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.
*correction - LBWR = SLJB
Steve Sulja has already publicly stated that SLJB is an empty scam company with no operations, no assets, no revenues no inventory, no employees and no headquarters....
===========
Posted by: MuchCompensation Date: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:32:32 PM
In reply to: Sally77 who wrote msg# 277270 Post # of 297753
I'm pretty sure Steve brought Steve back as CEO, after all it is his name on the line.
One can only imagine the conversations which occurred after November 16th between SS and PV.
This company and all of the shareholders are relying on Steve to do the right thing. I feel like he is trying to do the right thing by moving to Calgary. And that's not the easiest way out of this mess. It is however the correct move considering his options and the best move for SLJB.
Let's hope he's right.
LBWR CEO's Steve Sulja and Petar Vucicevich have now been charged with fraud by the OSC and PV by the RCMP also with criminal fraud.
it turns out that SLJB was nothing but an empty shell fraud company
===========
I believe that Steve and Petar may in the end may be overly otimisitic about the future of the company, but it appears to me that they at least have a vision and a plan which is essential for a viable business model.
I don't think that SLJB will prevail, it has been charged with massive fraud by the OSC and its former CEO has been charged with Criminal fraud
==================
Posted by: MuchCompensation Date: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 6:00:43 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 297751
Good things come to those who perservere. Happy Thanksgiving to all. SLJB Will prevail!
But you were specifically stating how "solid" a company LBWR was.
Why don't you tell us why you think that LBWR is a solid company?
Would it be that LBWR's revenues for the 2008 9 months are down from those of the same period 2007?
or
Would it be that LBWR's net income is for the 2008 9 months is also down from those of the same period in 2007?
How about the fact that LBWR's Securities Counsel for 2 1/2 years until recently, was charged in three lawsuits with fraud by the SEC and the US Attorneys Office made it public that it will be filing criminal fraud charges against him?
Or how about the fact that many of LBWR's private placement investors also were charged with fraud by the SEC?
Or how about the fact that LBWR's auditing firm founder and President was convicted of mail and wire fraud?
Or how about the fact that LBWR's Controller as of recently, was also the CFO of the scam company CSHD?
Or how about the fact that LBWR has only recently fired its CFO and not filed a form 8-K with the SEC to mention this to the investor public, even though LBWR had been an SEC Reporting company since May 2008?
Or how about the fact that just about every financial statement ever filed by LBWR with Pinksheets and the SEC has been restated for the worse?
Then there is the mess about LBWR funneling $250,000 to a private company ZERO percent owned by LBWR and 50% owned by LBWR's CEO Dexter Morris?....$250,000 representing more than all of the net income for LBWR combined for all the years 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.
Then there is those 6.7 million LBWR's shares worth about $2.4 million that were issued at a 99.6% discount to the market by LBWR and it appears that they were issued to the same Securities Counsel that was charged with fraud by the SEC.
yep, LBWR is a very solid company, as you say
=============
Posted by: MuchCompensation Date: Friday, February 27, 2009 3:43:27 PM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 12407 Post # of 12409
It is no secret that start up companies tend to burn more than they take in for many years.
Sirius/XM, for example, may achieve profitability this year after a decade of providing services to millions of people.
So, I don't find your argument particularly compelling.
It is the outcome in the final analysis which actually matters.
MC
How "solid" is LBWR?
It is so solid that its trailing 12 months Net Income was a negative $89,011
It is so solid that its 2008 9 month operating cash flow was a negative $459,000
It is so solid that its Sept. 30, 2008 Tangible Book Value was a negative $209,544
It is so solid that its 2008 9 month revenues and net income both dropped significantly from the same period in 2007.
yep, LBWR is very solid, alright
===============
Posted by: MuchCompensation Date: Friday, February 27, 2009 3:04:30 PM
In reply to: milo3 who wrote msg# 12402 Post # of 12404
It seems that this is generally a solid company. The services they provie actually cross over into my field.
