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.
We just need some news, pr, an update, anything that would even encourage someone slightly to be interested in a stock that has been dead for over 6 months. Come on ARSC give us something!
We just need news from ARSC. Anyone call them recently?
Is today going to be the day we have all been waiting for?
The new short rules
http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2010...les-explained/
Q: What’s new about what the SEC approved Wednesday?
A: There are a couple new elements to the rules. One element is essentially an updated version of the uptick rule. The second is a new “circuit breaker” component.
Q: Whoa, I’m already lost. What’s the uptick rule, again?
A: This was a rule — created during the Great Depression — that said traders could only sell a stock short after it rises, i.e. an uptick. The rule was abolished in July 2007. But as the markets tumbled in 2008, there was a general clamor to bring back the uptick rule. The SEC wrote up some proposed rules, asked for comments about it and after reviewing them voted on the new rules today.
Q: Ok, so what’s different about the new uptick rule versus the old uptick rule.
A: Under the old rule, you could short sell at a price above the last trade price, or after the last price was higher than the previous price. Under the new rule, you wouldn’t be able short unless someone was willing to buy it for more than the national best bid. (That is, for a higher price than anyone is currently offering to pay.)
Q: It seems like it’d be hard to find someone willing to pay more for a stock than they have to.
A: It probably would be. That’s the idea. This is supposed to be a curb on shorting.
Q: What’s the advantage of using the best bid versus the last uptick?
A: The SEC says “among other reasons, we believe that bids generally are a more accurate reflection of current prices for a security than last sale prices due to delays that can occur in the reporting of last sale price information and the manner in which last sale price information is published to the markets.”
Q: Ok, got it. Can’t short unless you can get someone to pay more than the current best bid for the stock.
A: That’s only part of it. The second part is “circuit breaker” element.
Q: Oh yeah. What’s that?
A: That part of the rule says that the shorting curbs come in when a stock’s price falls 10% from the previous day’s close.
Q: For how long?
A: For the entire day in which the shares fell below 10 percent and for the following day.
Q: How many stocks is this going to effect?
A: The rule will apply to stocks that are listed on exchanges and traded over the counter. The SEC estimates that about 1.3% of stocks would hit that 10% barrier on any given day, according to Dow Jones. Of course that would likely go up during times of major market stress and volatility, such as the kind we’ve seen over the last couple years.
Q: Wow. It’s certainly refreshing to have such a concise and pithy explanation of such as dry topic. A tip of the cap to you, good sir.
A: No worries, we aim to please.
28th? Anyone wanna bet money if news comes out? Maybe by gambling I can actual make some money.
How is this even legal?
ARSC Mergers, What has actaully happened as they said would and how long did it take to them to do?
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
ARSC Enters LOI to Acquire iVoice for Spinoff of Hydra Fuel Cell to Shareholders
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
ARSC to Acquire Mag-Wind Vertical Axis Wind Turbine Technology and Manufacturing Company
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
American Security Resources Sets April 30 Close Date for Wind Turbine Company
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
ARSC Signs LOI to Acquire Breakthrough Wind Turbine Company
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
American Security Resources Signs Letter of Intent to Acquire
Galaxy Microsystems, Inc.
Tuesday, November 9, 2004
American Security Resources Corp. Inks Memorandum to Acquire Leitner-Wise Rifle Co.
News News!!!!!!!!!
Yes where is it?
I was at my local swapmeet over the weekend and a high school student there selling Fuel Cells he made is his garage that he made for a science project out of scrap parts. He was selling them for $50 and they powered small appliances. He made a total of 3 and already sold two. His neighbor is a kid who owns an iphone and made a custom case for his phone out of duct tape. They decided to merge and both share the same booth at the swapmeet.
They already have had more revenue and delivered more than ARSC.
SATIRE, Just Joking.
OK but on a serious note, What the heck is going on with this stock?
