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.
Doesn't HOP-ON owe a ton of money, too?
No sales, no revenue, no cash in the bank....not looking good for this one to stay afloat much longer.
Not likely if they have been diluting since January (they have) and they are already getting close to 2.49 billion share limit.
No wonder PM resigned from the company.
NEW WARNING ABOUT hop_on ON PINKSHEETS DOT COM
Big red Stop sign - click on it and see the new warning (NO INFORMATION WARNING)
Indicates companies that are not able or willing to provide disclosure to the public markets - either to a regulator, an exchange or Pink Sheets. Companies in this category do not make Current Information available via Pink Sheets News Service, or if they do, the available information is older than six months. This category includes defunct companies that have ceased operations as well as 'dark' companies with questionable management and market disclosure practices. Publicly traded companies that are not willing to provide information to investors should be treated with suspicion and their securities should be considered highly risky.
THIS PAGE (i-BOX) IS INCORRECT
Check the nevada SOS website for the increase in auth shares to 2.49 billion shares....O/S probably is already close to that limit, based on their massive dilution and fluff press releases usually designed to let them dump hundreds of millions more shares on unsuspecting, uninformed people like many that post here.
Try calling the transfer agent and let us know what they are willingto disclose. Sure is fishy when they are hesitant to disclose the current share structure and are unwilling to update pinksheets in a timely manner.
Peter Michaels resigned. He is no longer in charge, except being a director allows him to keep encouraging the massive dilution needed to stay afloat a little longer.
Form what I've heard and seen, HOP-ON is now flat broke. They even admitted as much in their last unaudited financials.
I wonder how his court case will turn out?
You say he is honest? Then why did he lie about HOP-On creating the disposable phone, that actually was found to be a disguised Nokia phone?
Why did he fail to provide audited financials He promised so many times? Do you call that honest?
Why did he fail to disclose in regular press releases his relationship with USACIG, instead trying to imply HOP-On actually did a deal with that company?
So a reverse split may be being planned?
a 1:300 reverse split would be the likely solution that could increase the share price temporarily.
As HPNN keeps dumping dilutive shares on the gullible, the PPS will likely approach NO Bid, $0.0001 ask.
Not much help, are you?
Typical bagholder, IMO. Supporting a company that cannot seem to do anything right, cannot provided audited finacials (like they have promised so many times), and obviously is now flat broke (per unaudited financials).
Can't and won't argue, just will continue to post my opinion and frequently remind others to do their DD before losing everything with this terribly-run company.
Remember the deal with african aid network?
HRNF claimed they had a $1.5 million order
Guess who's domain name was expired/deleted on June 18th.
africanaidnetwork.org
http://www.justdropped.com/drops/061810org.html
Heathrow Natural Food & Beverage, Inc. Receives $1.5 Million Order for ACAI Plus to Be Distributed at the FIFA 2010 World Cup
Market Wire, December, 2009
12Next ..Heathrow Natural Food & Beverage, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: HRNF) is pleased to announce that it has entered into a contract with the African Aid Network ( www.africanaidnetwork.org ) for 80,000 cartons of ACAI Plus anti-oxidant gum which represents 960,000 individual units. The gum will be distributed at the FIFA 2010 World Cup in Cape Town, South Africa ( www.fifa.com/worldcup ) beginning in June 2010. The FIFA World Cup is held every four years and is the largest and most watched sporting event in the world. Thirty-two countries representing every continent in the world will vie for the World Cup and Soccer supremacy.
"This is a major milestone for the Heathrow Natural Super Food Brand and the exposure to be gained at the 2010 World Cup is priceless. The monetary value of the order is insignificant compared to the brand awareness for ACAI Plus, which will be used by consumers from every part of the world at the event. We are delighted that the African Aid Network has chosen ACAI Plus based on its nutritional value and unique delivery system to provide players and fans alike with super functional nutrients," said Michael Pagnano, CEO Heathrow Natural Food & Beverage, Inc.
bright side? What, the fact that the SEC could suspend trading at any time, like it has been doing with co's that don't provide timely financial info?
hop-on has been promising audited financials, too. Was that one of the big reasons the CEO resigned?
So you like a company that provides little disclosure, has a felon for a director/former CEO/former President?
They also failed to disclose in press releases that they actually didn't win a deal with USACIG, but actually did an "Inside Deal" because Peter Michaels was actually CEO of USACIG. Pretty fishy when they avoid disclosing that information in the fluff PR's.
Do you like the fact that PM drained (spent) the company of all cash and had assets plummet just prior to him resigning from hop-on?