I look forward to future news.
MC
Yet more false and misleading statements - the fraudulent actions
The SEC charged LBWR Securities Attorney David B. Stocker and several LBWR private placement investors with fraud for acts with other companies committed exactly during the time that they were also involved with LBWR.
==============
Posted by: Robsct Date: Friday, February 27, 2009 1:30:23 PM
In reply to: whistles who wrote msg# 12390 Post # of 12392
You are mistaken. Their troubles are with another company and it's years after they had any connection to Labwire.
MuchCompensation - "black box"
a "black box" refers to any trading program that is not publicly available, hence the "black box" in which the investment public does not know the exact methodology that is used to trade and make those returns. In fact, a "black box" can even be the method that is used to trade by one individual if the exact methodology is not known by the public.
regarding saying that the_worm06 is out of his league when debating with you, lets just see where this stock price goes in the future - to the $0.0001/share that I projected when it was trading at 3 cents/share, or to the stock price that you have been projecting here.
You really have to do some research before you start accusing the_worm06 of being out of his league.
==============
Posted by: MuchCompensation Date: Friday, February 27, 2009 1:15:37 PM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 11938 Post # of 11939
I don't know what your definition of "Black Box" trading is, but to me it means automated algorithmic trading.
What these companies developed was a statistically weighted arbitrage recognition model.
Don't lecture me, you are out of your league.
MC
huh?
you really don't know what people mean when they discuss a "black box" trading program, do you?
look it up.
second, are you saying that ONCP management has invested a few thousand bucks in the fund?
Is that it?
what does this have to do with whether they will want to reap the benefits directly (versus keeping them in the public company, ONCP) from managing the fund if the high returns continue?
======================
Posted by: MuchCompensation Date: Friday, February 27, 2009 12:54:49 PM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 11935 Post # of 11938
Wrong on both counts.
They are not using Black Box technology, and they are themselves invested.
You seem to be shooting blanks.
MC
The "black-box" trading program - Two things folks
1. If you are getting 10-15% returns per month from a "black-box" trading program, then you will need about one to two years worth of data before serious money comes in to be managed.
and
2. If the returns discussed above continue, then it would be foolish for the people involved (ONCP management) to keep the program in a public company like ONCP, when they can reap the benefits by owning it themselves directly.
So the LBWR/Texas Dept. of Public Safety mess boils down to two situations and only two situations:
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/psb/company/company_details.aspx?id=C14117
either
1. The employees listed in the Texas Dept. of Public Safety website for Labwire Security Services, Inc. (an assumed name for LBWR) were really employees of LBWR and therefore LBWR made fraudulent false statements in its SEC filings that it contracted its canine security and surveillance services to another entity.
or
2. The employees listed in the Texas Dept. of Public Safety website for Labwire Security Services, Inc. (an assumed name for LBWR) were NOT employees of LBWR and therefore LBWR and its CEO Dexter Morris made fraudulent false statements in its application with the Texas Dept. of Public Safety.
Either way, it does not look good for LBWR and its CEO Dexter Morris on this matter.
Labwire, Inc. Securities Counsel David B. Stocker and several LBWR Reg D Rule 504 investors charged with Securities Fraud by the SEC
.
1. In a form 15c2-11 filed with pinksheets.com by Labwire, Inc. (LBWR), the company listed Arizona attorney David B. Stocker as its Securities Counsel:
http://snipurl.com/286o1
.
2. In addition, the LBWR form 15c2-11 includes an opinion letter written by Mr. Stocker stating that 1.8 million shares of LBWR stock issued under Reg. D Rule 504 would be exempt from the SEC registration requirements and therefore can be freely trading.
.
3. In the same LBWR form 15c2-11, Labwire, Inc. states that Mr. Stocker "does not own any shares of the issuer".
.
4. The form 15c2-11 also includes an Exhibit "A", which lists the purchasers of the 1.8 million LBWR shares.
.