OK, so a couple days ago there was a 25,000,000 buy. And everyone said it was the start of something big. well again another 25,000,000 buy. Granted I am glad it is trading but really its not that big of buy.
I posted that it is not much since it is either
.00007 x 25,000,000 = $1,750
or
.0001 x 25,000,000 = $2,500
WHY DID THAT POST GET DELETED?!?!?!
I think its about time someone calls Frank again.
I am confused take our sell orders off or raise our sell orders. Make up your mind.
Plus 20,000,000 buy isn't that much.
It is either 20,000,000 x .00007 = $1,400
Or
20,000,000 x .0001 = $2,000
Can someone give Frank a call today for an update and let us know what he says? Maybe even record the call and post it.
I had a dream last night, that I woke up a millionaire. What a disapointed to me to see ARSC still at no bid.
Well I would like to think we all want to see this stock go up. We have all invested money into this stock and could use it to atleast be worth something and actually be something that is traded.
Since we really can't sell if we wanted to, its best to hope for the best and do what we can to make sure this stock goes up and not just stays where it has been for what seems like forever.
All the talk about Frank and Bob taking all of our money, I think they for sure are making money, but they own stock too. So if ARSC isn't worth anything it hurts them too, right?
IMO
I just got an email from a friend who said he called Frank today.
#####,
I decided to call Frank at 713-465-1001 I was actually surprised he answered since people have posted that no one was answering the phone, or calling anyone back. He sounded very positive. I asked about delivery and the aquisition. He said that he trying to wrap up the merger by the end of the month. He also talked about dividend after the spin off of Hydra.
I asked about the current share price and he said that after everything happens things should start getting better.
So, he has given me atleast some hope. So hopefully at the end of the month we'll see something.
Bob
The way the Analyst Conference lists the attendees makes it look like there are more companies attending the show.
Listed (Looks like 25):
Chemicals & Basic Industries
Aceto Corporation
Agrium Inc.
AirGas, Inc.
AMCOL International
Applied Extrusion Technologies, Inc.
Lydall, Inc.
MacDermid, Incorporated
Methanex Corporation
Rock-Tenn Company
Sonoco Products
Universal Forest Products
Wellman, Inc.
Clean Technology & Renewables
American Security Resources Corp.
American Superconductor Co.
Ballard Power Systems
Electro Energy Inc.
Ener1, Inc.
Fuel Cell Energy, Inc.
GreenPlains Renewable Energy, Inc.
Hydrogenics Corporation
Hydrogen Engine Center, Inc.
Mechanical Technology
Nathaniel Energy Corporation
Ultralife Batteries, Inc.
Valence Technology, Inc.
Actual (13):
Chemicals & Basic Industries
1. Aceto Corporation
2. Agrium Inc. AirGas, Inc. AMCOL International
3. Applied Extrusion Technologies, Inc. Lydall, Inc. MacDermid, Incorporated Methanex CorporationRock-Tenn Company Sonoco Products Universal Forest Products
4. Wellman, Inc.
Clean Technology & Renewables
1. American Security Resources Corp.
2. American Superconductor Co. Ballard Power Systems
3. Electro Energy Inc.
4. Ener1, Inc.
5. Fuel Cell Energy, Inc.
6. GreenPlains Renewable Energy, Inc. Hydrogenics Corporation
7. Hydrogen Engine Center, Inc.
8. Mechanical Technology
9. Nathaniel Energy Corporation Ultralife Batteries, Inc. Valence Technology, Inc.
This could be good or bad. At first I was like that’s too many companies. Since it said “No two companies in the same industry present at the same time.” There could be like 3 or 4 companies speaking at the same time. So when they said 175 to 225 are planned to attend you have to divide how many companies are presenting at that time. So maybe not huge visibility. But it could also mean less companies more of an opportunity for people to see ARSC.
Anyways Just my 2 cents.
I really hope the best, I really want to be proved wrong and actually not lose all the money I put into this stock.
