Some SFIO DD I found form months ago on the board. I will edit it to make it shorter.-----------------------------
I now understand what you guys are saying about the connections between SFI and the Fuentes brothers via Kings Pointe Capital.
Let me recap just so I can fully wrap my head around this ...
SFI hires Kings Pointe Capital in the beginning to sell company stock in order to raise funds from investment capital so SFI can have startup money. Kings Pointe is owned by Charles Fuentes who in 1992 was convicted of securities fraud along with two other brothers, namely, Kenneth R Fuentes of Thousand Oaks, California.
Indeed, when one uses godaddy to lookup who is registered for the domain smokefree-innotec.com, you can see it is Ken Fuentes of Thousand Oaks, California. Also, right on the home page of smokefree-innotec.com at the bottom, under the 'Contact..' section, it lists Ken Fuentes,
"Sales Relations: Ken Fuentes
+1.805.495.7480".
The main data point which ties the Ken Fuentes in the LATimes article to the Ken Fuentes who is registered under the smokefree-innotec.com domain is the region --> Thousand Oaks, California.
I previously did not have a middle initial to nail down exactly which K Fuentes BUT this region data point IS ENOUGH I think to tie Ken Fuentes the criminal to the owner of the smokefree-innotec.com domain as being the same criminal person which IS VERY SKETCHY. This is unfortunate. WHY does SFI employ or employed a 'sales relations' person by the name of Ken Fuentes who was in 1992 convicted and served time for securities fraud??!
BAD.
And WHY did SFI originally go into business with Kings Pointe Capital to raise funds by selling company shares when its owner/founder was Ken Fuentes criminal brother??!!
BAD.
These are serious questions and this now clear connection needs to be addressed by the company.
Now so far I agree that there are questionable relations with the Fuentes brothers and SFI and those connections have been established by Gammas source data in his post.
HOWEVER, so far I do NOT agree with the further rant in Gammas post. We have already been over the allegations that T.S and Wilbrink when working for under the umbrella of Metropolitan were in cahoots with NicStic AG (a swiss company) BUT I devoted two long posts previously in my digging along these lines and found NOTHING. The only connection was that Metropolitan had an agreement with NicStic to distribute the product and months after this business arrangement, it became known that NicStic was a fraud and so T.S and Wilbrink severed all ties (legally) with the fraud that was NicStic AG.
As for PEG, that is yet another speculative allegation with no evidence. I looked into PEG and it is just some small no name media group in Europe of which does social media campaigns pumping a company and/or its product, for cash not stock (which was stated in a previous official PR from SFI.
So I think that it has been established that the company SFI has or had under its employment the Fuentes brothers who did in the past have securities fraud convictions, according to the LATimes website. I think all other allegations of conspiracy and/or fraud still carries NO weight until proven with source links as the Ken Fuentes conspiracy has been by Gammas post.
Now, even though we have established that the Fuentes connection exists or existed, even though it causes me to raise an eyebrow of suspicion at the legitimacy of SFI, I cannot yet see exactly what it means toward the big picture. On one hand, it is bad that the company has employed such individuals however on the other hand, this securities fraud by the Fuentes brothers was more than a decade ago and has nothing to do with SFI as a company other than the fact that the individuals involved now work or worked for the company at some point in time. What does that mean? People do change, maybe after being in prison for a year or two on securities fraud the brothers are now on the straight and narrow, it just still does not quite cause me to believe necessarily that SFI is a scam. It does give me pause though and I appreciate the divulging of this information.
If one were to dig into a handful of large well known corporations and dig into the sorted past of each of the employees at those companies, I am sure that one would find all kinds of terrible criminal convictions and other scandalous activities with those employees, for most of the handful of companies scrutinized. However, does that mean that we would necessarily have to think that each of those companies themselves were total scams or frauds just because they employ some people with sorted pasts?
