https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLpfbcXTeo8
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.
Back to Da0.005s and soon Da0.003s and then lower still for new 128-week lows again.
DEATH SPIRALS ARE INEXORABLE.
DAVID RUSSELL FOLEY, Bureau of Prisons inmate no. 13141-111 and the OWNER of NTEK via his holding of the SUPERVOTING Series A Preferred shares, is nott in jail, he's in PRISON.
Mike, please refer to David Foley as the OWNER of NTEK, as he owns the shares of the share class that controls the supermajority of all share votes no matter how many BILLIONS or TRILLIONS of common shares they print and dump.
Two things:
Foley is the current OWNER of NTEK
Foley is in PRISON and nott 'jail'. He's doing hard time in FEDERAL PRISON, nott some country jail with Barney Fife.
David Foley is a hardened, recidivist felon who is convicted of multiple independent FELONIES against different parties on different occasions.
He also appears to have made false representations to the BANKRUPTCY COURT regarding back wages he now claims was due him from 2007. He did nott list that on his assets disclosure and that is BANKRUPTCY FRAUD. Yett another feather in his felonious hat.
Back into the 0.005s today, 0.003s on the way as is a new 128-week low
And a REVERSE SPLIT on the way as the AS getts maxxed ~OUTT very soon.
3 AS increases in 10 months - and another one and a REVERSE SPLIT now in the loading tray as Foley's ROYAL CAPITAL GROUP fake front for the BACKDATED floorless convertible notes he keeps issuing to himself directly into the FLOAT so he can dump them the week of issuance.
LOL!!! And how many of those were reinstalls because the app doesn't work right and has to be reinstalled periodically?
LOL!!! And how many were from the same user - like the Interstellar rentals - 165 rentals - 25 from the same IP address!!!
Bwahahahahahaa!!!!
Your belief is dead wrong. It is nott at all unethical.
According to your 'belief' it would be wrong for a lawyer to give assistance to a criminal client (or civil defendant) who wished to defend themselves (pro se) in court. Or that the lawyer must withdraw if the client demands to take the stand and testify despite the lawyer telling the client that choice will destroy his chances.
Those are both done ALL the time and are nott only ethical butt moral.
The client is always the king. The lawyer can withdraw or refuse representation for any reason he wishes (which is why some of them suggested you seek out other firms). It has nothing to do with ethics - they simply can choose their clients and their battles. I refuse to take on clients frequently - for many reasons.
The only ethical issue is if the client (1) wants the lawyer to engage in an illegal activity, (2) the lawyer becomes aware that the client is planning or currently engaged in an illegal activity that would be abetted by the lawyer's action, or (3) the lawyer becomes aware that the client represents a current threat to someone or the community and is planning a violent act.
As to (2) and (3), the rules differ by state as to what specifically qualifies.
I'm sorry some lawyers refused your wishes. Butt remember we have no obligation to do things we simply don't wish to.
LOL!!! Really??? Gott any LINKS to any company other than NTEK that is claiming that UF and NTEK are represented at CES 2016?
Post the links.
The floorplan of CES exhibitor booths and the list of exhibitors shows NO ULTRAFLIX, NO NANOTECH anything, NO NTEK, nothing whatsoever about UF or NTEK.
Those are the FACTS.
LOL, remember when some thought the NP-1 was 'the next BIG thing' - back when 60,000 were 'shipped into the retail channel' and 'BestBuy assosiates are training for months to sell them' and NTEK had a CES booth every year.
LOL! NOT ANYMORE!
Nott even one of the SMALLEST booths at CES 2016 - nothing - nada.
LOL!!!! Really? What number is NTEK's booth?
I can't find them on the CES 2016 exhibitor list.
At all.
What's their booth number?
Bwahahahahaha!!!!
LOL!!! That is soooooo wrong. The client's wishes always determine the course of action, UNLESS that causes the attorney to engage in UNETHICAL behaviour, in which case the attorney is bound to withdraw.
You can COUNSEL the client to pursue a better course of action, butt the final call is the client's - ALWAYS.
You can refuse work (I have many, many times) for any reason - don't like the client, client repeatedly lies to you, think client is engaged in inappropriate activity, don't want to be associated with a certain client, want to avoid future conflicts, etc.
