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.
Churak,
Thank you for yr PM.
Appreciate the information you gave.
Maybank
Churak,
Thank you and another poster for responding to my post.
The other who responded had his post deleted by the mods. My post also got deleted by the mods for whatever reason they have. I must have written something they did not like or asked something sensitive.
Maybank
JP,
I wish you are correct and I wish it is that simple as you put it.
However, this case has dragged on for more than three years now. Wait for the egg to eventually hatch to see if there is any chicken in the egg after all this time!
Maybank
The style of PR by Petel Inc is like a "strip-tease".
First they announce that Medify would be sold. Then some weeks/months later, they announce the sale is completed, with any details. Some weeks/months later, they announce how much they sold it for without saying who bought it. Now thay say the new owners will make some announcement in a few weeks time, and also announce that Medify Remote and SystmOne Remote will be launched in October. So they keep stringing you on, so that you continue to stay to watch the strip-tease, bit by bit.
I guess Strip-tease is akin to soft porn, part of the industry PTEL is in. So it is not surprising that PTEL is using a strip-tease technique for its PR.
Maybank
Was the MD of the "New Entity" ever identified?
Only Andrew Hawkins, VP Sales and marketing was named.
This is supposedly a newly recruited management team for medify Solutions/New Entity. I just wonder how long they have been there. Perhaps if the new entity is a tie-up with TPP, there may be some chance that development work on SystmOne Remote could have carried on to some extent by the TPP team. Where does Andrew Hawkins come from? Maybe from TPP?
It is rather doubtful that the "New Entity" can launch SystmOne Remote and Medify Remote in October 2007, unless there was development work quietly being continued during the last few months, especially by TPP.
I wonder who will be in the management team of the "New Entity"?
Maybank
Below are the exchanges of e-mail I just had with Petel Investor Relations.
From : Investor Relations <investors@petel.co.uk>
Sent : Tuesday, September 4, 2007 1:20 AM
Subject : RE: Petel Inc
Please see comments below.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: 03 September 2007 18:13
To: investors@petel.co.uk
Subject: RE: Petel Inc
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your response. Sorry to trouble you to clarify two points which seemed to be omitted.
1. You missed answering whether Medify UK is owned by Petel Inc or Petel
Limited (UK).
You already mentioned that Petel Inc owns 100% of Petel UK. I want to
understand where Medify UK fits in the organisation structure.
Petel's response:
Medify is owned by Petel Inc. Petel Inc is the parent company that sits over Petel Limited and Medify Solutions Limited.
2. You named David Morton and Phil Evans only as "Officers" of Petel Inc. Please name the "Directors" of Petel Inc. I expect there would be "Directors" for Petel Inc.
Petel's response :
David Morton and Philip Evans are the Directors AND Officers of Petel Inc. They are the only Officers, Directors and Controlling Persons of Petel Inc and Petel Limited.
Regards,
Maybank
From: "Investor Relations" <investors@petel.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Petel Inc
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 17:22:39 +0100
Dear Maybank
Thank you for your further email. Please see our points of clarification below.
Regards
Investor Relations
Petel Incorporated
Original Message-----
Sent: 03 September 2007 16:42
To: investors@petel.co.uk
Subject: RE: Petel Inc
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your response.
Please confirm that the Medify Solutions Limited you are referring to is the UK Medify, and not the US Medify. Also please clarify if UK Medify is owned by Petel Inc or Petel Limited (UK). Also please clarify is the a2a shareholding held by Petel Limited (UK) or held by Petel Inc.
Petel's response :
The Medify referred to is UK. There is no US Medify Solutions anymore, this is now Petel Inc.
Petel Inc owns 100% of Petel UK.
The a2a shares are held by Petel Limited and are therefore an asset of Petel Inc.
When you say, " Ian O'Reilly is not part of either company", which companies are you specifically referring to? Is it Petel Inc and Petel limited (UK)?
Please clarify if Ian O'Reilly is in Medify.
Petel's response :
Ian O'Reilly is not in Petel Inc, Petel Limited or Medify Solutions Limited.
May I post your response on the I-hub board?
Petel's response :
You may.
I would like to give you the following feedback as it may possibly be causing some confusion:
1. There is no website for Petel Inc. The Petel website is for Petel Limited (UK).
Petel's response :
If you check the Petel website (www.petel.co.uk) is for Petel Inc, it just has a .co.uk web address as we already own that domain and saw no need to change it.