5. Among the fourteen "purchasers" listed in Exhibit "A" are:
Curtis-Case, Inc. - 250,000 shares
Page Properties, LP - 250,000 shares
Jumpstart Capital, Inc. - 50,000 shares
Janan Page - 100,000 shares
Trevor Page - 100,000 shares
Martin Cantu - 100,000 shares
.
6. The Securities Exchange Commission charged certain individuals and entities with Securities Fraud in the sale of unregistered securities in Litigation Release No. 20302 dated September 27, 2007: http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2007/lr20302.htm
.
7. Among the defendants in the SEC securities fraud litigation release mentioned in the above paragraph are:
- David B. Stocker, LBWR's Securities Counsel mentioned in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 above.
- Page Properties, LP, an LBWR Rule 504 purchaser mentioned in paragraph 5 above.
- Curtis-Case, Inc., an LBWR Rule 504 purchaser mentioned in paragraph 5 above.
.
8. According to the SEC Litigation Release, Page Properties, LP is controlled by Timothy T. Page, another Defendant in the SEC securities fraud case.
.
9. Janan Page, an LBWR Rule 504 purchaser mentioned in paragraph 5 above, is listed as Timothy T. Page's spouse in the following SEC filing: http://www.secinfo.com/d1ztfh.212.htm
.
10. It is believed that Trevor Page, an LBWR Rule 504 purchaser mentioned in paragraph 5 above, is related to Timothy T. Page and/or Janan Page.
.
11. Jumpstart Capital, Inc., an LBWR Rule 504 purchaser mentioned in paragraph 5 above, was controlled by Phillip W. Offill, Jr, another Defendant in the SEC securities fraud case: http://snipurl.com/286vn
.
12. Martin Cantu, an LBWR Rule 504 purchaser mentioned in paragraph 5 above, is listed as a significant stockholder and Director of a company that is controlled by Timothy T. Page, Lion Capital Holdings, Inc.: http://www.secinfo.com/d12PKm.v37.htm
.
13. According to the SEC Litigation Release, Curtis-Case, Inc., an LBWR Rule 504 purchaser mentioned in paragraph 5 above and a defendant in the SEC Securities Fraud case is controlled by LBWR Securities Counsel David B. Stocker. As discussed in the paragraph 3 above, the LBWR form 15c2-11 had specifically stated that Mr. Stocker "does not own any shares of the issuer", which seems to contradict the information stated in the SEC Litigation Release discussed above.
.
14. Martin Cantu, LBWR's significant stockholder mentioned above is further discussed in this article by award winning journalist Carol S. Remond, in a Dow Jones Newswires Column:
http://snipurl.com/286qz
.
15. In a separate action, the SEC charged LBWR's Securities Counsel David B. Stocker with assisting in an illegal "pump and dump" scheme: http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2007/lr20154.htm
.
16. What does all of the above say about the quality of management of Labwire, Inc.?
Why did LBWR fail to make any statements in its SEC filings regarding restatements of financials when it had to RESTATE its 2008 Q1 financials filed with the SEC to reflect a positive net income turning into a net loss for the quarter, considered a very negative event, particularly when LBWR was falsely pumping the consecutive string of profitable quarters during this period?
what does this say about the company and its CEO, Dexter Morris, regarding their fiduciary duty towards shareholders of LBWR?
LBWR Form 8-K
Item 8.01 Other Events
On May 7, 2008, Labwire, Inc. (the “Registrant”) issued a press release announcing that it became a reporting company with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and will be filing with the SEC periodic reports containing up-to-date information about the company
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1426567/000137219808000062/form8k.htm
ahh...here it comes, the ever present "share buyback" potential that all scam companies use to pump the stock
=============
Posted by: nukuhiva Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:46:35 PM
In reply to: ThSeeker who wrote msg# 11825 Post # of 11853
What about the possibility of a share buy back before the conversion, after all at this low price I won't exclude the possibility as well
snow, the conversion price of $0.0001/share is not the worse case scenario, it is the most likely scenario, based on the bottomless death spiral convertible preferred stock that was structured by the company.
