stockholder value."
John Unwin commented, "This is an exciting partnership that combines the strengths of KaiTrade and Spooz and presenting new opportunities for significant revenue and value growth." KaiTrade's first priority will be to install SpoozToolz at Spooz's first major customer"
That major customer must be Bloomberg. We know that Bloomberg is changing their API and the trading tools they offer to subscribers from announcements on the Bloomberg website. There are no other annoucements on the Kaitrade website. Unless you have information the rest of us don't have why are you so pessimistic over the content of the blog? The blog is just John Unwin thinking out loud.
Couple of things;
there seems to be a great deal of confusion over the concept of a Non-disclosure agreement. An NDA can be written up any way the principals involved see as their best interest. Kaitrade would certainly be covered by any NDA pertaining to Bloomberg. It might even cover the very mention of Spooztoolz on the company website. The conversation with "Mike" at Bloomberg about Spooztoolz might have violated Bloombergs own NDA, it wouldn't be uncommon for a PR guy at a big company to make that kind of mistake. You can bet that divulging sensitive company information on an iHub message baord would be part of any NDA. An NDA is a legal document and while we might not like the silence it creates it is part of this type of business, so we continue to wait.
I have been reading over the message board for XXIS Capital 141 and as somber as this board is XXIS is very upbeat. Even with the reverse split. Just an observation.
Klononpin:
I have heard a number of people make the same kind of predictions about the overall market. One that staid with me predicts the Dow Jones to hit a low of 6500 before things start to recover. What ever happens the stock market needs to reinvent itself. There are too many ways to manipulate and cheat the system. The fact that Madoff could continue to run his scheme as long as he did suggests major failings in the SEC and other regulating bodies. I am optomistic that the changes in trading will make institutions like Bloomberg and TD Ameritrade look at upgraded computer software systems that are easier to monitor and understand. In the early days of personal computers there were so many different operating systems it caused all kinds of complications, love it or not at least MS DOS gave everyone a standard operating system. It maybe that trading systems are moving towards that kind of standard. I have a small bet on SPOOZ to be that standard. If it works out that way then we all make some money. Until that happens and while the market works itself out, some of the posters on this board might look at uping their dose of Klonopin to 4 mg. ...ummm or maybe 6!
"If you are a vendor with 2,000 or more customers and would like to partner or integrate with www.FindMyNextTrade.COM, please contact us directly for inclusion."
so, does this mean that Spooz has 2,000 or more customers? It's all very interesting isn't it? I'm sure some on this board would see this as being part of the "scam".
Rockmek, do you remember this post?
"I am trying to find positives. I'm trying to find evidence Spooztoolz exists. So far, nothing tangible. Instead of going quietly into the night why can't I throw my hands up and complain a little. I mean you're telling me you're satisfied with whats going on here?
And there's no point of selling for 90%+ losses at this point. If it were somehow to blow up I wouldn't be able to deal with it mentally."
I'm begginning to think that you forgot the first rule of investing in the stock market. Never invest more than you can afford to lose. In your case I'm afraid your suspicions about you ability to handle reversal is correct.
"Case 1:07-cv-07265 Document 1 Filed 12/27/2007 Page 2 of 16
3
SPOOZ’S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
10. Spooz owns all right, title and interest in a number of Trade Secrets and patent-
pending intellectual property (“Patent Rights”) relating to its proprietary trading software and
other technology. Such Trade Secrets and Patent Rights relate to, but are not limited to, the
Custom Pricing Module (“CPM”) and SpoozToolz products that have been developed by Spooz
over the last several years."
Nice to hear from you again Rockmek. It's interesting, just yesterday I was reading over the suit Spooz filed against Groves and Peng. If Paul Srickland is willing to go into a court of law based on the existence of Spooztoolz and supporting patents I'm willing to believe that such a thing does actually exist. But then maybe:
"MICHAEL W. DOBBINS
CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
DAJ
07 C 7265
JUDGE ANDERSEN
MAGISTRATE JUDGE COX"
are in on the scam too.
Klon:
I really appreciate the work you are doing here and that you are willing to post the results for us to see. I hope that Bloomberg isn't inundated with phone calls as they were in the past.
As for trying to reason with catani:
From the very first posts he has made on the Spooz board (16524) he has been trying to make a case that Spooz is a scam. He is not open to any other possibility, so I just ignore him. By the way you and I, in his mind, are obviously part of the scam.