Law firms (the biggest ones to the solos) file lawsuits they KNOW they will lose all the time. In the commercial world, this is often done to intimidate a small tech start-up who doesn't have the resources to fight back, or for other COMMERCIAL purposes. This happens All. The. Time. It creates leverage. It can be a prelude to a settlement that gives the plaintiff company a license to a product and/or IP, a prelude to a takeover (M&A) offer, or any of a variety of purely commercial objectives.
It's only unethical if you file making completely and totally unfounded accusations without even a shred of truth.
Some lawyers don't want to take cases they know they will lose, butt as I've stated, in BK, filing a Chap 11 and having it convert to a Chap 7 is nott a 'loss' and does nott damage reputation.
Let me assure you that I am deeply imbued both with the Silicon Valley/Bay Area legal environment for tech companies and AmLaw200 firms and BK lawyers, and I know that you are wrong. Firsthand.
This is nott a guess or a sideline/armchair quarterback opinion. It's the simple fact.
(Side note: most SV/BA firms and large firms from outside CA with robust SV/BA/SD/SEA practices will refuse to represent companies that would cause future conflicts with small tech companies. So one generally avoids representing say Merck or Pfizer if your firm has a robust biotech/biopharma practice with many small clients - because it will almost be inevitable that you'd be in a situation where the small client pitches a deal to Merck of Pfizer and you're conflicted ~OUTT of the DD for that transaction).
There is no stigma attached to the legal counsel for filing a Chap 11 that converts to Chap 7. None. In fact, BK courts bend over backwards to consider any Chap 11 reorg plan closely and to resolve any ambiguities in favor of approval of a Chap 11 reorg plan. The BK courts are predisposed to want to save potentially viable businesses than to liquidate them.
There is no negative reputational damage from initially filing a case as Chap 11, especially when it is a filing that is done on short notice and with the management of the company having departed (in this case, fired by Shkreli and then Shkreli taken away in handcuffs). The most knowledgeable person on the finances and business prospects of KBIO were Herb Cross (CFO and Acting CEO) and the old BOD. They are all GONE now, so there's nobody with a depth of knowledge and institutional memory to advise BK counsel on short notice.
However, even the best attempts at reorg plans often fail, even though BK courts are strongly predisposed to find in favor of them when at all possible. In cases like KBIO, there is simply no way to construct a plausibly viable business from the ruins.
Butt my point is that there is no stigma to a lawyer for filing Chap 11 petition and then later having if converted to Chap 7.
P.S. - Glad to see you Czeched Chambers. It's pretty reliable and really one of the only two sources to assess quality, service, and depth of experience for lawyers and firms (the second source is word-of-mouth from sophisticated clients who repeatedly use the same firms and lawyers a lot - like VC and i-bankers).
"What do you guys think this CEO does all day?"
That's a great question. I've wondered that too.
When I called the neighboring suites at 700 S. Friendswood Drive - this was about a year ago - they all had the same thing to say; the suite is basically dark and empty most of the time, and a guy comes by every week or two and picks up mail and goes inside for a while, then when he leaves the lights are off and the door is locked for days or weeks until he or a young woman come by to pick up the mail and presumably dump the voicemails/message recorder and check the fax machine (is they even have one).
Before DCLT or the guy (who I'm presuming is Tim Vance) rented that 700 sq ft strip mall 'office', it was occupied by a woman who is a chiropractor. I called her and asked if she knew anything about the tenant who took over her suite at 700 S. Friendswood. She has a thick Indian (Hindi or Urdu) accent, and she said "oh, it was some guy I think." and she didn't even know it was a 'company' there - she thought it was just one guy who was using it as a part-time office.
I'll see if I can find my original post(s) on this matter from last year and post a link or links to the original content, and nott my current paraphrase from memory. Here's one:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=111957211
And here is the text from another one:
Just an FYI - real players only use law firms in Chambers and rated by Chambers. All other ratings (M-H, Avvo) for small law firms and solo practioners are IMO totally useless.
A company like KBIO ought to have had an AmLaw200 firm on retainer - especially when Shkreli came in. Only they have the resources and breadth of expertise to deal with complex matters like the interface between bankruptcy, securities, assignable or transferable IP licenses and assets, foreign obligations, and in this case white collar criminal defense.