Yes, based on the common shares outstanding released by the company, it appears that the fully diluted common shares outstanding will be something in the area of 20 billion shares.
============
Posted by: snow Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:12:32 PM
In reply to: nukuhiva who wrote msg# 11819 Post # of 11849
nukuhiva
My point that this is what can happen in a worst-case scenario. There has never been a good explantion given for conversion into the preferred shares. The terms appear to be preposterous in their implications.
Unbeliebable!
So ONCP has now increased the number of authorzied Preferred Shares from 10 million to 1 billion.
wow!
============
Posted by: catani Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009 6:57:18 AM
In reply to: Traderfan who wrote msg# 11780 Post # of 11847
Interesting is only the number of the A/S here. With 3 billion you will have a clue to where it will go again. And then, the prefered like those from page three here. Not to forget worms picture of the prefered
http://sunbiz.org/pdf/42583988.pdf
What does it tell you about the CEO of LBWR, Dexter Morris,
when LBWR files a form 8-K with the SEC for a material event the is positive, such as the signing of a new client, but fails to file a form 8-K with the SEC for negative material events such as the loss of 1/4 to 1/2 of its total business due to the termination or expiration of an agreement from its largest client, or the termination of its Chief Financial Officer?
more red flags
THE BEHAVIOR OF THE CLASSIC SCAM COMPANY
Filing an 8-K to announce a new client sign-up has, under any circumstance, nothing to do with the SEC declaring the form10-12g effective. Nothing.
Absolutely no connection between the two
===========
Posted by: Creede Bighorns Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:48:36 PM
In reply to: milo3 who wrote msg# 12311 Post # of 12319
How sweet it is. The 8k corresponding with the PR surely makes me think that the Form 10 must be close to getting the Notice of Effectiveness.
The Company acquired 100% of Occupational Testing, Inc. (OTI) on October 31, 2007 for $120,000 cash and a $480,000 note payable bearing interest at 1% over New York floating prime.
Let's see how "efficient" the strategy of focusing on larged clients has made LBWR:
LBWR's trailing 12 month Net Income was NEGATIVE $89,011
LBWR's 2008 9 month Operating Cash Flow was NEGATIVE $458,000
yep, LBWR is very efficient alright.
=============
Posted by: milo3 Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009 1:13:17 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 12318
Focusing on very large companies = efficiency
and is just one of many strategies that makes Labwire (LBWR)
operations the most employee/revenue efficient company in its industry.
A VERY TELLING SIGN
It now appears that LBWR is filing 8-K's for whenever they sign up a new client.
What does it mean that on February 26, 2009 they filed an 8-K to announce the signing of a new client, Evergreen International Aviation, Inc.?
It means that for the last 9 months, since the 8-K filed with the SEC regarding the USIS agreement on May 15, 2008, LBWR has not signed any clients whatsoever, other than Evergreen.
Wow!
Truly amazing
=======================
Posted by: Robsct Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:32:14 AM
In reply to: None Post # of 12310
Form 8-K for LABWIRE INC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26-Feb-2009
Other Events
Item 8.01 Other Events
On February 19, 2009, Labwire, Inc. (the "Company") entered into an occupational screening services agreement with Evergreen International Aviation, Inc. ("Evergreen"). Pursuant to the agreement, the Company will provide laboratory testing and specimen collection services to Evergreen. The Company expects Evergreen to place orders for 10,000 to 12,000 tests per year.
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/090226/lbwr.pk8-k.html
We all know what happens when LBWR issues a press release describing future revenues from a new client agreement.
What happened to the Shell $2.25 million revenue per year for 5 years agreement announcement?
oops, the figures never happened.
so why should anyone ever believe LBWR on these press releases again?
