Replies to post #23575 on Rim Semiconductor Company (fka RSMI)

[halston]

I am saying the company is flat out liars cheats and thieves. period. the facts are out there in front of everyones face to prove it. they stated themselves they have done things to shareholders that could get them sued.

what other facts do you need?

this pertains to statemnt issued by the copany itself matt check it out before you allow factual posts to be deleted

[excel]

So are you saying that Brad & Coop & all the others from NVEI are flat out lying to their shareholders when they have repeatedly stated that the tech works?

YES!


There is absolutely no evidence anywhere that says it does work.

In fact there is evidence everywhere it doesn't.

Common sense.

I repeat, basic common sense..........

You would have people busting down the door to finance them if true.

You also wouldn't be giving away 30% of your company if true.

[cosmoworld7]

Deeba, did you just figure that out recently after YEARS of false PRs? Liars , fakers, manipulators, theives, crooks, cheaters, etc , etc, whatever you want to call it. The have screwed investors for years, NOBODY should be defending such blatantly deceptive behavior. That's why people are displeased with NVEI; not because they are whining or bashing. Its amazing that you don't have the ability to think critically and use your mind in circumstances like this. But about 80% of the investors here DO have that ability and they are voicing their concerns here. NVEI has bought it upon themselves. Fortunately for them, they have the safe harbor act to protect them in a legal aspect.

Simply go back and read any of the PRs over the past several years and you will notice they were WAAAAYYYYYYYY off target repeatedly! Look at how "fishy" the recent financing deal was? I posed a question about this recently and even none of the hypsters were able to refute it. NVEI has destroyed themselves - what a shame!

But I will assume that you aer a mature adult and give you the benefit of the doubt? What makes you think favorably about NVEI?

[spokeshave]

deeba: Re: ...are you saying that Brad & Coop & all the others from NVEI are flat out lying to their shareholders when they have repeatedly stated that the tech works?

In my opinion, they have been as truthful about the tech as they were about Brad "reducing" his salary from $250,000 to $268,000.

Or, as truthful as they were about Rich taking a "pay cut" when in actually, he requested to go part time so he could work on the new movie.

Or, as truthful as they were about having the FPGA completed by the end of 2002.

Or as truthful as they were about having the FPGA completed by the end of 2003.

Or as truthful as they were about the promise of no "going concern" statement in the 2002 annual report.

Or as truthful as they were about promising revenues from the tech in 2002.

Or as truthful as they were about promising revenues from the tech in 2003.

Or as truthful as they were about promising revenues from the tech in the first half of 2004.

Or as truthful as they were about the Intellicon merger.

Or as truthful as they were about the Hytek acquisition.

Or as truthful as they were about PowerStream being a viable, proven technology when they bought it in April of 2002.

Or as truthful as they were about the demise of Cu@OCx.

Or as truthful as they were about projections of $40,000,000 gross from the movie.

Or as truthful as they were about the Maine telco test on a "prototype" that was 80% based on a technology that by the company's own admission was not completed until nearly a year later.

Or as truthful as they were about the Lucent verification of the Cu@OCx technology, which later was proven not to work.

Or as truthful as they were about the so-called "prototype" device on display at the 2002 SHM.

Or as truthful as they were about the Mercatus loan.

Or as truthful as they were about Alberto Fernandes's contribution to the technology and his "presentation" at the symposium.

Or as truthful as they were about the reasons for securing Quint as a PR firm.

Or as truthful as they were about the reasons for securing Fleischman-Hillard as a PR firm.

Or as truthful as they were about the reasons for the reverse split.

Or as truthful as they were about the move to the "new research facility" in Pleasanton.

Or as truthful as they were about the $23 million financing deal from Beter.

Or as truthful as they were about the promise of an ASIC in 2003.

Or as truthful as they were about the promise of an ASIC in the first half of 2004.

Or as truthful as they were about "rolling thunder" the first time.

Or as truthful as they were about "rolling thunder" the second time.

Or as truthful as they were about "rolling thunder" the third time.

Or as truthful as they were about "delivering on the promise".

Or as truthful as they were about "underpromising and overdelivering".

Or as truthful as they were about releasing the movie in 2002.

Or as truthful as they were about releasing "white papers" and "datasheets" in 2002.

Or as truthful as they were about the name change to RIM.

Or as truthful as they were about executives "purchasing" stock with deferred salary and bonuses.


You get the picture.

[louis]

Deeba,

"NVEI says the tech works"

"It works" Where, when and how does it work? What are the specifications it meets. It is being tweeked, because of problem with?????? Time to come clean on just what the heck "IT" is. Chipwa1

Chipwa hit the nail on the head. Saying the tech works without any parameters is meaningless.

Cobra says in post #23590
This of course is the same that could happen to those representing NV if they give false information.

Those would include but not be limited to:

Dr Walter Chen
Brad Ketch
Ray Willenberg
Tom Cooper
The Auditors
Michael Propp

Show me where any of the above says the tech works with parameters without the safe harbor act accompanied with any of their statements.

Louis


Legal Disclaimer: The post above contains my opinion. Do not misinterpret or confuse the content as I cannot guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of any message. The reader must bear all risk associated with the use of my message in making any specific investment or decision. I do not accept any liability for any loss or damage which may directy or indirectly result from any advice, opinion, information, representation or omission, whether negligent or otherwise, contained on this message.