The only useful rankings in law are Chambers and they do a lott of research every year to update those rankings in each practice area. They interview clients, co-counsel, peer opinions, public case resolutions, etc. each year to update the Chambers book, which is around 5 inches thick and the type is very, very small and the pages are thin. There's a ton of info in there, and it's up-to-date.
It ranks individual lawyers, firms (based on practice areas), both large firms and highly reputed boutiques (Susman/Boies/Keker/Finnegan/Bartlit/etc.), Chambers also ranks local practices/firms/lawyers by state-city. So it's nott all AmLaw200 firms.
Butt it's the only credible rating entity there is other than word-of-mouth from other lawyers or small coteries of clients (e.g., the VC community, i-bankers) who work together and gossip like hell within their circles. That's the real lawyer rating system that works in places like where KBIO is - venture-funded, recently IPO'ed, Silicon Valley tech companies.
Oh, and BTW, SSF is in San Mateo county, even though many of these articles in the lay media call KBIO a "San Francisco" company. It's nott - technically.
Of course. Only really lowball, low-end BK lawyers will sometimes offer a flat fee to get retail clients for very basic things - like a BK petition for a ghetto household with all W-2 income and a few credit cards, one bank account, a car loan or two, and maybe money owed to a Rent-to-Own store.
Regular BK lawyers charge by the hour - especially for corporate BKs. Straight-up paid by a client 'retainer' (trust fund deposit) for the pre-petition work paid by the client, and then they then submit timesheets to the BK trustee (and the BK court) to get paid for post-petition work and gett paid ~OUTT of the BK corpus assets.
Many times the BK judge may question the timesheets and cut hours, or the estate assets are so impaired that some or all of the post-petition fees don't get paid in full - only cents on the dollar.
"That mean's KBIO is going to Zero.
The final reported trade will likely be at 0.000001.
Then it will eventually be revoked.
Butt it will trade on the grey market for weeks to months as speculators playing the 'there will be a greater fool' theory will try to play it on the way to 0.000001.
These zombie tickers can still have grey market trades for years - usually at 0.0002 to 0.000001 - before they gett revoked.
I often wonder who the heck buys these zombie stocks - it's a negative expectancy game and unless you're an MM it's hard to buy at 0.0001 and sell at 0.0002, and if by some rare chance a retail player can do that - the entire trade is so small that the commission eats any profit.
"What is the benefit for a reputable law firm to even try to initiate a chapter 11 if it is not viable - why not just do a chapter 7 right out of the gate?"
1. Bankruptcy lawyers are often told to file what the client wants and time is often of the essence, AND it is nott up to the lawyers to assess economic viability of an enterprise - they must rely upon the representations of the client.
2. Filing as a Chap 11 doesn't foreclose any options - many Chap 11s convert to Chap 7s - very, very rarely does a case filed as a Chap 7 wind up as a Chap 7. So you'd file with the most options for the client and buy time to see if a Chap 11 reorg plan is even a viable pitch - it takes a lott of time to assess the estate - and experts like accountants, bankers/i-bankers, and business people - and communications with the creditors before you can even know if a plan is potentially viable - and even then you can file a reorg plan with a less than 1 percent chance it will get approved.
3. $$$$ - Hey, you get more billable hours ~OUTT of meetings, review, preparation, etc. for a possible Chap 11 reorg plan, even if then abandoned or rejected, and THEN you get the billable hours for the Chapter 7 work. Why nott gett more money?
LOL! I have no idea what you're saying or trying to say. The only way I can decipher your post would be a nonsensical claim that Anthion was buying long and at the same time selling short (which is virtually impossible as there are and have been virtually no borrowable KBIO shares to sell short for a long time).
Or is this some bullsheet that Anthion was buying long and at the same time (and this is the real joke!) selling 'naked short' - so Atnthion actually had NO position in the company - they were FLAT as to the stock - and all the buying pressure was met with an equal amount of 'naked short selling' pressure?
Is one of these wacky schemes what you're trying to claim Anthion did?
If so, those are absolutely absurd theories/schemes and make zero sense.
BTW, remember that the guy who heads Anthion was FIRED from his prior job at Pequod Capital - which he ran into the ground. So he's an anti-genius when it comes to money management and investing.
He's Dan Pike, Jr.
LOL!!! Really?