===============
The client is expected to require between 10,000 and 12,000 drug and alcohol tests per year, resulting in revenue of around $500,000 annually to the Company. The client will go live on the Labwire platform March 1, 2009.
But, Crow, that is the thing, LBWR is NOT continuing to prosper
as Trailing 12 month Net Income was negative and the last reported Operating Cash Flow, that of the 9 months 2008 was a NEGATIVE $458,000.
========
Posted by: Crow3 Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:15:32 AM
In reply to: milo3 who wrote msg# 12299 Post # of 12307
RIGHT, MILO....as aggravating as the wait for the uplisting is, the important thing is that they....despite the low SP...they are continuing to prosper.
And would this be the same LBWR CEO Dexter Morris that also said that LBWR revenues would be about $50 million by 2008, with an EBITDA of $15 million?
===============
Posted by: milo3 Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009 6:06:38 AM
In reply to: None Post # of 12306
Labwire's USIS Alliance business will expand
and as CEO Dexter Morris indicated the alliance format will be a new way in which Labwire can expand it business more rapidly than by only the addition of new client signings.
There is nothing in LBWR's SEC filings that show continuing USIS business under their Alliance Agreement.
There is nothing in LBWR's SEC filings that show continued retrieval of Laidlaw's subsidiary business.
There is nothing in LBWR's SEC filings that show organic growth of contracts with Veolia's U.S. subsidiary Transportation division and other clients - Boeing , Lockheed Martin , Aramark. All were originally signed a long time ago and revenues decreased from 2007 to 2008.
There is nothing in LBWR's SEC filngs that show new client signings since USIS about a year ago.
==================
Posted by: milo3 Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:48:29 AM
In reply to: None Post # of 12293
Labwire's revenues will enter a steady growth period
based on (1) continuing USIS business under their Alliance Agreement (2) continued retrieval of Laidlaw's subsidiary business (3) organic growth of contracts with Veolia's U.S. subsidiary Transportation division and other clients - Boeing , Lockheed Martin , Aramark (4) new client signings.
Yep, LBWR revenue has grown subtantially since the zero revenue at start-up four years ago to about $4 million per year.
However, LBWR CEO Dexter Morris was projecting revenue for 2008 of $50 million per year, more than 10x the actual revenue rate of today.
How is that working out?
In addition, lets see what has happened to the LBWR stock price in these four years:
2005 3rd quarter LBWR stock price averaged 36 cents/share
It is now at 5 cents/share, a whopping 86% drop in stock price.
How is that working out?
===================
Posted by: milo3 Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 2:40:49 PM
In reply to: Robsct who wrote msg# 12275 Post # of 12291
Labwire revenue has grown enormously in 4 years
since the Company's inception. Starting from -0-
Labwire is currently at $ 4 million + in yearly revenues
with an even more rapid revenue expansion for 2009 expected.
The temporary revenue shortfall in '08 has been fully explained several times in this forum.
Future Labwire, Inc. (LBWR) earnings do NOT look bright
and many people are selling their LBWR shares.
2008 Q1 Net Income decreased by 110% from 2007 Q1
2008 Q2 Net Income decreased by 60% from 2007 Q2
2008 Q3 Net Income decreased by 26% from 2007 Q3
since 2007 Q4 resulted in a Net Loss of $234,378, a substantial net loss is also expected for 2008 Q4, leading to a substantial net loss for all of 2008.
In addition, Revenues for 2008 9 months decreased by 10% from the 2007 9 months figure.
Regarding the buying and selling of LBWR stock, the stock price of LBWR has dropped by 77% over the last year from 22 cents/share on February 25, 2007 to the current 5 cents/share of today, February 25, 2008, implying that there has been substantial selling in the stock.
==========
Posted by: milo3 Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 4:27:05 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 12290
Future Labwire earnings & revenue look bright
as very few are selling their shares. Distribution is virtually nil as prospective LBWR investors wait for events to unfold a bit more.
