Wednesday, January 07, 2015 5:26:03 PM
Looks pretty impressive. Think I should go long? Weed seems to be the obvious next choice for these guys. Their balance sheet would even make Billy Boy blush. I'm going all in 
NOTE 10. GOING CONCERN
The accompanying consolidated financial statements for the periods ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the settlement of liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. As of September 30, 2014, the Company has negative working capital of ($3,728,379) and a retained deficit of ($2,435,774,230). There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to obtain the substantial additional capital resources necessary to implement its business plan or that any assumptions relating to its business plan will prove to be accurate. The Company is pursuing sources of additional financing and there can be no assurance that any such financing will be available to the Company on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. Any inability to obtain additional financing will have a material adverse effect on the Company, including possibly requiring the Company to cease operations.
These factors raise substantial doubt about the ability of the Company to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
NOTE 11. TRADING SECURITIES
As of September 30, 2014, the Company held $7,500 in securities in its margin account and $649 in its money market account, which is included in the consolidated cash balance.
The Company held no investments or securities and $818 in its money market account as of September 30, 2013.
NOTE 12. JUDGMENTS PAYABLE
The Company currently has three judgments against it. Included in the accompanying balance sheets at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2012 is $2,300,948 stemming from the following lawsuits.
Sebaco Siete, S.A. v. Omega Realty Partners, LLC, et. al. 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida. Case No.: 06-11204 CA 13 FJ. A default judgment against impleader defendants in the amount of $1,564,832 was filed in 2009.
Jorge Ramos v. Omega Capital Funding, LLC, et. al. in the circuit court of the 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida. Case No.: 07-38288 CA 09. A final summary judgment was filed in 2009 in the amount of $85,000.
Luxury Home LLC v. Omega et. al. Case No.: CV2011-004554. A default judgment in the amount of $651,116 was filed in 2012 for a previous year’s claim.
Madison Boardwalk LLC. On April 26, 2013, Madison Boardwalk, LLC (“Madison Boardwalk”) filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Case No. l 13-cv-288) against Omega Commercial finance Corp. (“the company”), Jon S. Cummings IV and Von C. Cummings. The complaint alleges that the company breached its agreements with Madison Boardwalk to provide it with funding for a hotel it was seeking to finance and develop (the “Project”).
The complaint also alleges that the defendants engaged in deceptive practices in violation of Wisconsin Statues Section 100.18(1) and that Jon S. Cummings IV and made intentional misrepresentations related to the Company’s ability to arrange financing for the Project. The plaintiff is seeking damages against the Company in the amount of $9,240,874, which the plaintiff claims is the difference between the financing cost proposed by the Company and what the plaintiff alleged they could receive from an alleged alternative funding source; plus, Jon S. Cummings IV and Von C. Cummings jointly and severally in the amount of $1,071,000, and certain other amounts as determined at trial. The plaintiff did provide to the Company a payment of a non-refundable due diligence and processing fee in the amount of $20,000, which is not in dispute.
In response to this complaint, the Company and Jon S. Cummings IV filed a motion to dismiss the complaint due to Jurisdiction and Venue. On November 7, 2013, the Court issued an order denying the motion to dismiss, granting Madison Boardwalk’s motion for leave to file a surreply and allowing Madison Boardwalk leave until November 21, 2013 to show that the individual defendants in this case are citizens of Florida.
The Company believes that this claim is totally without merit, and the Company intends to file its Answer and Affirmative Defenses followed by a Motion for Summary Judgment and to vigorously defend the company, The Company cannot predict th3e ultimate outcome of the complaint. And, in the event, that the court ultimately awards Madison Boardwalk the full claimed amount, it may have an adverse effect on our financial and liquidity positions in future periods. However, the company holds the right to file a Rule 11 Motion for sanctions any time prior to trial for any damages this may cause to the company and its shareholders of record. Furthermore, the Company assumes Von C. Cummings will retain his own counsel at his cost because he is employed as the CEO of Bentley Addison Capital finance and not the Company.As of September 30, 2014, through mediation, the complaint was dismissed with prejudice.
17
IBC Funds LLC. On October 17, 2014 the Circuit Court in the Twelfth Judicial Circuit in and for Sarasota County, Florida (the “Court”), entered an Order Granting Approval of Settlement Agreement (the “Order”) approving, among other things, the fairness of the terms and conditions of an exchange pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), in accordance with a Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) between the Company and IBC Funds, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (“IBC”), in the matter entitled IBC Funds, LLC, vs Omega Commercial Finance Corporation., Case No. 2014 CA 6009 (the “Action”). IBC commenced the Action against us to recover an aggregate of $65,085 of past-due accounts payable, which IBC had purchased from certain of our vendors pursuant to the terms of separate claim purchase agreements between IBC and each of the respective vendors (the “Assigned Accounts), plus fees and costs (the “Claim”). The Assigned Accounts relate to certain legal, accounting, underwriting, and Edgar filing services cost. The Order provides for the full and final settlement of the Claim and the Action. The Settlement Agreement became effective and binding on October 31, 2014.
As of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the Company has payment obligations of $2,300,948 on the judgments against it.
NOTE 13 RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
During the periods ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, the Company compensated its officer $53,416 and $76,247 in cash and equivalents, respectively.
