Blackout Media Corp (BKMP)

[maninfla]

re: "...Does anyone think a Park Ave firm with a client list like Trajectory has would waste one second of their time on this if there wasn't something there???..."
--------------

but who is trajectory representing?

according to BKMP's own PR of jan 20:

"...BKMP announced today that Fight Network's management team have selected New York-based Trajectory Sports & Media Group LLC to assist in the furthering of the US and international distribution for The Fight Network's digital television service..."
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/060120/0106927.html

it appears this has NOTHING to do directly with BKMP
BKMP is simply making an announcement for TFN and trajectory

why do people keep using trajectory as adding legitimacy to BKMP?????
looks to me this has NOTHING directly to do with them
---------------------

and cant the same be said of the "ownership clarification" PR?

"...Blackout Media owns 20% of Blackout Communications, a private Canadian company who in turn owns The Fight Network, also a private Canadian company..."
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/060117/0106464.html

why do people keep stating BKMP owns an interest in TFN when in reality its of blackout comm?
[without 8K's we may never know the role blackout comm plays as "intermediary"]
---------------------

and doesnt the same apply with TWN?

"...BKMP announced today that it has completed its purchase of a 20% stake in another new specialty digital network called The Wagering Network [TWN], through Blackout Communications Inc..."

again blackout comm as "intermediary"
--------------------

and what about the "capital structure clarification" PR?

"...There have been several questions about the capital structure of Blackout versus the capital structure of First Canadian American Holding Corporation. To clarify this to all the shareholders and investment community, the capital structure has not changed at all, there has only been a change of name. The company has exactly the same capital structure under the new name as it did under the old name. In addition, the company is not planning to do any reverse stock splits..."

didnt everyone believe this applied to OS when in reality [and as i mentioned at the time] it was about the AS?
[as later confirmed in the companys own filings by their noting the increase of OS]

even the RS comment leaves room for interpretation, [applying what appears to be there own parameters of defining things], as it states "not planning to do any reverse stock splits"...as in plural...so if they were planning one RS, it still is a "valid" statement
-----------------

lots of questions still remain here