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.
Wasn't it overwhelming in favor of a payout?
What are they going to do with the $1-2M (tops) that would be left over? I can tell you they will 100% be paying themselves, and then the money will be gone.
Yeah! Those people who got scammed should have known that people were breaking the law!
Now pay me my $1M of bonuses for running the company into the ground!
It was over the day they signed the deal with DM.
Glenn lied for a couple of years to get us to qualification and then got canned when he tried to go out and find a better deal.
It was probably illegal, but we couldn't fight it with a $2M cap on legal costs. The EC lawyers spent all they could and got us a marginal victory to justify themselves (they weren't in the room, but the discussions happened because of them).
Everyone involved got theirs. We got the shaft.
The same thing that is going to happen to those who voted for a distribution.
Well we just denied the "BOD" here something they wanted to do.
But I do agree, it is a rare occurrence.
Well when you have a lender that uses the investment as their only source of liquidity, and that lender gets a vote, you're typically not going to be winning any votes.
7 cents a share is a pretty smart bet at this point.
Worst case scenario, you get a small gain from that.
If the pps was 6 cents and there is the potential they would pay out 7-8 cents, why would you leave?
I didn't trust shareholders to do the right thing and sold. To me, it was worth the $1K (this is an approximation) I lost, but I could easily justify sticking around.
The pps was depressed in anticipation of giving the clown car more gas money.
To be fair, those negotiations would have never occurred without the EC - regardless if they were allowed to participate or not.
I've seen guidance from the SEC that mentions the date of postmark being the date of consideration when it comes to shareholder votes. You can google "postmark and shareholder vote" and it should come up.
It really isn't that big of a deal, and I don't have time to get into it. You can have that one.
They saved more money than they will have spent, right?
Even if it's only $2M net, it's still material to the amount that will be left over.
Heck, even if it's break even I'd be okay with that. One dollar less in Platinum's pocket sounds good to me. I don't care who it goes to, if they were associated with PP, I'd rather they not get the money.
So if your vote takes 3 weeks to arrive for some reason, it shouldn't count - just using your logic.
It's not worth arguing over, but I work in a very technical field where legal issues are dealt with on a regular basis.
Probably not.
And there is a one day deadline to the deadline?
I'm certain your vote will be counted if you got it postmarked by the actual deadline.
Most legal things are based on when an item is postmarked.
Yep.
This logic that "we'll this is all we have left, so we might as well give it to them and see what happens" doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It made sense 4-5 months ago when the EC was working on a deal, but why would you give money to these guys to REINVEST?
Why not stick it in Apple and actually make money? There are times worth holding, but we're talking about national security guys investing in a dental appliance. Why would anyone be for that?
I'm out, so it is what it is, but this is a total scam.
Has anyone seen pictures of the actual device?
Outside of that, look at the "before and after" pictures on that website you linked to and it's clear that any changes are related to posture, tanning, or weight gain. Also, why are they all Asian? My wife is Asian, so I'm all for it, but it seems off.
Did anyone else take the time to click on all the states in the "find a provider" section?
It references over 700 certified providers, but the map shows only 4 (1 in Utah, 2 in Florida, and 1 in New York).
That doesn't make any sense to me, either.
In the how it works section - doesn't it look like the xray results are simply a result of better posture?
I just find it odd that DNA and stem cell treatment would fix something like this. I guess it's possible, but it seems a bit off.
Did no one say anything about it then? I have never put any stock into obvious paid promotion and I'm almost certain people have always pointed out the source.
That's paid promotion written by IMSC...
We would be in this position, either way, as they would have continued to extend the BK to form their "exit plan".
The EC ended up saving more money than they cost. I'm okay with their efforts.
How many of those fights did the EC win?
A lot of them....
Giving these guys a job for another year/two years at $300K a year should give you all enough incentive to request the liquidation.
I sold my shares because I have no faith you guys will figure that out and I won't be a part of giving money to people who have stolen from me in the past (there is no arguing against this).
Best of luck to everyone who wants to stay in. I decided to take a "fool me 10 times" approach.
Does Kirk Huntsman have any relation to John Huntsman?
He's an unabashed freeloader.