I just stopped into the East Palo Alto Best Buy yesterday, right off 101 nott all that far from NTEK's 'world headquarters - other than the main office at CI-Taft' and nott only was there no visible signage of UF, the guy working the 4K and HD TV area hadn't even heard of Ultraflix - and this BB is a whole maybe 15 miles from Kruse Drive, SJ.
He never heard of them. Also he never heard of any $10 UF gift cards that BB is *allegedly* giving ~OUTT with 4K TV purchases.
So there's that.
Leslie Hayes was also one of the nominees who set up FS Global Capital for DaFoley: http://www.corporationwiki.com/p/2bmt29/leslie-hayes
Remember DaFoley claimed he and his FoleyFambly has NOTHING to do with FS Global Capital when I stated he did.
Another lie of DaFoley - butt WHY would he be ashamed to admit that FS Global Capital was HIM?
He KNOWS it's ILLEGAL to use backdated floorless CONvertible debt notes to his own entities to evade the 12 month holding period - and sell UNREGISTERED STOCK without any applicable exemption.
Janice, this is my last of 15 posts for today, so I can't respond until later tonight when I get 15 more.
However, I am encouraged that you would push the BLUE button and that you seem to agree with me (mostly) on the free speech matter - that government should nott be the arbiter of which public comments are 'worthy' of publication.
In this last post (until midnight Eastern), let me leave you with one question more:
Do you believe it is correct (or Constitutional as under the Bill of Rights First Amendment) for a governmental agency or a governmental entity (include public universities) to define 'hate speech' and impose penalties against individuals who are nott employees of the governmental agency or entity for using such 'hate speech'?
Should I be banned by the University of California from using the 'N word' on the Berkeley campus outside Sproul Hall where the 1960's 'free speech' demonstrations were held?
Can the University of Michigan refuse to hire (or to fire) a professor solely (or even partially) because they are engaging in speech supporting 'Islamic terrorism" or "the Red Menace" or 'communism' or the KKK or the Iranin Republican Guard or ISIS or the Nazi party - even though they are doing this on their own time and are fully discharging their teaching/research obligations required by their job??
How can one justify (under the US Constitution) the University of Texas punishing one student for calling another student a darkie and nott punish another student for calling a student a whitey or a honkey or a Jewboy?
How can a public university (or Federal grant funding agency like NIH) refuse to even permit an investigator from doing experiments or other research to show physiological and genetic bases for gender and racial differences in physical, mental, behavioural, or other matters? This is equivalent to squelching free speech of an academic researcher by suppressing certain lines of inquiry based solely on concerns the results may provide scientific evidence supporting a conclusion that the university or Federal agency deems to be politically 'undesirable'.
Do you believe 'hate speech' is/can be political speech? If not, why not?
Do you believe that political speech is not/should not be protected under the First Amendment, especially as it pertains to actions by a government agency or entity (like a public university) intended and crafted to selectively suppress certain political opinions?
I'll Czech back tonight.
Choosing the blue button maximizes utility (the utilitarian approach) so everyone is better off - some are more better off that others, butt everyone has a better living standard at the cost of inequality of wealth.
And that, in fact, is what we see in reality. The most capitalistic societies have the greatest overall living standards as compare to the most socialistic or communistic.
Obama even recognizes this, although he chooses the RED button. In his reply to a question in 2008 as to whether he would be in favor of raising capital gains taxes on 'the wealthy' even it was certain that LESS tax revenue would be produced than currently, he chose to penalize 'the wealthy' even though it would produce less government revenue and also would reduce private sector investment and jobs.
So to some, it is better for all to be equally poor, than to have some be relatively comfortable butt with inequality where others are extremely comfortable.
The SEC, as a government agency, should - if they elect (or must) publish public comments, should publish ALL public comments, including the one cited.
The government is nott to be suppressing individual speech on public comments or censoring those which the bureaucrats 'disagree' with.
The main purpose of public comment periods is for ALL persons to provide comments, have them aired evenhandedly (if they are published, all should be published - if not, then none should be published) without regard to content.
And I include EVERY comment received, even if containing vulgarities, threats, etc.
I am a free speech absolutist, and especially on matters of political speech and governance.
I am also an opponent of closed meetings, including Congressional meetings in closed sessions to discuss 'sensitive national security issues'. I can see how that is allowable in a REPRESENTATIVE democracy, which the USA is, butt I would prefer NOTT to have these type of closed meetings which lead to things like a runaway NSA, FISA courts, funding and support of foreign country 'rebels' to efect regime change, etc. while the citizens are kept totally in the dark.