With lots of room for internal growth, re enlistment of clients & new client signings 2009 looks good for Labwire (LBWR).
More false and misleading information
1. Although LBWR is a stock symbol, on message boards the stock symbols are used for the name of the companies discussed. In this case LBWR is the stock symbol for "Labwire, Inc."
2. "Labwire Security, Inc." is not the assumed name of Labwire, Inc. (LBWR)
As the link below shows, "Labwire Security Services, Inc." is the assumed name of Labwire, Inc. (LBWR):
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=27628079
===========
Posted by: milo3 Date: Thursday, February 19, 2009 8:39:46 PM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 11966 Post # of 11979
worm06, your message and the pasted info' seem disjointed. LBWR is a stock symbol - not a company name - and the filed Labwire dba is for Labwire Securtity, Inc - not Labwire Security Services
and the pasted portion could be from any of several applications.
All together the ingredients seem like a good start for borsch but not accurate information about anything in particular.
milo3
What happened to the $2.25 million per year in revenues going to LBWR from this one client alone?
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200610/ai_n16755952
Labwire Announces Additional Agreement With Leading Petrochemical Company Valued at up to $2.25 Million Annually
Market Wire , October, 2006
Email Print
Labwire, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: LBWR), a leading provider of employee screening solutions and canine security and surveillance services, is pleased to announce that it has entered into a Blanket Services Agreement ("BSA") with a leading oil and natural gas producer, natural gas marketer, gasoline marketer, and petrochemical manufacturer (the "Petrochemical Company"). Under the terms of the BSA, Labwire will ensure site security to the Petrochemical Company's refinery, storage, and other facilities located throughout North America through the provision of: (i) day to day canine security and contraband (explosive and drug) detection services and (ii) canine and armed officer emergency and disaster response services. The BSA is valued at up to $2.25 million annually and is for an initial term of five years.
"We are extremely pleased to have been awarded this BSA with the Petrochemical Company," commented Mr. Dexter Morris, Chief Executive Officer of Labwire, Inc. "The BSA was earned by our company as a result of our experience and expertise in providing similar services to certain of Petrochemical Company's land-based facilities and to one of its oil and gas operating platforms located in the Gulf of Mexico following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita."
The Petrochemical Company operates refinery, production, storage, terminal, port, and corporate facility locations, which are covered under the BSA and for which Labwire may provide the above-described security and surveillance services. As part of the BSA, each facility determines for itself the need or desire to requisition a Labwire security team. As of the date of this release, Labwire is providing security and surveillance services to two of the Petrochemical Company's refinery and storage facilities.
About Labwire, Inc.
Labwire, Inc. is headquartered in Houston, Texas and provides secure and compliant employee drug screening and background checking services to Fortune 500 corporations via the Labwire(TM) Platform. Labwire(TM) is a proprietary, Web-based application that streamlines the complex regulatory and record management activities associated with employee screening, delivering accurate timely results while eliminating service calls and paper trails. This comprehensive solution to managing employee screening services is the most efficient and cost-effective platform in the industry. For additional information about Labwire, Inc., please visit www.labwire.com .
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements in this release that are forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, or other factors which may cause actual results, performance, or achievements of the company to be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially because of factors such as the effect of general economic and market conditions, entry into markets with vigorous competition, market acceptance of new products and services, continued acceptance of existing products and services, technological shifts, and delays in product development and related product release schedules, any of which may cause revenues and income to fall short of anticipated levels. All information in this release is as of the date of this release. The company undertakes no duty to update any forward-looking statement to conform the statement to actual results or changes in the company's expectations.