On July 9, 2014, the Company issued its officer 40,000,013 shares of restricted common stock, valued at the current close price on the date of issuance, the expense approximating the fair value of the services.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/29504/000151597114000527/ocfn10q093014.htm
NOTE 10. GOING CONCERN
The accompanying consolidated financial statements for the periods ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the settlement of liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. As of September 30, 2014, the Company has negative working capital of ($3,728,379) and a retained deficit of ($2,435,774,230). There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to obtain the substantial additional capital resources necessary to implement its business plan or that any assumptions relating to its business plan will prove to be accurate. The Company is pursuing sources of additional financing and there can be no assurance that any such financing will be available to the Company on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. Any inability to obtain additional financing will have a material adverse effect on the Company, including possibly requiring the Company to cease operations.
These factors raise substantial doubt about the ability of the Company to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
NOTE 11. TRADING SECURITIES
As of September 30, 2014, the Company held $7,500 in securities in its margin account and $649 in its money market account, which is included in the consolidated cash balance.
The Company held no investments or securities and $818 in its money market account as of September 30, 2013.
NOTE 12. JUDGMENTS PAYABLE
The Company currently has three judgments against it. Included in the accompanying balance sheets at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2012 is $2,300,948 stemming from the following lawsuits.
Sebaco Siete, S.A. v. Omega Realty Partners, LLC, et. al. 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida. Case No.: 06-11204 CA 13 FJ. A default judgment against impleader defendants in the amount of $1,564,832 was filed in 2009.
Jorge Ramos v. Omega Capital Funding, LLC, et. al. in the circuit court of the 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida. Case No.: 07-38288 CA 09. A final summary judgment was filed in 2009 in the amount of $85,000.
Luxury Home LLC v. Omega et. al. Case No.: CV2011-004554. A default judgment in the amount of $651,116 was filed in 2012 for a previous year’s claim.
Madison Boardwalk LLC. On April 26, 2013, Madison Boardwalk, LLC (“Madison Boardwalk”) filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Case No. l 13-cv-288) against Omega Commercial finance Corp. (“the company”), Jon S. Cummings IV and Von C. Cummings. The complaint alleges that the company breached its agreements with Madison Boardwalk to provide it with funding for a hotel it was seeking to finance and develop (the “Project”).
The complaint also alleges that the defendants engaged in deceptive practices in violation of Wisconsin Statues Section 100.18(1) and that Jon S. Cummings IV and made intentional misrepresentations related to the Company’s ability to arrange financing for the Project. The plaintiff is seeking damages against the Company in the amount of $9,240,874, which the plaintiff claims is the difference between the financing cost proposed by the Company and what the plaintiff alleged they could receive from an alleged alternative funding source; plus, Jon S. Cummings IV and Von C. Cummings jointly and severally in the amount of $1,071,000, and certain other amounts as determined at trial. The plaintiff did provide to the Company a payment of a non-refundable due diligence and processing fee in the amount of $20,000, which is not in dispute.
In response to this complaint, the Company and Jon S. Cummings IV filed a motion to dismiss the complaint due to Jurisdiction and Venue. On November 7, 2013, the Court issued an order denying the motion to dismiss, granting Madison Boardwalk’s motion for leave to file a surreply and allowing Madison Boardwalk leave until November 21, 2013 to show that the individual defendants in this case are citizens of Florida.
The Company believes that this claim is totally without merit, and the Company intends to file its Answer and Affirmative Defenses followed by a Motion for Summary Judgment and to vigorously defend the company, The Company cannot predict th3e ultimate outcome of the complaint. And, in the event, that the court ultimately awards Madison Boardwalk the full claimed amount, it may have an adverse effect on our financial and liquidity positions in future periods. However, the company holds the right to file a Rule 11 Motion for sanctions any time prior to trial for any damages this may cause to the company and its shareholders of record. Furthermore, the Company assumes Von C. Cummings will retain his own counsel at his cost because he is employed as the CEO of Bentley Addison Capital finance and not the Company.As of September 30, 2014, through mediation, the complaint was dismissed with prejudice.
17
IBC Funds LLC. On October 17, 2014 the Circuit Court in the Twelfth Judicial Circuit in and for Sarasota County, Florida (the “Court”), entered an Order Granting Approval of Settlement Agreement (the “Order”) approving, among other things, the fairness of the terms and conditions of an exchange pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), in accordance with a Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) between the Company and IBC Funds, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (“IBC”), in the matter entitled IBC Funds, LLC, vs Omega Commercial Finance Corporation., Case No. 2014 CA 6009 (the “Action”). IBC commenced the Action against us to recover an aggregate of $65,085 of past-due accounts payable, which IBC had purchased from certain of our vendors pursuant to the terms of separate claim purchase agreements between IBC and each of the respective vendors (the “Assigned Accounts), plus fees and costs (the “Claim”). The Assigned Accounts relate to certain legal, accounting, underwriting, and Edgar filing services cost. The Order provides for the full and final settlement of the Claim and the Action. The Settlement Agreement became effective and binding on October 31, 2014.
As of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the Company has payment obligations of $2,300,948 on the judgments against it.
NOTE 13 RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
During the periods ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, the Company compensated its officer $53,416 and $76,247 in cash and equivalents, respectively.
On July 9, 2014, the Company issued its officer 40,000,013 shares of restricted common stock, valued at the current close price on the date of issuance, the expense approximating the fair value of the services.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/29504/000151597114000527/ocfn10q093014.htm
"The aim of the wise is not to secure pleasure, but to avoid pain."
-Aristotle
Join the InvestorsHub Community
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.