I called 802-253-7596 and asked how many attend this event. The lady who answered said they are expecting 175-225 attendees.
It also says there is a webcast of the meeting:
Early Registration - Companies committing early receive: 1) a preferred morning presentation time which improves attendance, and 2) a fee reduction from $3900 to $3500, which includes the cost of webcasting your meeting.
http://www.analyst-conference.com/main/help3.asp?QuNum=14
WHY DO MESSAGES AND POSTS KEEP GETTING DELETED?!?
Not mine, but if someone has something to say good or bad about ARSC, if it is the truth I want to see it.
Has anyone called ARSC lately for an update?
Umm I am confused about this!?!?!?!?
So I have seen posts of people passing by the Hydra building, but has anyone ever gone to the ARSC building in Houston?
19 Briar Hollow Lane, Suite 125 Houston, TX 77027
That is the address on ARSC website and its SEC filling.
ARSC:
http://www.americansecurityresources.com/contact/
American Hydrogen Company: http://www.americanhydrogencorporation.com/contactus.html
Google Street View Map:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&q=19+Briar+Hollow+Lane,+Suite+125+Houston,+TX+77027&wrapid=tlif12939533837661&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=19+Briar+Hollow+Ln+%23125,+Houston,+TX+77027&gl=us&ei=aSkgTenJJoSq8AbogJnKDQ&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CBQQ8gEwAA
But!!!!!!! I was Google'ing it and I found this company at the same address:
Merrill Zurich
http://www.merrillzurich.com/Contact_Us.htm
19 Briar Hollow Lane, Suite 125 Houston, TX 77027
It's website is more up to date than ARSC so it makes me thinks something smells fishy. hmmmm?
.
So is ARSC aware and strong enough to break out after being locked in the cellar.
Any opinions on this post?
KNOW THE SIGNS OF CELLAR BOXING
What is cellar boxing:
Naked shorting into $0.0001, or, **Cellar Boxing**
There’s a form of the securities fraud known as naked short selling that is becoming very popular and lucrative to the Market Makers that practice it. It is known as “Cellar boxing” and it has to do with the fact that the NASD and the SEC had to arbitrarily set a minimum level at which a stock can trade. This level was set at $.0001 or one-one hundredth of a penny. This level is appropriately referred to as “the cellar”. This $.0001 level can be used as a "backstop" for all kinds of market maker and naked short selling manipulations.
“Cellar boxing” has been one of the security frauds du jour since 1999 when the market went to a “decimalization” basis. In the pre-decimalization days the minimum market spread for most stocks was set at 1/8th of a dollar and the market makers were guaranteed a healthy “spread”. Since decimalization came into effect, those one-eighth of a dollar spreads now are often only a penny as you can see in Microsoft’s quote throughout the day. Where did the unscrupulous MMs go to make up for all of this lost income? They headed "south" to the OTCBB and Pink Sheets where the protective effects from naked short selling like Rule 10-a, and NASD Rules 3350, 3360, and 3370 are nonexistent.
The unique aspect of needing an arbitrary “cellar” level is that the lowest possible incremental gain above this cellar level represents a 100% spread available to MMs making a market in these securities. When compared to the typical spread in Microsoft of perhaps four-tenths of 1%, this is pretty tempting territory. In fact, when the market is no bid to $.0001 offer there is theoretically an infinite spread.
In order to participate in “cellar boxing”, the MMs first need to pummel the price per share down to these levels. The lower they can force the share price, the larger are the percentage spreads to feed off of. This is easily done via garden variety naked short selling. In fact if the MM is large enough and has enough visibility of buy and sell orders as well as order flow, he can simultaneously be acting as the conduit for the sale of nonexistent shares through Canadian co-conspiring broker/dealers and their associates with his right hand at the same time that his left hand is naked short selling into every buy order that appears through its own proprietary accounts. The key here is to be a dominant enough of a MM to have visibility of these buy orders. This is referred to as "broker/dealer internalization" or naked short selling via "desking" which refers to the market makers trading desk. While the right hand is busy flooding the victim company's market with "counterfeit" shares that can be sold at any instant in time the left hand is nullifying any upward pressure in share price by neutralizing the demand for the securities. The net effect becomes no demonstrable demand for shares and a huge oversupply of shares which induces a downward spiral in share price.