Do you like the fact that the so-called disposable phone they were/are touting they developed was actuallt found to be a disguised Nokia phone and that PM denied it until a SF Gate news reported proved hop-on was using someone else's product without permission and claiming it was a hop-on product?
Do you like the fact that they have been dumping tons of shares to stay afloat a little longer?
I can't think of any reason to like this company and their business model or disclosure practices.
Thanks - not too sure what you-tube will do for 'em
Pretty hard to believe that HOP_ON, only a lowly distributor, can even make a few percent margin on the product.
If PM wasn't intermingled with USACIG, I doubt that company would have chosen HOP_ON to try to sell anything for them, IMO.
With HOP-ON's track record of numerous failures, they sure wouldn't be my pick to do business with.
OLD NEWS?
I SEE THE i-BOX STILL HAS 1.49 BILLION SHARES LISTED. APPARENTLY MY "OLD NEWS" ABOUT THE INCREASE TO 2.49 BILLION SHARES IS MORE CURRENT THAT ANYTHING POSTED ON THIS MESSAGE BOARD.
Gotta mention Google and TV to keep the share sales flowing and absorb the massive dilution.
Wow
This amendment by HOP-ON shows the share auth at 2.9 billion shares - OUCH
Action Type: Amendment
Document Number: 20100106444-32 # of Pages: 1
File Date: 2/19/2010 Effective Date:
Previous Stock Value: Par Value Shares: 1,490,000,000 Value: $ 0.0001 Par Value Shares: 10,000,000 Value: $ 0.001 No Par Value Shares: 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Total Authorized Capital: $ 159,000.00 New Stock Value: Par Value Shares: 2,490,000,000 Value: $ 0.0001 Par Value Shares: 10,000,000 Value: $ 0.001 No Par Value Shares: 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Total Authorized Capital: $ 259,000.00
Is the SEC still investigating this company? I see the company was admitting the SEC investigation was ongoing, then the company tied to claim they were not aware of any "ongoing SEC investigation".
Since when does the SEC let the target of an investigation know they are bing investigated?
That druggie Mario is apparently out of jail temporarily, too. Maybe he will start pretending to be PYCT CEO while his SEC lawsuit problems continue.
Reverse split coming Paychet?
Is that the update being planned?
Will it be a 1:300 reverse split or 1:500.
In any case that massive dilution is expected to continue.
Bottomfeeder - HOP-ON also could be shut down or trading suspended any day for not filing timely periodic reports.
I'm seeing more and more co's getting hit by the SEC for that very reason. See the "Trading Suspensions" link on the SEC.gov website for examples.
Since hop-on has been promising, but never delivering, audited financials; I'm guessing they are having \difficulty getting an accounting firm to sign-off on audited financials.....or maybe they never actually intended to file them.
Not finding a business license for HOP-ON in Irvine, CA
Legally, they cannot do business without a business license. May have to check further with the City and point them to the press releases indicating what hop-on is peddling.
Last business license I could find that they had (using hop-on.com) was for The Wireless Company, with Dan Gannon as the main contact. That license expired in 2006.
Does HPNN have a taxpayer ID # ?
Since they claim they are selling a product on Amazon, don't they have to collect sales tax on each item sold and remit it to the state of the purchaser.
USACig has to do this, too.
Would be interesting to see how much sales tax they send in for 2010.
HOP-On is trying to peddle someone else's product (anti-radiation chip) for purposes it was not intended, too.
These products can be placed on any device that emits radio frequency radiation and electro-magnetic radiation: cell phones, iPhones, televisions, and computer monitors, just to name a few. These products are ISO certified by Zenith Quality Assessors Pvt. Ltd.
The product from "as seen on TV" is not intended for TV's, monitors, etc. It has NEVER been tested or "ISO certified" for that use.
The same company that makes these kind of chips got sued by the Federal Trade Commission for false claims. Anyone else concerned that HOP-ON's claims that someone could be protected if the deivce is put on a TV/Monitor may not be true? We'll see if the FTC wants to weigh-in on HOP-ON's latest claims.