SPOOZ management has been tiptoeing around the Bloomberg deal for some time. If they intend to buy back shares, keeping the price down until they have the revenue from the Bloomberg contract would be a no-brainer. A buy-out by Bloomberg might be OK for shareholders wanting a quick return but some longs, such as me, may not see that as a good idea.
Software doesn't go bad, like say a bunch of bananas. If the core code of a program is sound it can always be upgraded over time. I have the original discs for Photoshop,all subsequent upgrades simply improved on what was a good program at the outset. Improvements that did not alter the original copyrights. I trust Imperial Wazoo's impression's of the core concepts that make up the SPOOZ approach to trading. I'm also quite certain that the Bloomberg contract exists. Contrary to the way some people express themselves on this forum, a company no matter how small, has to be careful about the kinds of public statements they make.
Ok....
go to http://www.kaitrade.com/
click on news; http://www.kaitrade.com/News.html
you will see this quote: "John Unwin commented, "This is an exciting partnership that combines the strengths of KaiTrade and Spooz and presenting new opportunities for significant revenue and value growth." KaiTrade's first priority will be to install SpoozToolz at Spooz's first major customer.
Within one year that customer could generate sales of up to 1,200 installations of SpoozToolz at a contracted price of $ 400 per month per installation."
also click on people: you will see a new name to Kaitrade, Douglas Foster, seems he is there to do the training needed to get the traders at Bloomberg up and running.
"Mr. Foster also managed a group of traders and trained individuals new to the trading field."
I see Jim Hensal is also listed as working for Kaitrade.
All of this suggests that the Bloomberg deal is still going forward. Spooz is still the only software mentioned as part of the Kaitrade package of trading solutions.
Once again pocdab I humbly suggest you take some of your own advice:
"did you read my post last nite I mite be a newbe but I know what I'm talking about.you will find that out sometime.people are to up serious.relax have some fun you take risk everytime you step out your door.are from ohio"
pocdab
pocdab you need to take some of your own advice:
"everyone need's to calm down stock's are a long time
investment this isn't a day trader's stock.
let people who can not stand the pressure sell
I bought all day"
Umm.....you need to reread my last post. The preferred shares are issued at a rate of one share of preferred stock to 1000 common shares. So, that's 120,000,000 common shares
("120,000,000 restricted shares of common stock are held by Spooz, Inc.")
that converts to 120,000 preferred shares at a suggested book value of $1.00. That means a book value of $120,000. Paul Strickland has been trying to get this company off the ground for how long? 5 or 6 years, longer? Even if he could sell all the converted preferred shares for the book value, he's making maybe $20,000 a year for all his trouble. Seriously, man, I know 15 year olds that are making more than that growing weed in their parents basement.
Even if they were to convert the common shares to preferred shares (120,000,000 divided by 1000 is 120,000 preferred at a value of $1.00 a share, a price suggested by XXIS not the market) you want me to believe that's enough money to make a worthwhile scam? Even if they could sell the preferred shares at full value on the open market it would hardly pay for a dirty weekend in Las Vegas!
If you're referring to the 120 million shares of common stock owned by SPOOZ, let's see.....120,000,000 times the current asking price for shares of XXIS .0001 uh carry the one, that's a whopping $12,000 dollars. Yep, that's quite the scam alright.
Where exactly are these 120 million shares to come from?
refresh my memory, what was the gist of your phone call and with whom?
this from a CNN article on Madoff........
Markopoulos was right about Madoff's operation being a fraud. But his magnum opus -- an 18-page 2005 letter listing 29 "red flags" -- is quite dense and confusing, probably because he'd gotten frustrated after years of not being taken very seriously.
Unfortunately, the letter didn't list what would have been (in hindsight, naturally) the simplest tip-off: that this supposedly multi-billion dollar operation was audited by an obscure three-person accounting firm.
so, what do we know about "Spooz, Inc. To Undergo Audit by Kramer Weisman & Associates, LLP"
anyone?
as for the deal between SPOOZ and Kaitrade:
I don't know any software company that actually gets involved with the service and support end of things. I use Adobe software all the time but nobody from Adobe has ever been by to see how it's working for me. Microsoft leaves the support and installation to in house IT people. I'm sure Bloomberg is paying Kaitrade for their services and more power to them.
nukuhiva:
this is just wild speculation on my part but .........let's see, Spooz software is designed to trade, Paul Strickland is a trader.......Cap 141 and Spooz now share an office......do you think it's possible that the cash is being generated by the same software we have all invested in?