News Focus
News Focus
icon url

longhornbill

09/27/07 12:42 PM

#30006 RE: skunksyard #30003

The 7% is a continuing license fee. It comes from the profits generated by SWARM. I think most everyone else sees this clearly, even by accounting standards. Sorry you are so confused. Reread Paul's e-mail.

BB
icon url

keegers

09/27/07 12:46 PM

#30008 RE: skunksyard #30003

Skunk I am confused how looking at it from an accounting standpoint makes it less clear? They do not own 7% of a product, they own 7% of net profits from trading. Not 7% of assets under management, not 7% of common stock. They were very explicit when they state 7% of net profits. They then go on to seperate the 120 million from that consideration by using the word "also". The way they use this word, websters defines it as "in addition; too; besides; as well". There is a clear seperation of the 2. Good lord. Read the PR. you obviously didn't. The were very explicit about what the 7% was from, and the 120 million was from. One is due to a licensing deal. One is not.
icon url

jcrom56

09/27/07 12:55 PM

#30011 RE: skunksyard #30003

Skunks, it is impossible to be any clearer about the 7% than to state the fact that Spooz will receive 7% of the net profits that 141 generates from SWARM related trading AND any trading utilizing any system developed in the future using SWARM technology. It is perpetual profit sharing...period. There is no more or no less to be read into it. Percentage of Spooz ownership in 141 has nothing whatsoever to do with the profit sharing.

Look, here is the deal, plain and simple. Spooz negotiated THREE things for themselves and us by extension:

1. $1,500,000.00 cash
2. 120 million shares of 141 Capital common stock.
3. 7% of all net profits 141 makes trading accounts with SWARM and any system developed down the road based on SWARM.

These are three points agreed to by negotiation and one has nothing to do with the other.
icon url

EBI

09/27/07 1:01 PM

#30017 RE: skunksyard #30003

Please tell me you're not an accountant. No offense, but the "devil is in the details." Granted, not all the details have been released and there are still questions to be answered....but you sure know how to butcher what details are in plain sight. Sorry all, but IMO this is a deliberate attempt to divert this board from gaining information on the PROBABLE answers.