Replies to post #38571 on Revolutionary Concepts Inc (fka REVO)

[wilma6311]

bluejacket, no problem...

You are right...it was the 10Q & 10k but here is the info you requested in black and white...

1. Our net gain for the three-month period ended March 31, 2014 was $774,106 compared to a net loss of $(237,757) over the prior year period. This gain is primarily attributable to decreases in loss on derivatives and interest expense and the consideration received as part of the license agreement with Eytalk365, offset by increases in operating expenses.

COMMENT: As you know...EYETALK365 LLC was just registered as a brand new business in Sept 2013 and has not made a name for themselves.

2. There are no subs because there is NO REVENUE or cash streams from subs...and also...this...

The company expects to have its product manufactured by third parties over which it has no control and it currently does not have any agreements for the manufacture of the product. the company is subject to fluctuations in the cost and availability of raw materials and the possible loss of suppliers....

and this from the recent PR...

...The Licensee is working aggressively to commercialize and sublicense REVO's patented "EyeTalk Communicator System" to other companies to generate licensing fees and royalties. This would give the sublicensees the right to exploit, produce and incorporate the technology into their products and market them to their customers. This would allow REVO and its primary Licensee the ability to fully exploit and maximize the potential financial revenues and profits that could be obtained from the patents and licensing agreement.

COMMENT: Doesn't sound to me like there are currently sub-licensees in place...

3. In RE lawsuits against the company by security holders who are disgruntled...

VOLATILITY IN OUR COMMON SHARE PRICE MAY SUBJECT US TO SECURITIES LITIGATION, THEREBY DIVERTING OUR RESOURCES THAT MAY HAVE A MATERIAL EFFECT ON OUR PROFITABILITY AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.

As discussed in the preceding risk factors, the market for our common shares is characterized by significant price volatility when compared to seasoned issuers, and we expect that our share price will continue to be more volatile than a seasoned issuer for the indefinite future. In the past, plaintiffs have often initiated securities class action litigation against a company following periods of volatility in the market price of its securities. We may in the future be the target of similar litigation. Securities litigation could result in substantial costs and liabilities and could divert management’s attention and resources.

Once Ali reveals the true identity of the licensee being EYETALK 365 they open themselves up to lawsuits. They hired the new law firm to try and aggresively push this product to market but IMO made an error using the big names in the filing because Ali is once again using speculation to drive the pps. But I can tell you he is hoping he gets someone to latch on in the next few months and before he needs to reveal the truth...at least in the form of a license...to keep the shareholders from revolting. Let me know if I didn't address any of your questions below.

He wrote in the 10k the licensee was a no name company?

He wrote in the 10k no subs?

He wrote in the 10k none of this is true and there will be law suits?

Show me where ANY of that you posted is in the 10k Wilms

With posts like that hard to get anyone to believe a word you say IMHO!!!