In fact, until the "beefed up" version of Rule 3370 (Affirmative determination in writing of "borrowability" by settlement date) becomes effective, U.S. MMs have been "legally" processing naked short sale orders out of Canada and other offshore locations even though they and the clearing firms involved knew by history that these shares were in no way going to be delivered. The question that then begs to be asked is how "the system" can allow these obviously bogus sell orders to clear and settle. To find the answer to this one need look no further than to Addendum "C" to the Rules and Regulations of the NSCC subdivision of the DTCC. This gaping loophole allows the DTCC, which is basically the 11,000 b/ds and banks that we refer to as "Wall Street”, to borrow shares from those investors naive enough to hold these shares in "street name" at their brokerage firm. This amounts to about 95% of us. Theoretically, this “borrow” was designed to allow trades to clear and settle that involved LEGITIMATE 1 OR 2 DAY delays in delivery. This "borrow" is done unbeknownst to the investor that purchased the shares in question and amounts to probably the largest "conflict of interest" known to mankind. The question becomes would these investors knowingly loan, without compensation, their shares to those whose intent is to bankrupt their investment if they knew that the loan process was the key mechanism needed for the naked short sellers to effect their goal? Another question that arises is should the investor's b/d who just earned a commission and therefore owes its client a fiduciary duty of care, be acting as the intermediary in this loan process keeping in mind that this b/d is being paid the cash value of the shares being loaned as a means of collateralizing the loan, all unbeknownst to his client the purchaser.
An interesting phenomenon occurs at these "cellar" levels. Since NASD Rule 3370 allows MMs to legally naked short sell into markets characterized by a plethora of buy orders at a time when few sell orders are in existence, a MM can theoretically "legally" sit at the $.0001 level and sell nonexistent shares all day long because at no bid and $.0001 ask there is obviously a huge disparity between buy orders and sell orders. What tends to happen is that every time the share price tries to get off of the cellar floor and onto the first step of the stairway at $.0001 there is somebody there to step on the hands of the victim corporation's market.
Once a given micro cap corporation is “boxed in the cellar” it doesn’t have a whole lot of options to climb its way out of the cellar. One obvious option would be for it to reverse split its way out of the cellar but history has shown that these are counter-productive as the market capitalization typically gets hammered and the post split share price level starts heading back to its original pre-split level.
Another option would be to organize a sustained buying effort and muscle your way out of the cellar but typically there will, as if by magic, be a naked short sell order there to meet each and every buy order. Sometimes the shareholder base can muster up enough buying pressure to put the market at $.0001 bid and $.0002 offer for a limited amount of time. Later the market makers will typically pound the $.0001 bids with a blitzkrieg of selling to wipe out all of the bids and the market goes back to no bid and $.0001 offer. When the weak-kneed shareholders see this a few times they usually make up their mind to sell their shares the next time that a $.0001 bid appears and to get the heck out of Dodge. This phenomenon is referred to as “shaking the tree” for weak-kneed investors and it is very effective.
At times the market will go to $.0001 bid and $.0003 offer. This sets up a juicy 200% spread for the MMs and tends to dissuade any buyers from reaching up to the "lofty" level of $.0003. If a $.0002 bid should appear from a MM not "playing ball" with the unscrupulous MMs, it will be hit so quickly that Level 2 will never reveal the existence of the bid. The $.0001 bid at $.0003 offer market sets up a "stalemate" wherein market makers can leisurely enjoy the huge spreads while the victim company slowly dilutes itself to death by paying the monthly bills with "real" shares sold at incredibly low levels. Since all of these development-stage corporations have to pay their monthly bills, time becomes on the side of the naked short sellers.