FTC Charges Sellers of Cell Phone Radiation Protection Patches with Making False Claims
219. FTC v. Stock Value 1 (Southern District of Florida) (S.D. Fla.) (Feb. 13, 2002) (FTC File No.
012-3098) (SV1 - Civil Action No. 02-CV-80131)
!Defendants: Stock Value 1 a/k/a SV1, Deborah Jenkins, and Meristar International, Inc. (On May 14,
2002, the Commission announced that it had approved the filing of an amended complaint in its case adding
Meristar International, Inc. as a defendant. o686
220. FTC v. Comstar Communications, Inc. et. ano. (E.D. Cal.) (Feb. 13, 2002) (Comstar - Civil
Action No. 02-CV-00348)
!Defendants: Comstar Communications, Inc., a/k/a Communications 2000, and Randall A. Carasco
o688
!The Federal Trade Commission has charged two companies that sold devices that purportedly protect
users from electromagnetic radiation emitted by cellular telephones with making false and unsubstantiated
claims. In separate court actions, the FTC alleges that Stock Value 1, Inc. and Comstar Communications,
Inc. (Comstar) falsely represented that their products block up to 97% or 99% of radiation and other
electromagnetic energy emitted by cellular telephones, thereby reducing consumers' exposure to this radiation.
According to the FTC, the defendants lacked a reasonable basis to substantiate their claims. The Commission
is seeking permanent injunctions, consumer redress, and other equitable relief.
!Stock Value 1, Inc., based in Boca Raton, Florida, and also known as SV1, and its president, Deborah
Jenkins, marketed and sold two products -- "SafeTShield™" and "NoDanger"-- that purportedly block
electromagnetic energy emitted from cellular and cordless telephones to consumers throughout the United
States. These products consist of metallic fiber patches that are placed over the earpieces of cellular and
cordless telephones. The defendants advertised their products through TV, radio and print ads, and on the
Internet.
! Comstar, based in West Sacramento, California, and its president, Randall Carasco, marketed and sold
their products under the names "WaveShield," "WaveShield 1000," and "WaveShield 2000." They advertised
their products to consumers nationwide through TV, radio and print ads, and on the Internet.
!The complaints allege that the defendants, in both cases, failed to disclose in their ads that the vast majority
of electromagnetic energy emitted by cellular and cordless phones comes from the antenna and parts of the
phone other than the earpiece. The defendants allegedly also failed to disclose that the products have no
effect on this other electromagnetic energy. These facts, the FTC said, would be material to consumers'
decision to buy or use their products. Both complaints further allege that the defendants made false statements
that their products had been scientifically "proven" and "tested," when in fact that was not the case.
According to the FTC, there is no scientific proof that so-called shields significantly reduce exposure from
electromagnetic emissions.
!These cases were referred to the Commission by the Good Housekeeping Institute, the consumer product
evaluation laboratory of Good Housekeeping Magazine. Independent tests conducted by the Good
Housekeeping Institute on SafeTShield™, WaveShield, and similar products found that the products did not
reduce radiation exposure from cellular telephones.
!The Commission vote to authorize staff to file the complaints in the appropriate federal district courts was
5-0.
!On May 7, 2003, the FTC announced that a stipulated order, which has been approved by the court,
settled the Comstar matter. The order prohibits the defendants from the future marketing or selling of any
product that purports to reduce consumers' exposure to radiation and electromagnetic energy, unless the
claims are true and can be substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence. The order also
prohibits the defendants from making unsubstantiated representations about the benefits, performance, or
efficacy of any product or service. The settlement requires the defendants to clearly disclose that most
electromagnetic energy emitted by cell phones comes from parts of the phone other than the earpiece, where
the WaveShield is placed, and that the WaveShield has no significant effect on this other radiation.
Additionally, the settlement prohibits the defendants from misrepresenting the results of any test, study, or
research.
!The Commission vote to approve the filing of the Comstar order was 5-0. The Comstar order was entered
in the U.S. District Court for the ED CA, in Sacramento, on April 28, 2003.
www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/02/svicomstar.htm (press release – complaint)
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/05/fyi0226.htm
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/05/comstar.htm (release – stipulated final order)
Nope - a reverse split (1:300) is about the only thing that will cause an increase in the stock price.
Still no promised audited financials. Do you think that is why the former CEO Peter Michaels resigned? Or is it because he is a convicted felon?
Two-time Super Bowl champion Lawrence Taylor is a founding partner at eXfuze. Now he is apparently indicted.
http://www.exfuze.com/AllStarsTeam.aspx
and HRNF is supposedly one of the numerous distributors of Exfuze
another fluffie Pr from HOP-ON.
Can you imagine what a flop any Reality Show that hop-on and Peter Michaels, the felon in charge of USACIG, will create?
Most already know they will use a ruse like that to help them dump hundreds of million, if not billions more shares as the share price heads to $0.0001.
It looks like LT was pulled from everything that Exfuze had on its website. Was't he one of the founding investors in Exfuze?
I wonder if Pagnano still considers LT one of his best buddies? LOL
Only after the next reverse split, probably a 1:300. Then the stock price can go down even faster.