2. Some, or perhaps many of the shareholders refer to the Petel Limited (UK)website as well as the Pink Sheets website for information. It is in the company's interest to keep the information on the company website and the Pink Sheets website updated in a timely manner so that the information is up to date and accurate.
Petel's response :
This is something we always try to achieve.
3. Please note that "Officers" of the company is not the same as "Directors" of the company. The Pink Sheets website information for Petel Inc only show the "Officers" of the company, not the "Directors". Please list the "Directors" names separately, even though in Petel's case, some "Officers" may also be "Directors". If you get a request for the names of
the Directors, please give the "Directors" names, not the "Officers" names, whether or not they are the same people. That may be the reason you are getting the question repeatedly about who are the Directors of Petel Inc.
Petel's response :
The Directors of Petel Limited are David Morton and Philip Evans. The Officers of Petel Inc are David Morton and Philip Evans. There are absolutely no further Officers, Directors or persons with control of the Company.
We hope this clarifies matters.
Regards,
Maybank
From: "Investor Relations" <investors@petel.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Petel Inc
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 10:08:58 +0100
Dear Maybank
Thank you for your enquiry.
Petel Inc owns 100% Petel Limited and Medify Solutions Limited. The latter is subject to an agreement for its purchase that is now very near completion.
In addition Petel has shareholding in a2a Group Plc.
For your information, and for the benefits of your forum colleagues can we take this opportunity to confirm for you that Ian O'Reilly is not part of either company. May we also confirm for the final time that the ONLY officers and directors of Petel Inc are David Morton and Philip Evans.
Out of over 2,300 shareholders we have one person who is trying to convince people that the legally required information supplied to Pink Sheets is incorrect and untrue.
Furthermore, we have spoken with both FINRA and the SEC and they are happy and confident that we are in good standing.
We hope this information is of use.
Best Regards
Investor Relations
Petel Incorporated
-----Original Message-----
Sent: 03 September 2007 03:05
To: investors@petel.co.uk
Subject: Petel Inc
Dear Sir,
Can you please advise specifically what corporate entities are currently owned by Petel Inc (registered in Delaware). Please indicate the percentage ownership as well.
Thanks and regards,
Maybank
Capt Bob,
I believe Rob C asked whether the Petel he was referring to in his post #26704 and post #26706 is the same Petel that you are talking about, and you replied, "No Rob, it is not." If I have mis-interpreted your response to Rob, then what question were you replying to, when you wrote, "No Rob, it is not."
Rob C, have I interpreted your posts correctly? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Maybank
Capt Bob,
Please check your response to Rob C.
The Petel Inc that Rob C referred is the very same Petel Inc that was Medify Solutions before the name change. Look at the file number 3856268. That is the same file number shown in the Certificate of Incorporation that you posted (post #26685).
Rob C, I believe the Petel Inc shown in your post #26704 is our present PTEL.
Maybank
What is the entity that owns Petel UK and Medify Solutions limited?
Ninja's statement,
"I was under the impression that DuPont had recently pulled their work with sb when they were served with papers to stop or face a lawsuit."
Can anyone confirm this? Thanks.
Maybank
Greed, or perhaps more likely, desperation. Maybe both!!
YJ,
I agree with you.
Take it all the way in court and settle it conclusively, one way or another. Trouble is the court action keeps dragging on and on and on....... for ?? years already!!
When will we get a court conclusion???
Maybank
neom2006,
"Time for all to wake up and start to demand change/results."
And how do you propose that retail shareholders do this?
Maybank
Great to hear the news that CNVG secured contract worth $162,000. Any idea over what time period is the contract worth? Is the $162,000 over a one year, two years, three years.. five years.....how many years??
ss9173,
If we are indeed "still too early to thew dinner table", the question is, "Will we survive till dinner is ready in the USA?"
I hope NEOM at least succeeds to some extent at the dinner table in Europe and Asia where something is being served! That will prevent NEOM from starving to death in the USA!!
Maybank
beam11,
Thank you for your response to my post.
I am glad to hear of your reaction to my post and reference to JJ Keil's "kind goodwill gesture"!!! LOL
I was also simply showing a "kind goodwill gesture" to JJ Keil in return, regardless of whether he deserved it or not!! LOL.
You may have noted that in my post, I posed the question, "What was the reason for JJKeil making this purchase of 100,00 shares on the open market?? I left that question for each one to answer it themself.
In my post #128657, I left another question for each poster to answer for themself.
"Compare the above suggested action to what they are doing, which is, wanting the options and warrants to be repriced downwards, and selling the NEOM shares immediately upon exercising the options or warrants, instead of holding on the shares. What message does this convey to the retail shareholders?"