At times it almost seems that the unscrupulous market makers are not actively trying to kill the victim corporation but instead want to milk the situation for as long of a period of time as possible and let the corporation die a slow death by dilution. The reality is that it is extremely easy to strip away 99% of a victim company’s share price or market cap and to keep the victim corporation “boxed“ in the cellar, but it really is difficult to kill a corporation especially after management and the shareholder base have figured out the game that is being played at their expense.
As the weeks and months go by the market makers make a fortune with these huge percentage spreads but the net aggregate naked short positions become astronomical from all of this activity. This leads to some apprehension amongst the co-conspiring MMs. The predicament they find themselves in is that they can’t even stop naked short selling into every buy order that appears because if they do the share price will gap and this will put tremendous pressures on net capital reserves for the MMs and margin maintenance requirements for the co-conspiring hedge funds and others operating out of the more than 13,000 naked short selling margin accounts set up in Canada. And of course covering the naked short position is out of the question since they can’t even stop the day-to-day naked short selling in the first place and you can't be covering at the same time you continue to naked short sell.
What typically happens in these situations is that the victim company has to massively dilute its share structure from the constant paying of the monthly burn rate with money received from the selling of “real” shares at artificially low levels. Then the goal of the naked short sellers is to point out to the investors, usually via paid “Internet bashers”, that with the, let’s say, 50 billion shares currently issued and outstanding, that this lousy company is not worth the $5 million market cap it is trading at, especially if it is just a shell company whose primary business plan was wiped out by the naked short sellers’ tortuous interference earlier on.
The truth of the matter is that the single biggest asset of these victim companies often becomes the astronomically large aggregate naked short position that has accumulated throughout the initial “bear raid” and also during the “cellar boxing” phase. The goal of the victim company now becomes to avoid the 3 main goals of the naked short sellers, namely: bankruptcy, a reverse split, or the forced signing of a death spiral convertible debenture out of desperation. As long as the victim company can continue to pay the monthly burn rate, then the game plan becomes to make some of the strategic moves that hundreds of victim companies have been forced into doing which includes name changes, CUSIP # changes, cancel/reissue procedures, dividend distributions, amending of by-laws and Articles of Corporation, etc. Nevada domiciled companies usually cancel all of their shares in the system, both real and fake, and force shareholders and their b/ds to PROVE the ownership of the old “real” shares before they get a new “real” share. Many also file their civil suits at this time also. This indirect forcing of hundreds of U.S. micro cap corporations to go through all of these extraneous hoops and hurdles as a means to survive, whether it be due to regulatory apathy or lack of resources, is probably one of the biggest black eyes the U.S. financial systems have ever sustained. In a perfect world it would be the regulators that periodically audit the “C” and “D” sub-accounts at the DTCC, the proprietary accounts of the MMs, clearing firms, and Canadian b/ds, and force the buy-in of counterfeit shares, many of which are hiding behind altered CUSIP #s, that are detected above the Rule 11830 guidelines for allowable “failed deliveries” of one half of 1% of the shares issued. U.S. micro cap corporations should not have to periodically “purge” their share structure of counterfeit electronic book entries but if the regulators will not do it then management has a fiduciary duty to do it.
A lot of management teams become overwhelmed with grief and guilt in regards to the huge increase in the number of shares issued and outstanding that have accumulated during their “watch”. The truth however is that as long as management made the proper corporate governance moves throughout this ordeal then a huge number of resultant shares issued and outstanding is unavoidable and often indicative of an astronomically high naked short position and is nothing to be ashamed of. These massive naked short positions need to be looked upon as huge assets that need to be developed. Hopefully the regulators will come to grips with the reality of naked short selling and tactics like "Cellar boxing" and quickly address this fraud that has decimated thousands of U.S. micro cap corporations and the tens of millions of U.S. investors therein.