HPNN is a dilution nightmare and has failed miserably in each business model they try.
Probably not that low. Someone will put in some $5 trades at the ask to artificially prop-up the price.
Moderator - please update I-Box with latest share structure
From Pinksheets.com, under "Company Information" for HRNF:
Outstanding Shares
4,956,063,957 as of May 28, 2010
Authorized Shares
10,000,000,000 as of May 28, 2010
Float(shares)
4,500,000,000 as of May 28, 2010
Number of Shareholders of Record
103 as of May 28, 2010
he's watching more than the message board.
I truly believe the lack of PR's were due to people/shareholders filing formal complaints/tips about those PR's where he was claiming distribution with co's that no one could seem to find actually existed, among other complaints about PR's, IMO.
The World Cup PR was simply comical.
What telecom business? HOP-ON claims it developed the first disposable....LOL
Do they mean the phone that actually was a disguised Nokia phone that HOP-ON got caught trying to peddle? No wonder they don't actually formally exhibit at CES show booths....I think they would be ridiculed and once Peter was called the cell phone guro only as an inside joke, IMO.
Plus the product is just snake oil. When you see the "as seen on TV" label, you can probably guess hop-on is again peddling stuff. Is Peter the new Billy Mayes?
widezew - massive dilution of the share pool at hop-on. Try doing a little DD and you too can figure this out, all by yourself.
I have confirmed it, but not that is officers or directors dumping to line their pockets. Me thinks it is discounted shares for cash to stay afloat a little longer, plus shares for services.
The oustanding share count has been skyrocketing. This is confirmed dilution. Since HOP-ON had $0 cash reported and no sales, one wonders just how many more shares have been being dumped (by the company) with each fluff press release?
Do you think HOP-ON is claiming exemption from registration of all those dilutive shares?
With the way they issue those unaudited financials once in a while, it is unclear if they are really claiming exemtion from registration of all the shares they have been dumping.
Still can't order/buy anything on hop-on website, contrary to what they suggested in their press release.
catch - HOP-ON can't claim that the anti-radiation product they are re-selling protects humans from radiation damage.
The Federal Trade Commission already has taken action against a company making claims that a similar product actuall protects people (see excerpt from one of my previous posts)
Looks like HOP-ON is really trying to put out fluff press releases to help them dump dilutive shares on the gullible and unsuspecting. Shame, shame.
The little anti-radiation screen scams have been beeing peddled by many already.
Since it has already been proven that those kind of add-on chips or devices do little or nothing, the new snake oil salesmen already are treading on thin ice with the history of the trade commission going after those who have been making such claims.
The lawsuits charge that the defendants did not disclose in their ads that the majority of electromagnetic energy emitted by cellular and cordless phones comes from the antenna and parts of the phone other than the earpiece. The two companies also failed to tell consumers that their products have no effect on this electromagnetic energy, the FTC said.
Two companies that allegedly prey upon consumers' fears of radiation exposure through the use of cell phones have been taken to court by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which charged the firms with making false claims about their mobile phone safety shields.
According to the FTC, there is no scientific proof that the coin-sized metallic fiber patches placed over the earpieces of cellular and cordless telephones significantly reduce exposure from electromagnetic emissions.
In fact, the agency said, devices that block only the earpiece or another small portion of the phone are ineffective, because the entire phone emits electromagnetic waves.
Further, the FTC charged, the shields may interfere with the phone's signal, causing it to draw more power and emit even more radiation.
Investigation Widens
The FTC is looking into other companies making similar products, said Serena Viswanathan, staff attorney for the agency, who added that the number of such "shields" sold in the U.S. has not yet been determined but will be introduced in the trials to be held in Florida and California.
"The FTC is not taking a position on whether electromagnetic emission from cell phones is dangerous to consumers, because more research needs to be done before reaching a conclusion on the issue," Viswanathan told Wireless NewsFactor.
"Our point is that consumers who are concerned about this should know that the products made by the defendants do not work."
No Scientific Evidence
In the separate court actions filed against Stock Value 1 (SV1) and Comstar Communications, the commission is seeking permanent injunctions against the companies and refunds for consumers.
"These companies are using a shield of misrepresentation to block consumers from the facts," said J. Howard Beales III, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "There is no scientific evidence that their products work as they claim."
The FTC alleges that the companies falsely claimed their products, which sold for US$20 to $25, could block up to 99 percent of radiation and other electromagnetic energy emitted by cellular telephones.