Contact: S.D. Torrey Hills Capital, Inc. James Macdonald Investor Relations (858) 456-7300
Wrong again
I have years and years of observing what happens to the stock price of companies that issue bottomless death spiral convertible preferred stock to draw from when making these statements of the $0.0001/share stock price, even without considering the quality of ONCP management - which, by the way, have shown a total lack of fiduciary responsibility towards common stockholders in the past.
what do you think that a preferred stockholder (and other market forces) is going to do to the ONCP common stock price knowing full well that the 5 day average ONCP common stock price immediately before the conversion of preferred to common is going to determine how many common shares he receives from the conversion?
sell sell sell sell until the ONCP common stock price reaches $0.0001/share or lower, allowing for the maximum amount of common shares to be received upon conversion of the preferred stock.
This will result in tens, if not hundreds of billions of ONCP shares of common stock outstanding.
============
Posted by: ThSeeker Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:58:23 PM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 11735 Post # of 11741
wormie. its not about understanding. IF that happened .0001 then you would be right. But you have nothing but pure pessimism to draw you to believe that level of PPS will be fact approximately 3 months from now. A lot of progress can be PR'd by then. Certainly possible that enough progress could be made to see the PPS rise significantly from today's .004. It has a long way to go to break even and I don't thik it will be possible to achieve that. But being unable to stop a fall to like you predict....
LBWR Revenue is NOT growing
Labwire Revenue is FALLLING! LBWR showed a Revenue decrease for the nine months ending Sept. 2008 compared to the nine months ending Sept. 2007
LBWR 2007 9 month Revenue = $3.530 million
LBWR 2008 9 month Revenue = $3.169 million
a 10% decrease in revenue
=============
Posted by: inspro Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:52:01 PM
In reply to: Robsct who wrote msg# 12270 Post # of 12272
since OTI is owned by LBWR that happens to be LBWR revenue ,and it matters to me none where their revenue comes from it continues to grow and thats what concerns me, and you are absolutely correct imo they have overcome the short fall from , thye loss of revenue from greyhound,either from organic growth or from new business that we dont even know about whats important is REVENUE IS GROWING and I am sure we will get a more clearer picture when we see 4 q 2008 results
management could always issue themselves more preferred shares or common shares to have voting control of the company
and since when does having outside shareholders owning a big part of a public company increase the probability that fraudulent management is going to be nailed for their crimes?
===============
Posted by: snow Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:47:00 PM
In reply to: the_worm06 who wrote msg# 11735 Post # of 11736
worm06
It this happens the shareholders who opted for the preferred shares will take over almost the whole company. Why would management choose to do this, making them deserving of being put behind bars?
the bottomless death spiral convertible preferred
will allow market forces to bring down the stock price of the common shares down to $0.0001/share, allowing for billions upon billons of common shares to be issued when the preferred shares are converted into common.
this will not be a temporary effect.
this will be a permanent effect on the stock price of ONCP common shares
this should not be too tough to understand
that is what happens with these bottomless death spiral preferred stocks.
Don't worry, we still have some announcements from the US Attorneys Office from the Eastern District of Michigan regarding SLJB, its officers/directors and certain "consultants"
Thanks for verifying that the Greyhound/Laidlaw agreement with LBWR expired
===========
Posted by: Robsct Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:25:31 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 12267
Labwire had a temporary setback with revenue when the Laidlaw contract expired but is showing a quick and steady recovery. LBWR had rapid revenue growth in 2008. Let's work with some figures. Here's the news release.
"Revenues for the three-month periods ended September 30, 2008 and 2007 were $1,292,472 and $1,352,671, respectively. The decrease in revenues is principally due to the inclusion in third quarter 2007 revenues of approximately $208,000 in collections on accounts previously written off. Adjusted for this $208,000 in revenues, third quarter 2008 revenues increased over third quarter 2007 revenues, primarily because of revenues from our Wyoming operations acquired during the fourth quarter of 2007. This increase is despite the expiration of a particular client's account agreement amounting to approximately $400,000 per quarter. We are currently in negotiations to resume services to this client, and we anticipate that revenues from this client may resume in some amount in the first quarter of 2009."