Thank you for your answers to my questions!!!
I am not surprised that you found the refence to JJ Keil's "kind goodwill gesture" funny and deserving of your laughter!!! Your detailed analysis of JJ Keil's open market purchase of the 100,000 shares in Oct 2006 certainly provides a very good explanation.
As you are well respected by many on this board, such an explanation coming from you may be better accepted as shedding good light, and perhaps some truth, on this "kind goodwill gesture"
If I had posted that explanation the way you did, it may have been taken for "bashing" and that I was ungrateful for JJ Keil's "Kind goodwill gesture"!!! LOL
I just wonder how some other posters here will react to JJ Keil's "kind goodwill gesture"?? LOL
Maybank
Other than buying NEOM shares on the open market, another positive gesture that NEOM officers and Directors and anyone else who really has faith in NEOM and wants to lend support to NEOM, is to exercise whatever options and warrants that are vested and exerciseable, pay for it and then hold on to the shares, instead of selling immediately upon exercising the options and/or warrants.
Besides giving a show of faith, it will provide some funds to the company.
Compare the above suggested action to what they are doing, which is, wanting the options and warrants to be repriced downwards, and selling the NEOM shares immediately upon exercising the options or warrants, instead of holding on the shares. What message does this convey to the retail shareholders?
Maybank
JP,
If you are referring to the purchase JJ Keil made in Oct 2006, I am aware of the gesture he made with that single purchase. See my post : http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=22059826
What was the reason for JJKeil in making this purchase of 100,00 shares on the open market??
I am not aware he made any other open market purchase. Other than this one purchase by JJ Keil, was there any other open market purchase by any NEOM Officer or Director?
Maybank
The subs took NEOM shares because they had all to gain and nothing to lose with the NEOM share price guarantee!!!
That was the something big in the deal for them!!!
Why would any NEOM Officer or Director buy any NEOM shares on the open market when they have milions and millions of cheap options??
If they buy on the open market they are simply putting their own personal money at risk and also run the risk of insider trading accusations.
They will take stupid risks with other people's money, but not with their own money! What would you do if you were in their shoes??
Ameritrade seems to accept on-line orders for CNVG.
I have not actually done any trade for CNVG so far.
Quarterly Reporting Guidelines from Pink Sheets :
Quarterly Reporting Obligations :
In order to be considered as having adequate current information publicly available, issuers must publish Quarterly Updates to their disclosure statements on the Pink Sheets News Service, no later than 45 days after the end of each fiscal quarter.
http://www.pinksheets.com/pink/otcguide/disclosure_guidelines.pdf
Maybank
Let me amend the timing to probably 2nd to 3rd week of November.
Timing is not so critical. Good revenues will be important!
If in early November, that will be good, but maybe unaudited numbers.
3Q numbers should be available probably around 3rd to 4th week in November.
Mike,
That is correct. Medify did PR that it was acquiring v2v. However, the deal was not eventually consummated. Therefore, factually, it is correct for Petel to state that v2v was not a part of Medify, at the time Medify "acquired" Petel.
Maybank
Solidgold,
If one reads what is written in Petel's e-mail to you, what they state is correct. V2v was never a part of Petel , nor was it a part of Madify Solutions in the past. There is no past or existing relationship, up to the point of writing, between V2v and PTEL/Medify.
However, it does not mean they could not have a relationship in the future. PR and Investor Relations people are supposed to be good in "playing" with words, so interpret what they write/say very carefully!
Maybank
PPE,
This is what I heard about eleven days ago.
From: "Investor Relations" <investors@petel.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Status of Medify Solutions Limited
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:32:28 +0100
Dear Maybank.
Thank you for your email. The sale of Medify Solutions Limited has been agreed and details will be announced to all shareholders at the appropriate time via the website.
As with all commercial negotiations a non-disclosure agreement is in place and we will not be discussing the terms of the sale until an announcement is made.
This obviously leads into the question "when will the announcement be made?". We do not at this point have a definite date but expect this to be within the next four weeks.
We hope this information is useful and thank you for your continued communication.
Best Regards
Investor Relations
Petel Incorporated
To: investors@petel.co.uk
Subject: Status of Medify Solutions Limited
Dear Sir,
PTEL management announced that the "sale" of Medify Solutions has been concluded. However we have not heard from PTEL management since that announcement, any details of that "Sale" of Medify. Please advise what are the details of this "sale" and what will PTEL shareholders be getting from this.