Full Disclosure
Boca Raton, Florida-based SV1 has marketed its SafeTShield and NoDanger products using claims such as "NoDanger is proven to protect the soft tissue of the ear ducts by filtering out 99 percent of the electromagnetic waves emitted from the ear piece of mobile phones up to a frequency of 2,000 MHz," the FTC reported.
West Sacramento, California-based Comstar sold its WaveShield product line with ads contending that, "The WaveShield will block up to 99 percent of the radiation entering the soft tissue of the ear canal."
The lawsuits charge that the defendants did not disclose in their ads that the majority of electromagnetic energy emitted by cellular and cordless phones comes from the antenna and parts of the phone other than the earpiece.
The two companies also failed to tell consumers that their products have no effect on this electromagnetic energy, the FTC said.
Phone Safety Debate
Both complaints allege that the defendants made false claims that their products were scientifically proven and tested. The FTC said that there is no scientific proof that the shields significantly reduce exposure from electromagnetic emissions.
Anti-radiation peddlers busted by the FTC
Aug 21 2003
Two companies who marketed and sold bogus cell phone radiation protection patches have settled Federal Trade Commission charges that they violated the USA's federal laws by making false and misleading claims about their products.
Using television and Internet advertising, Safety Cell, Inc. and Rhino International, Inc. deceptively indicated that their patches, designed to fit over the earpiece of any cell phone, could block a substantial amount of radiation and other electromagnetic energy emitted by cellular telephones, thereby reducing consumers’ exposure to this radiation.
Under separate settlements, both sets of defendants are required to have adequate scientific evidence to substantiate claims about the performance, efficacy, or benefit of any good or service. The settlement in Rhino requires them to pay US$342,665 in redress to consumers who purchased Rhino’s “WaveScrambler” patch.
According to the FTC, the Sag Harbor, New York-based company and its principals, Nigel Harrison and Sherry Molina, marketed and sold the “WaveScrambler” patch, claiming that their product could block 99 percent of electromagnetic waves emitted by cellular phones and cordless phones.
Safety Cell, based in Brooklyn, New York, and its principal, Jerry Berger, meanwhile marketed the “WaveGuard” cell phone shield. The FTC alleged that the defendants claimed that their WaveGuard patch blocked most of the electromagnetic energy emitted from cell phones.
Under separate stipulated orders, which the court approved, the defendants are prohibited from the future marketing or selling of any product that claims to protect consumers from harmful radiation and electromagnetic energy, unless the claims can be substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence.
The orders also prohibit the defendants from making unsubstantiated representations about the performance, efficacy, or benefits of any good or service.
The settlements require both sets of defendants to indicate clearly in connection with claims that any device protects consumers from cell phone radiation that most electromagnetic energy emitted by cell phones comes from parts of the phone other than the earpiece, and that the WaveScrambler and WaveGuard have no significant effect on this other electromagnetic radiation. Additionally, the settlements prohibit the defendants from misrepresenting the results of any test, study, or research.
Finally, the settlements contain various recordkeeping provisions to assist the FTC in monitoring the defendants’ compliance.
It is not accumulation, it is massive dilution.
Since HOP-ON has not filed in a long time, do you think their securities will get revoked soon?
HOP-ON lied in latest press release? Surprised?
There is no anti-radiation chip available for sale on HOP-ON's website.It looks like they lied about this being avaialble, in their latest press release, IMO.
LOL - selling a product that doesn't work? Again?
Kinda like when they tried to get people to believe they had a disposable phone, but the reporter found out that HOP-ON simply disguised a product from Nokia and claimed it was a hop-on product....LMAO
The antiradiation chip does not do anything, and can actually cause more radiation to be emitted from cell phones.
Looks like HOP-ON's desperation to dump dilutive shares is matched by the fact that it reportedly is out of money, had no sales at all at last report, and CEO Peter Michaels resigned.
OS just under 5 billion shares, dilution continues to skyrocket
See mssg#25563
Remember this, from the Jan 5 fluff press release?
Additionally, HNFB will again begin to purchase its common shares in the open market to reduce the float by 95% or 2.5 Billion shares. This will be done over the course of the next 6 months. Also, HNFB has engaged counsel who is representing 75 plus pink sheet firms to reverse decisions by Scottrade and E-Trade which currently do not allow buy orders for HRNF and several other sub-penny stocks.
...............
They've basically doubled the share count since then, not reduced the float by 95%. Proves that Pagnano basically puts out stuff that he apparently never intends to follow-through on....and the share printing press is working overtime....on the way to 10 billion shares or a 1:300 reverse split. No bid right now....just like before the last reverse split announcement (1:300 in 2009, 1:200 in 2008, 1:100 in 2007).