I am a Sunshine Law proponent and as much a of a free speech advocate as you will likely ever find.
ALL speech is political speech (or can be). Porn is political - so nothing should be banned as 'obscenity'. Calling for the murder of politicians is one of THE most political of all forms of speech and should be held legal (a specific, real threat can be prosecuted as a conspiracy).
I could go on, butt I think you catch my drift on my views.
Janice, it's a very simple hypothetical. You may NOTT assume development and evolution. It is PERMANENT.
Either RED button for both people/groups to be permanently at level 4 forever,
or
theBLUE button for one person/group to be permanently at level 6 and the other person/group permanently at level 10.
You need nott assume that the wealth of one group/person comes from work or resources of the other group/person. E.g., the wealth of a person/group at level 10 may be entirely due to their own work (built their own mansion, IPad, etc,. without any work from the other group or even any interaction from them - you can assume the two person/groups live on separate butt adjacent islands and don't use any common fishing area or other resources.
So, which button do you push and why?
Great! Me too. So we are both utilitarians in this one. Now, one more for you:
There are two buttons - one red and one blue (like the capsules in The Matrix. YOU and ONLY YOU can and must push one and only one of them (the unpushed one is immediately disabled once your choice is made and you push the other button).
The red and blue buttons WILL effectuate one of two and only two possible outcomes for two people (or groups of people) that constitute the entire universe/planet. The buttons decide the standard of living for the two people (or two groups - and the only two in the universe/planet/country/society).
A standard of living level of 4 is equivalent to a homeless person in the USA or an average rural agricultural worker in India (basically subsistence level).
A standard of living level of 6 is equivalent to someone in the USA with an income of $50,000.
A standard of living of 10 is Bill Gates or George Soros level wealth.
Here is your choice (your only choice and you must push one button or both people/groups go to level 1 permanently and starve like Ethiopians in the '80s):
Push the RED button an both people/groups live at level4
Push the BLUE and one person/group lives at level 6 and the other person/group lives at level 10.
Pushing the buttons in your only power. The decision will be permanent.
Which button do you push - red or blue - and why?
No, read the rules - YOU and ONLY YOU can decide to order the deaths of 80 to save 20 or less. The sailors can decide (if you want them to) WHICH 80 will die.
Butt YOU and ONLY YOU MUST make the decision to order the deaths of 80 or to do nothing and allow all 100 to die.
You cannot delegate and you cannot appoint a committee to decide.
What is your choice?
Weekend OT kwestshun to Kingpin Janice:
Hypothetical:
100 sailors are stranded on the ocean bottom in a submarine. There is only enough oxygen (or really CO2 scubbers) left to allow 20 sailors to survive and be rescued. This is a known fact (as is the time of rescue). If 80 sailors are dead, then 20 can live and will be rescued. In 10 minutes if the 80 are not dead, the number of potentially rescue-able live sailors will be only 19 and will decline by 1 additional sailor every 10 minutes thereafter, so there can be a penalty for delaying the decision if the decision is to kill 80 sailors - one additional death plus the 80 for every 10 minutes delay, if the decision is to save any sailors at all.
YOU are the sole decisionmaker and are nott on the sub - you are safe onshore, butt you and only you can make this decision and it must be made, either to order the deaths of 80 (or more) to save 20 (or less) or to let all 100 die. These are nott guesses, these are absolute certainties about the outcomes.
You do nott choose WHICH of the 80 must be put to death - for now assume it will be done by lottery or voluntary choice on the sub or by someone else outside the sub with authority to make the selections of condemned sailors.
Question: Would you choose to order the deaths of 80 or more to save the 20 or less or would you let all 100 die instead? Why?
I will look forward to your answer.
"Oh, so you want to receive privacy notices, dividend notices,,etc., etc.??"
Oh, you think privacy notices are material information that are likely to influence an investor's decision to purchase, refrain from purchase, or sell the stock" of a publicly-traded corporation?
LOL!!! Really??
Oh, and all dividends must be DECLARED and published to the world (via SEC or OTCMarkets, et al.) as notices PRIOR to the dividend.
What is nott understood, is that providing material non-public information to a selected group is ILLEGAL.
