InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

r clarke

10/30/16 8:17 AM

#59192 RE: valeriana #59191

I think you are doing pretty well at thinking like NTI management and are probably not far off in your speculation.

HCTI is just a piggy bank, and if it runs dry theyll just smash it and take the last of the change. HCTI lost 34M and is 8M in debt, so obviously they can flush it at will.

... but I think before that they will try to pump up HCTI with PR's, maybe some insider buys and even some revenue.

They will do this in order to excercise the option to give NTI 77% stake in HCTI.

But win or lose, NTI management wins at the expense of shareholders.








"Here is my **pure speculation**... take it as such. When they are done collecting all of their money from this dilution machine, and actually want to start being an honest legitimate public company, they will probably just bankrupt this debt-ridden used & abused ticker, void the licenses, and start fresh elsewhere, or heck, just stay private.

NTI has the real goods, the patents. They basically set up HCTI as an ATM machine, gave "themselves" the licenses with this company, then fixed it so they themselves are "majority shareholder" so they can basically decide whatever the heck they want. RS? Sure, no prob. Take out more notes? Hey why not? NTI can never be touched, right? It's like doing whatever you want to yourself, but never actually hurting yourself, or accepting any responsibility. Who cares what the heck happens to Hybrid, right?

The F500 contracts... who knows what the actual contract writings say. It could have tucked in provisions where all future revenue streams and business arrangements could transfer to the original patent holder (NTI) upon HCTI license termination. Again pure speculation, but I'm just trying to get inside management's mind, and think what I would do if I was behind the scenes running this circus. Haha. Sorry if I burst anyone's bubble. Just some constructive conversation"
icon url

sharpei

10/30/16 8:20 AM

#59193 RE: valeriana #59191

This very scenario has been posited for some time among veteran longs. A possibility Valeriana.
icon url

Backstabbed

10/30/16 10:44 AM

#59204 RE: valeriana #59191

Please do tell me. How many shares do you own so far and how many are you looking to collect? Thank you in advance.

EPA took pictures with HCTI management. Joint Agreements are done with HCTI.

This can be confirmed through PRs.
icon url

Skiluc

10/30/16 11:10 AM

#59205 RE: valeriana #59191

Exactly. Great post. Very True!
icon url

blackshirej

10/30/16 12:56 PM

#59213 RE: valeriana #59191

While it's pure speculation...I definitely think it's extremely plausible.

Many of us here invested based on the technology and there's no denying the technology is VERY sound.

But we also invested under the impression that management would fulfill their obligation to increase shareholder value and it's become quite apparent when they gave us their reasons for the reverse split and then completely contradicted themselves, destroying the share price by taking on tons more convertible debt under less than favorable terms and conditions, that they have absolutely no desire to increase shareholder value.

In my job, my boss and his grandkids have multiple companies...one is the development company that I run. Then they have a few car dealerships. Then they have their holding company where all the money is, etc. I think there are like 6 companies. The money all gets shifted around and the purpose is very simple. To reduce tax liability and ensure that if something happens with one company, it won't run them broke or affect all of their business. Those are all private companies...but same concept with a public company...except now you can dilute and get free money. How do you shift that money into your private companies and into your pockets without sending a red flag to the SEC?

Simple...you pay it all out via "consulting fees" or "licensing fees" or "commissions for working these huge deals"...sure makes it easy to establish those deals when the same guys running the public company are running the private companies.

I'm actually kind of surprised there are no laws regarding the conflicts of interest with public companies doing business with private companies sharing the same management or public companies being "partnered" with private companies sharing the same management.