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.
You got it!! Hurray!
daveyo.
how do you know this? First you mentioned 'think' then it seems you know something for sure. do tell.
As for the others talking about going to trial. I "think" that is not an option for JNSH at this point. A big mistake when they agreed to settle.
Thumbs up
As a shareholder I would wager I have more influence asking the company for greater details into what is going on than I do the court.
Have been for almost a year.
Sad and maddening. It’s not ‘is what it is’ imo. We shareholders need to have a voice and put some pressure on jnsh for an explanation! This is at the very least a waste of the people of Chicago land’s money. Enough is enough with this settlement creep.
Wow, imagine that! Sorry to rub it in but I’ve been saying this would happen a long time ago. Somebody needs to be held accountable or provide some information to the shareholders.
Why is this happening? What purpose does it serve the case the courts the company’s involved? I call bullish!t again!
"The New Perimeter in Security Starts at the Keystroke"
Interview with ACS President and CIO, Craig Brunet. Written and published by CIO Review
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/5870e3_a428b0f544a74ad0a5d8c0eb2f792c93.pdf
PPS at $5.10 (.3643 pre split)! Love to see this run up. Been waiting years. Good luck to all the crickets here! :)
I did not purchase it.
You are 100% correct, however there was no intent on my part to deceive anyone. I simply get alerts in my email re: SFT and thought, "wow, maybe this segment is finally getting some attention".
I leave it up to the board readers to decide for themselves if it is relevant or not.
In my opinion, some of the links were/are relevant and applicable. Others are not and may not be. It is not a solicitation either way.
Caveat emptor.
Too bad this facility here (iHub) can not be used in a mature and positive manner (for and against a company/stock). Ego's and greed get in the way too much.
Don't shoot the messenger. Just trying to contribute something relevant.
Quote:
Out-of-band Authentication Market 2018: Leading Players and Manufacturers Analysis
CA Technologies
CensorNet Ltd.
Deepnet Security
Early Warning Services
Gemalto NV
SecurEnvoy Ltd
StrikeForce Technologies
Symantec Corporation
TeleSign
VASCO Data Security International
This sector is definitely heating up!
Global Out-of-band Authentication Market 2018- Gemalto NV, SecurEnvoy Ltd, StrikeForce Technologies, Symantec Corporation
testing ... fasten your seat belts
Good post!!!! Couldn't have said it better myself.
Sticky this post!
Nice new product announcement.
Announcing the New Echoscope4G® Surface for Shallow Water Applications
Yes Yes and Yes. Thank you both. This is what I was pointing out the other day. This could be lawyers fees, or a settlement offer, or both? We don't know.
So the question is, what would a settlement amount look like?
Normally, in a case like this, if the parties can't agree, a judge will look at financials and try and determine how much was lost in revenues from not being able to run the network which gives them a fair price/value of a settlement.
Problem is, hard to tell from JNS fins what have been making yearly from the network? That's what I've been saying.
Now, some folks say damages could also be awarded, but I find that damages usually are only awarded by a jury from a trial. Since this is not going to trial then one can assume with some certainty that there will be no damages.
So JNSH, how much net income is the network bringing in? Anybody know?
Ahhh, I see now, it was reset for 1/18 at 9:30. Thanks
Funny.
Is it farther to New York, or by bus?
What's the difference between an Orange?
Not again!?
BTW - what does last year's price have to do with anything? And when exactly last year? Pick a day?
But wasn't their supposed to be a hearing today? I don't have access to pacer to know what happened. And zero volume?
What's happened here?
Good post. Thanks.
YES! I agree, and I agree that something creative would and should happen.
I just don't trust CCGI/Blink.
My gut says because CCGI is who they are, they will not pay up.
That means, whatever JNSH is without the legal matters, is the business and the revenue. Now, EXACTLY, what is that? How much is EACH division bringing in, how much does it cost to run each division. How are executives being compensated and what is their compensation?
What are the plans for the future for each division?
What is the strategy for the Charging stations? How is the charging stations division going to grow? Where is the income coming from to grow it? What people are in place to grow that division and what are their credentials and experience. There is NOTHING that says this company is worth more than .012 PPS. Just my opinion, I just can't believe I am the only one shouting about this and can't believe I'm vilified for doing so.
Yeesh.
BUT ... but ... but ... if that is the case, how come everyone is stating there is has been a settlement? I'm so confused now.
Ok, so there it is in black and white. I stand corrected, sort of.
There is still this ...
YES, and thank you. Now, how is that definitive of a settlement offer? 'Accruing a liability in connection' could mean a LOT of things. It could also be an accounting trick. Farkas is not the most forthcoming and ethical person by all accounts. It means *nothing* IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, that's all and folks should be made aware. Not just a quick general statement by any poster.
See here for "accrued liability"/
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/accrued-liability.asp
However, just since the topic came up, looking at the other side of it;
SUPPOSING their offer was $750,000 we would assume JNSH turned it down for a greater sum. However, as you can see from CCGI's fins, they don't have any money to dish out. Hence stalemate.
Not sure what you are referring to. Just trying to point out that CCGI has not reported in any filings about a dollar settlement amount earmarked or set aside for payment to JNS Holdings to satisfy the lawsuit? What's so wrong about that? Some posters here seem to indicate however that CCGI has done so in filings. I don't see it anywhere?
Great, yes; and there is still nothing noting settlement dollar amounts, just to be clear. I wanted to point out the 2016 10-K as 2017 has not been filed. OTC/Pink Qtrly's can contain omissions imo.
And it's pretty interesting comparing the 2 paragraphs. Slighlty different. CCGI/Farkas are a very slippery and sleazy slope imo.
Let's make sure posters/readers here understand that *nothing* was stated in CCGI's fins about settlement dollar amounts or other relating directly to JNS Holdings.
CCGI/350 Green has 5 suits still on the books and in the works. Any mention of settlement money by CCGI is not earmarked for JNSH, nor is there any amount noted.
FORM 10-K CAR CHARGING GROUP INC.
[X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016
IMHO - There is still a ton of potential here.
SFT still owns the patents.
Has international patent(s) pending.
Won the IPR.
Still have 5 lawsuits to settle.
Still selling product (see recent HSN YouTube video).
Still improving product(s) (I received and installed the latest version and find it head and shoulders above the previous release)
They have enough cash for 2018 (this was stated by CEO in recent interview).
I'm sure some others could add more and I'm sure others will shoot all this down but I'm just trying to answer your question.
As for "Turd" - hardly a turd, I'm sure many folks here made money on the 3 runs this turd had. Others, like myself, are bag holders and hoping things turn around. It is the OTC stinky pinky land however and only invest what you can afford to lose. GLTAL
Awesome for you. I bought originally in 2012 and continued for years. Got burned by the dilution, averaged down, managed to almost break even. Lost some, recuperated, ultimately broke even.
Holding some still because I believe in the potential NOT because I believe in management anymore or the way things are run.
And surely NOT because of anything said here.
re·spec·tive·ly disagreed.
adverb
separately or individually and in the order already mentioned (used when enumerating two or more items or facts that refer back to a previous statement).
"they received sentences of one year and eight months, respectively"
Check the PPS on 01/14/16 then on 02/05/16.
Also, annual report 03/20/15 then 03/29/16.
No. Not until the company becomes more transparent, like they said they would, and when my shares increase in value.
I respectively disagree.