Oh, butt since NTEK has already put themselves in the securities fraud soup with the fake, false, and fraudulent 'financials' they've advertised on OTCMarket.com paid ad site for THREE YEARS now, and issued and authorized the illegal delegendeding of NTEK stock to DaFoleys' Royal Capital Group and FS Global Capital as well as to DaFoley personally - all without a legal examption like Rule 144 - and all without a 12 month holding period, by using non-existent and/or backdated floorless convertible debt notes,
NTEK is soooo deep into the hole of ILLEGAL actions, including butt nott limited to securities fraud, wire/mail fraud, insider trading, swing-trade rules, among many other violations of securities laws already,
many seem nott to notice the smaller, yett very frequent, occurrence of less severe securities law violations, like SELECTIVE DISCLOSURE and the more severe violations like using selective disclosure to induce investors to buy and/or hold the stock while insiders and DaFoleyShells DUMP illegal shares into the market.
SPNG-style. NTEK is just SPNG v2.0.
"What is shady about releasing info. only to shareholders
Nothing, IF the company is a PRIVATELY HELD corporation or partnership.
Butt it's ILLEGAL for any publicly-traded corporation to make selective disclosures to anyone, including shareholders, about any material information that an investor would likely consider relevant to making a decision to invest or divest themselves by purchasing or selling the stock.
So, unless NTEK has 'gone private', it's breaking the LAW.
So there's that.
LOL!! So after an alleged 2+ years of "manipulation" that has NTEK DOWN 98 percent over that period, and according to the claims of some a 'naked short' position that must be in the TRILLIONS by now, yet the last FINRA short INTEREST report on OTCmarkets.com shows a measly 60,172 shares in the last report a month ago,
and the float has TRIPLED in 16 months,
and yet,
we are supposed to believe (or some actually do believe) that this, unlike all the other pennyscams that crater into oblivion and No Bid or are mercifully suspended and die after following a similar, in fact the standard, course of pennyscam decline, that NTEK pennyvestors will 'run those trillions of naked short shares' and regain the lost 98+ percent?
Bwhahahahahahahaha!!!!
What utter, utter boolsheet.
Are you aware that US Bankruptcy court and bankruptcy judges are NOTT Article III judges or courts?
A BK judge has very limited jurisidiction and powers compared to an Article III Federal judge.
Your comments seem to imply that a BK judge has similar or equivalent jurisdiction and powers as an Article III judge. Let me inform you that they have NO authority to adjudge any NASDAQ delistings or halts as illegal nor to assess any monetary judgement, injunction, or penalty against NASDAQ.
The snipe hunt for NSS will continue in the minds of some, I am sure, butt the scenarios proposed in your post are purely nonsensical - it is like expecting a meter maid to whip ~OUTT an M-4 fully automatic combat rifle from his/her three-wheeled scooter and rescue hostages from a team of Al Qaeda/ISIS terrorists.
Ain't gonna happen. Can't.
Wow, that's a huge load of total bullsheet right there.
First, it makes no logical sense whatsoever.
Second, it just getts more bullshetastic from there.
Utterly, utterly false premises based on nothing, and then proceeding from flase premises using false logic.
I would normally write "that's just WRONG", butt it is soooo wrong that it merited a few more words of explanation.
"A company can not change or issue shares during the bankruptcy process. Newco is only issued upon emergence and after the cancellation of existing shares."
You might want to tell the 'old GM' shareholders about that. IIRC, the 'new GM' was formed during BK proceedings and the 'old GM' shares were never cancelled. That's my recollection, butt you might wish to Czech it ~OUTT for yerself.
IIRC, the 'old GM' shares, which were worthless in fact, were still trading well after the bankruptcy closed and the 'new GM' shares were trading. Talk about pure 'air shares' - the 'old GM' shares were literally nothing, yett people were buying them on the 'greater foole' theory, and for quite a long time.
The GM bankruptcy broke so many black-letter rules of bankruptcy law - among others screwing the GM bondholders, many of whom were GM retirees with a large portion of their nestegg in 'safe' GM senior bonds - and handing the corpus to the UAW - that it's nott a good example of standard practice.
Hell, it was downright ILLEGAL and the only reason it was pushed through was purely political reasons - buying the UAW's campaign contributions and votes for 2012.
"BTW, I forgot to ask, do you think your old poker pal Joe C. is involved with Arik???"