Regards,
Maybank
Solidgold,
We should know the details of the sale of Medify Solutions within the next three weeks, unless there is some obstacles in the way.
Maybank
Capt Bob,
If TBG merges with v2v, which is CNVG, that has nothing to do with PTEL. More likely it is CNVG (v2v) acquires Medify and PTEL gets CNVG shares to give to PTEL shareholders.
The indication was that Medify was to be sold, and would be part of a pink sheet company, which CNVG is, and PTEL shareholders would be given free shares of the pink sheet listed company.
Currently there is hardly a market for CNVG shares. There is very little interest in the market for CNVG when you look at the number of shares being traded. With PTEL shareholders being given CNVG shares, the market interest for CNVG will get spread to the PTEL shareholders. In this way, both CNVG and PTEL will benefit.
CNVG was only very recently listed on the pink sheets. There was already a CNVG board with the same moderators from the PTEL board set up just before the listing of CNVG. Is the CNVG board having the same moderators a coincidence, or was it planned?? Is the timing of the listing of CNVG recently a coincidence or also part of the plan by PTEL for moving Medify out of PTEL and yet stay listed as part of another pink sheet listed company?
Maybank
When NEOM bought the Triton BSD business, I had the impression that this company was about a breakeven operation at that time. Among all the subs that NEOM bought, I thought BSD probably had the best relative financial performance among all the subs.
There was supposed to be a reason why NEOM purchased each one of the subs. Yet after the acquisitions in rapid succession, NEOM management practically did nothing with the subs they acquired. The way the deals were structured in the acquisition of the subs, there was no motivation or need for the subs to perform because of the guarantee in the share price among other factors. It may even appear that the subs had nothing to lose, regardless of whether NEOM was a success or failure. The main characters in the NEOM management to be held responsible for this failure, IMO, are CJ, DD, MC and the BOD. There was supposedly a "Strategy Meeting" held one week-end in Ft Myers with the management of all the subs. It must have been a week-end holiday at NEOM HQ instead to "welcome" these management staff. No strategies or strategic direction seem to have been evolved from that "Strategy Meeting".
The past NEOM management really ruined this company!
Maybank
Dr Mike,
Two of the "Old BOD" members are still in the "current BOD". I would not expect these two "Old BOD" members who are still around, to agree to the company to sue the "Old BOD" because they are also involved.
Besides owning only 5000 shares during his tenure as a director, does he still have the cheap options as well after leaving NEOM?
"On June 15, 2006, NeoMedia agreed to issue and register 3,721,698 shares of NeoMedia common stock,....."
"The Settlement Agreement contained a stipulation that if the share price of the NeoMedia Common Stock declined from the date of issuance of the stock issued pursuant to the Settlement Agreement to the date the shares issued became registered, that NeoMedia would be responsible for the difference in the share price so as to keep Wayside whole."
Question 1. Why did Neomedia not register the shares when they were supposed to. Was this Chuck Jensen's or David Dodge's responsibility to register the shares?
Question 2. Looks like NEOM has the similar price guarantee on the shares, if they did not get the shares registered on a timely basis. This is gross negligence on Management's part. IMO, CJ and DD have been negligent in this instance! I think the current NEOM management ought to sue CJ and DD to recover the cost of their negligence, plus damages.
Maybank
success622,
Thanks. I got it.
Initially I had trouble opening the link for some reason. When I succeeded, I quickly deleted my post.
Maybank
personalizit,
Thanks for your response.
I agree with your guess. IMO, it has to work that way, otherwise I do not see how it can work.
Maybank
This statement :
"NeoMedia retained a 10% ownership in 12Snap, subject to an option agreement pursuant to which NeoMedia has the right to sell and Buyer has the right to acquire the remaining 10% stake held by NeoMedia for a purchase price of $750,000 after December 31, 2007; and ...."
Does this mean Neomedia has the right to sell its 10% stake in 12snap to anyone that will buy it, or only to 12snap? If only to 12snap, does 12snap have the obligation to buy the 10% stake if Neomedia exercises its right to sell it?
Coversely, if 12snap exercises it right to acquire the remaining 10% stake from Neomedia, does Neomedia have the obligation to sell?
If both parties have rights, but no party have any obligation, how does such an option agreement work?
Maybank
Mike010173,
Thank you and tjak for the lead to CNVG.
I hope everyone makes money on both PTEL as well as CNVG
Ben, welcome aboard. The PTEL Corp Overview gives a good
introduction to PTEL. Hope you have read that.
Maybank
Perhaps it was not worth mentioning at all.