Can someone just call Frank and ask him about the $21 million back order?
Wow, check out todays volume for IVOI!!
1,000 share at .0001 equals $0.10
Plus the $8-10 trade, that person is already down 90%
Someone from the IVOI board on ihub stopped by hydra yesterday.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=57768249
Please do and update us on more then what it looks like from the outside. Go inside, ask some questions, ask for a tour. take pictures, video, record the conversations and then please post!!!
Exactly.
Thats why I am buying more!
Why would the company sell stock at .00007 to get finacing, when it could delivery on its promises which hopefully raise the share price then they can sell the same ammount of share but get more than 100% more capital just being .0002
The officers are all holding stock too, the selling at .00007 has got to be hurting them too, right?
Why do companies release news but not update their website with the "new" news. Why does it takes so long to show up:
http://www.americansecurityresources.com/news/
http://www.ivoice.com/wwwroot/press.htm
iVoice IVIO Results of Operations
Nine months ended September 30, 2010 compared to nine months ended September 30, 2009
Total sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 were $142,996 and $73,969, respectively. The increase in sales of $69,027 is primarily due to the increase in product sales of green products offset by a small decrease in IVR maintenance revenues. Declines in the IVR maintenance revenues are due to the general decline in the economies of our customers. Sales of the new “green” products are through distributors and by direct sales to the B Green customers.
Total cost of sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 were $68,958 and $34,473, respectively. The cost of sales represents the direct material and labor costs for the anti-vibration products produced by B Green Innovations’ out-sourced manufacturer. The increase in cost of sales of $34,485 is attributed to the increase in sales of “green” products.
Total operating expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, were $976,453 and $960,351, respectively, for an increase of $16,102. The increase is primarily attributable to the expenses of B Green for the staffing and roll-out of the new “green” products offset by small decreases in insurance and other overhead and office expenses.
Total other income (expense) for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 was an income of $182,670 as compared to an expense of $242,089 for the nine months ended September 30, 2010. This change was primarily the result of an increase in other income, which was comprised mostly of a $232,491 gain on sale of tax losses in the NJEDA program, an increase in the gain on revaluation of derivatives and lower amortization of debt discount.
The net losses for the nine months ending September 30, 2010 and 2009 were $719,745 and $1,162,944, respectively. The changes were the result of the factors discussed above.
The net loss attributable to non-controlling interest for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 were $135,396 and $319,930, respectively reflect the non-controlling interest’s portion of the operating losses recorded by B Green Innovations, after effect of elimination of intra-company transactions, which is included in our consolidation for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
17
Table of Contents
Three months ended September 30, 2010 compared to three months ended September 30, 2009
Total sales for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 were $43,357 and $28,721, respectively. The increase in sales of $14,636 is primarily due to the increase in product sales of green products and a small increase in IVR maintenance revenues for the period. Normally the IVR maintenance revenues have been declining due to the general decline in the economies of our customers. But, increases this period are only temporary due to receipts that were previously thought to be uncollectible. Sales of the new “green” products are through distributors and by direct sales to the B Green customers.
Total cost of sales for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 were $22,288 and $13,934, respectively. The cost or sales represent the direct material and labor costs for the anti-vibration products produced by B Green Innovations’ out-sourced manufacturer. The increase in cost of sales of $8.354 is attributed to the increase in sales of “green” products.
Total operating expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, were $311,747 and $303,248, respectively, for an increase of $8,499. The increase is primarily attributable to the expenses of B Green for the staffing and roll-out of the new “green” products offset by small decreases in insurance and other overhead and office expenses.
Total other income (expense) for the three months ended September 30, 2010 was an expense of $37,859 as compared to an expense of $169,960 for the three months ended September 30, 2009. This decrease is primarily attributed to lower interest expense.