No. His legal claim against NYBD/PLKD was settled, I believe and I'm shure Canouse dumped whatever shares he was issued. I am unaware that Joe and Bros ever put a nickel of his own munny into NYBD/PLKD, just a legal claim arising from EXPU and Rico's time at EXPU.
Bottles and trademark/tradedress claims. Misappropriation/conversion - sheet like that. I don't recall that the draft complaint was ever filed (it might have been, my memory is declining as the odometer mileage adds up on the ole block o'vanilla pudding) - I think it was sent to Rico with a cover letter from Joe's lawyer - it was settled something like 6-9 months or so later, IIRC (faulty memory, notwithstanding).
I don't think Arik would tolerate any Canouse with their schnozzola under his nomad tent. You don't lett a guy like Joe in on your money-laundering and tax evading games.
"when do revenues come into ntek and stock start moving up?"
The second Tuesday of the third week of Neveruary.
Of if they miss that deadline, then it'll be the sixth week of Neverember when the moon is full and it's low tide in Salina, Kansas.
Ha, I've fooled you on that one!
I AM The Thetan. Yup, there's only one and I be it.
Keep this a secret just between us. I'm PM'ing you a 20 percent off coupon code for your first e-meter reading and an application to join SeaOrg (we will need your fingerprints, DNA, footprints, gender identity(ies), sexual preferences, ACH banking information, Social Security number, birthdate, mother's maiden name, and a handwriting sample of the text "I hereby grant full power of attorney for all matters as well as appoint as my personal conservator, representative, receiver, guardian, and my choice as trustee for all trusts, existing or future, extate administrator, and executor of my will, for all purpose now and forever, irrevocably nominate and appoint ____________________. Sign with your signature using a blue-black Bic pen, and leave the date field blank.
"Yesil Elgin"
YES, YES, YES - I forgot to mention him. I think you've gott one of his less frequent name spellings.
YES, he is a HUGE crook. Focus a lott on him.
I meant to mention that, butt forgot. And Czech under all his name misspellings.
Read the hokey book on these clowns - it's largely baloney. You can skim through it by googling for Arik Meimoun and see the Amazon preview and use the pull-up and pull-down with your cursor to read the excerpted pages - in and around Chap 8 IIRC.
With DaFoleyCrimeFambly™, it's one fraud after another after another.
It's in DaFoleyCrimeFambly™ bloodline - it's in their DNA. Pathological lying, fraud, pennyscams, schemes, fabricated and fake 'financials', securities fraud, bank fraud, wire fraud, game counterfeiting, software copyright violations, game copyright violations, false press releases and Tweets and FB statements, theft (of USB game fobs from former employer), bankruptcy fraud, defrauding K2, etc., etc., et al., et seq.
Royal Capital Group and FS Global - both FoleyScamFronts™ for illegal floorless convertible notes - BACKDATED! - converted, issued, and illegally delegended and sold shares - FELONY SECURITIES FRAUD.
Illegal HVEL free-trading shares issued to DaFoley™ and dumped - MORE SECURITIES FRAUD. No 12 month waiting period passed and no "loan' made by DaFoley to HVEL 12 months before he was issued those shares that were unrestricted.
It's one HUGE mountain of Foley Fraud - and Aaa... aa... aaaa... aairball Highballwatertowerloser is one of the adopted chillens used by DaFoleys as front men, nominees, bagholders, and DeKetts and Daddona co-CONspirators in FoleyFrauds™.
So with Aa... aaaa... aaa... aaaron HighballwaterTower being kicked to DaCurb and Richard Baker fleeing the scene like a scalded ferret, there is now NO executive officer on location at the Dean Martin NTGL playpen.
So expect NO sense of urgency, NO pressure to produce, and NO adult supervision of the NTGL romper room again this year.
Welcome to the NTGL playpen Aaaaaaron is eating his crayons again, Stevia is sniffing Magic Markers, and Patsy is moulding Play-Doh into casino chip cookies and baking them in her Easy-Bake oven
"2016 is here and plenty of unkept promises to go around"
And plenty of unkempt NTGL 'employees' to go around ... and around ... and around ... in circular motion going nowhere for yett another year of no sales, no audit, no S-1, no gaming license APPLICATION filed, nada.
Unkempt NTGL clownshow clowns