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/081223/lbwr.pk10-q.html
Now we can adjust Q3 '07 down by $208K to factor out the recovered revenue that was previously written off.
Q3 '07 adjusted revenue is $1,145K...so Q3 '08 revenue grew over the same period '07 by $207K which is 18% growth over same period '07. And that was with the loss of $400K in revenue from the expired contract not yet recovered. We topped Q3 '07 revenue (even with a $400K loss of revenue from one contract) WITH NEW GROWTH! If we had that $400K back, which they are working on, the Q3 '08 revenue would have been $1,752K compared to the adjusted Q3 '07 revenue of $1,145K! That would have been a $607K increase in revenue or 53% increase in revenue! So the numbers are not showing the new revenue growth because of the one temporary set back which they are working on recovering for 2009.
Now on 2/5/09 we got a PR showing more rapid growth!!
Labwire Implements Additional Service Units
Friday February 6, 8:00 am ET
BROOKSHIRE, TX--(MARKET WIRE)--Feb 6, 2009 -- Labwire, Inc. (Other OTC:LBWR.PK - News), a leading provider of employee screening solutions and canine security and surveillance services, announced that as of January 29th, 2009 it has added another 140 service units in 20 states (utilizing Labwire's federal transit administration (FTA) compliance platform) to one of it's "alliance" contracts (Labwire release May 15, 2008) for calendar 2009. Each location was setup with the capability of doing 50 drug tests before having to reorder forms. "We are pleased to have completed these setups and have them online and functional in less than 30 days. We look forward to the additional volume that will be generated by these locations," said Dexter Morris, Chief Executive Officer, Labwire Inc.
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/090206/0471946.html
So, it turns out that LBWR's agreement with Greyhound/Laidlaw was terminated or expired after all
so far, the SEC filings do not show that the Greyhound business has been regained by LBWR
so far, the SEC filings do not show that the USIS business has amounted to anything for LBWR
If you factor out the revenues from OTI that have been included in the 2008 figures, but not in the 2007 figures, the drop in LBWR business has been very substantial so far in the 2008 figures reported with the SEC versus the 2007 figures.
============
Posted by: milo3 Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:37:56 AM
In reply to: None Post # of 12266
REST OFTHE STORY REGARDING LABWIRE'S TEMPORARY REVENUE LOSS When the entire story of Labwire's temporary loss of revenue story is told it portrays a uniquely positioned company with a gifted CEO.
When Laidlaw - Labwire's best customer - was acquired by First Group Corp. Labwire lost the business of Greyhound and Laidlaw's Yellow School Bus business to USIS.
(Short version.) Labwire's CEO has retrieved Greyhound' business and is currently working to secure the return of the balance of business lost to Laidlaw. (We'll know more about this later).
In addition to this , Labwire returned with an Alliance Agreement with USIS which could prove to be the beginning of a great long term arrangement for Labwire. In fact Labwire has already completed its first transaction/deal with USIS
My do some research on AOAG
can someone tell me about the positive aspects of the company?
thanks
What "Toronto" are you talking about?
The Toronto RCMP office that has charged SLJB former CEO Petar Vucicevish with criminal fraud?
that "Toronto"?
LBWR - How much comfort can you have in a company
that overstates their actual "Cash & Marketable Securities" position at the end of a year by 200%, from the actual amount, $108,346, to the false and misleading amount, $305,684, an overstatement of about $200,000 - as LBWR did in its 2006 financials.
what happened here?
they "thought" that there was $300,000 in the bank, but it really turned out to be only $100,000?
how does this happen?
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1426567/000137219808000021/form10sb.htm
Labwire Revenue is FALLLING! LBWR showed a Revenue decrease for the nine months ending Sept. 2008 compared to the nine months ending Sept. 2007
LBWR 2007 9 month Revenue = $3.530 million
LBWR 2008 9 month Revenue = $3.169 million
a 10% decrease in revenue