This is the same guy who has screwed you over multiple times in the past year. Why you would want to give him access to $15M is beyond me.
I think it will shake out somewhere between 7-10 cents a share (I'd bet on about 8).
The EC didn't really do much. Any money they saved us pretty much went back out the door due to costs. The only silver lining is that they may appoint someone to go after management, but that is a court issue that may never happen.
As it has always been, we got the shaft while other people collected millions of dollars from us.
We are the company.
They manage it. We own it.
I'm very happy to see that they are recommending appointing an independent third party to look into going after management.
I'd take $0 to see that happen. Especially after reading today's filing.
You've got to account for the $20M that went to BAM.
They had $74M at the end of Feb and had about $4M of expenses for Feb. So $74M - $4M for March leaves us with $70M - $55M to DM = $15M.
I'd imagine the cap is still there for the lawyers, but go ahead and factor in another $3M for them just to be safe and you are left with $12M over ~79M shares or $.15 cents a share...
Well, no, that case has nothing to do with ours.
Either they broke our agreement and committed insider trading or they didn't...
BAM was the secured debt holder. They had to be paid to transfer the assets to L3.
The DIP loan has nothing to do with PP...
They financing occurred during the middle of a financial crisis while we were still in develop mode.
To say we couldn't get better terms in a much better economy with a real product is counter intuitive.
So?
We either get a lot or nothing.
In the "nothing" scenario, management does not get their million dollar bonuses. I'm okay with losing $1-2K if it means management loses out on their bonuses and CIC plan payments.
Here comes the negative train...
Yeah, lets just drop it.
We're going in circles at this point.
Maybe you are special, per the rest of your post (after saying you aren't), but this is the internet and no one has any method of verifying anything you said about being around from the beginning or talking to the EC from day one.
Making those statements, that we can't verify, is what I'm talking about.
It's a good thing they have a trustee over their BK case who wants to get as much money back for PP's creditors as possible.
You can ago around PP and straight to him.
That high priced law firm in the CI is needed to do that.
Yeah, I agree with this.
The judge, EC, and lawyers will decide this one for us. It is in everyone's best interest to settle and move on.
Nothing posted on this board will impact anything. Anyone posting on this board is clueless and has no inside information. Anyone claiming to have that level of knowledge or saying this thing will be settled next week is trying to take advantage of people.
Yeah, I said the law firm who signs the legal documents was the lead attorney. I agree that it is the other firm running the show. That's the only statement you called me out on that was incorrect. It wasn't multiple ones.
You aren't special and you have no special insider information/buddies on the EC. As long as we can agree on that, we're good to go.
In a week or two, this ID will go away and someone else will show up claiming to have special knowledge or that someone is under protective custody because they are so important to the case. They'll make a stupid statement that is easily shown to be false and I'll call them out on that, too.
Enough people have been taken advantage of here and it's been going on for the better part of a decade. I'm sure you've made a lot of money flipping in and out of this thing and don't care about those people, but I do. I feel responsible for 1-2 people getting into this thing and I'm not going to let you or Whiskers or whoever else shows up come in here and take advantage of people with stories of inside information.
"I know several of those chosen to be on our Equity Committee and they are not only familiar with bankruptcy cases but also familiar with legal matters. They were interviewed and chosen by the US Trustee because of their knowledge of bankruptcy and the law and have long term holdings in this stock."
This is what I'm talking about.
Until we have the detail on how the committee was formed, I'm going to go ahead and assume they followed the law.
That is my point, you're trying to present this story that you have this special inside information. Based on how things normally work, it would be extremely odd for the type of coordination you suggested to occur. If I'm one of the top 7 shareholders here, why would I give my seat at the table up to someone else that I more than likely do not know (I'm sure you'll tell me they all know each other personally)?
It's okay to admit that you're just as clueless as the rest of us. Now you've embarrassed yourself and are coming up with some wild scenario where the largest shareholders who lost out here would not want to be kept up-to-date/involved with the decisions on what is going on with the EC.
I tend to look at what logically makes sense. It makes sense to me that a law firm is going to give a good deal to another law firm. That was my only point. You've taken it way beyond that.