The net losses for the three months ending September 30, 2010 and 2009 were $328,537 and $458,421, respectively. The changes were the result of the factors discussed above.
The net loss attributable to non-controlling interest for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 were $120,169 and $146,590, respectively reflect the non-controlling interest’s portion of the operating losses recorded by B Green Innovations, after effect of elimination of intra-company transactions, which is included in our consolidation for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
News 1:
ARSC Enters LOI to Acquire iVoice for Spinoff of Hydra Fuel Cell to Shareholders (BusinessWire)
American Security Resources Corp.(Pinksheets: ARSC) has signed a Letter of Intent to acquire iVoice (OTCBB:IVOI) as a merger vehicle to spinoff its wholly owned subsidiary, Hydra Fuel Cell Corporation (www.hydrafuelcell.com ), in a special dividend to the shareholders.
The merger of IVOI and Hydra is subject to due diligence and the conclusion of a definitive agreement between the companies and is expected to close on or before the middle of January, 2011.
A previous plan approved by ARSC's Board calls for a significant investment directly into Hydra before the spinoff. The spinoff will be submitted to the shareholders in a proxy which will describe the transaction and contain the ratio of Hydra shares to ARSC shares for the dividend. The company expects to have the details of the spin-off in a proxy shortly after the closing with IVOI. After the spinoff Hydra's stock will trade independently.
New 2:
iVoice Enters Into Letter of Intent to Merge With Hydra Fuel Cell Corporation (MarketWire)
iVoice, Inc (OTCBB: IVOI) announced today that it signed a non-binding Letter of Intent to merge with Hydra Fuel Cell Corporation, a subsidiary of American Security Resources Corporation. The transaction, which is subject to due diligence, the usual and customary conditions, and entering into a definitive agreement, is expected to close in early 2011.
Hydra Fuel Cell Corporation has developed highly scalable, mass producible proton exchange membrane (PEM) hydrogen fuel cell systems. It is in the process of delivering the first HydraStax(R) systems this month. Hydra, located in Beaverton, Oregon, is set to advance hydrogen fuel cell electric generation as grid replacement for residences and small commercial establishments.
Jerry Mahoney, CEO of iVoice, remarked, "We are excited about the merger and to be working together with Hydra Fuel Cell Corporation."
Frank Neukomm, CEO of ARSC, stated, "We have been working to find the right company to merge with Hydra since 2009. We've found it in iVoice."
"Non-binding Letter of Intent"
One of the first steps in the merger and acquisition ("M&A") process after executing a confidentiality agreement ("Confi") or non-disclosure agreement ("NDA") is the issuance of a non binding letter of intent. A letter of intent, referred to as the "LOI", is a legal document that is provided to show interest in progressing with a transaction, such as to purchase, joint venture or merger.
An LOI is a nonbinding legal agreement that not only expresses interest, but typically details the initial terms for the contemplated transaction, timing for due diligence, any contingencies (financing, Board approval, etc.), and specifies the timing to execute a final definitive agreement and close the transaction.
While this document is not legally binding, the LOI is an important part of a purchasing process because it typically means that both parties have fundamentally agreed on a purchase price, basic terms of the deal and have agreed to negotiate exclusively with each other.
(From: http://ezinearticles.com/?Merger-and-Acquisitions-Series---Non-Binding-Letter-of-Intent&id=3673848)
mmech please call frank and ask those questions, record call if you can!
I'd just like a stock you can actually trade. This no bid is crap. Stop buying at .0001! Stop selling at .0001, lets gets this to run!
Can some explain what I am seeing here?
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/ARSC/quote
is that saying if someone will buy the 1,030,000 at .0001 $103 it would be at .0002?
volume up today on arsc
225,593,140
One thing is if the company is going to be successful or not.
It is a complete other thing if this company is a scam.
ARSC needs to resolve the whole scam idea. Show proof. Then we can get that out, and then just watch and see as the company is either successful or fails.
.0002 PLEASE!