I think the question of whether dilution started immediately after the presentation Spooz made in NYC and spanned the next 10 months is important enough to revisit. There have been inaccurate timelines put out, and I posted about it yesterday, so let me take a stab at it once again tonight.
OK, lets look at that questionable statement once again, for the folks in the back row swapping spit instead of watching the movie LOL :o)
"Then he diluted 3 billion shares in the span of 10 months."
If Paul Strickland presented and then immediately began 10 straight months of dilution, then we should be able to count off the months and see for ourselves. So, lets count the months, shall we?
November, December, January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August... 10 months. Exactly 10 months.
Thus we know that the above statement was specifically contending that dilution began immediately after the NYC show that Spooz presented at on October 18, 2007 because there is no other way for there to have been a 10 month span during which dilution in earnest could have occurred. We are in early September, the 11th month since the NCY presentation. I have belabored the point so that everybody can see for themselves and make up their own minds, and because I think that my efforts prevented a misrepresentation from becoming an accepted fact. And also, IMHO, that the timeline contained in that statement is untrue.
Well, what has happened now that I've taken the time to point this out? Here is what is now being put forward as the appropriate timeline: "Something apparently went haywire at Spooz after April 22, 2007 with nearly 3 billion shares added to the O/S. ( http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=31987228 )
Now first off, there were not 3 billion shares dilution beginning in April 2007. Now, there could not possibly be any other explanation of this mistake than that this was just the wrong date, since elsewhere in that same post it is clear that the date to use is April 22, 2008. I'm sure it was merely another innocent mistake. I'm sure it was just an innocent typo.
So, that mistake is forgiven, but lets look at the two statements: both refer to the same 3 billion shares of dilution, so, apparently, today it is being conceded that the truth is that the dreadful dilution we have all endured did not actually start 10 months back, but began in earnest after April 22, 2008.
I do believe that was my general point all along.
So, lets count the months of which the timeline that is now being conceded consists: May, June, July, August... 4 months, not 10 months.
Apparently, I can both read and count. Or so it seems.
Qusetion: Is it true that Paul went to New York City and then launched immediately thereafter into 10 straight months of dilution, as was first asserted?
Answer: No.
Question: Has this original misrepresentation now become an assertion that the dilution we have all endured began in earnest as late as April 22, 2008?
Answer: Apparently. A more accurate timeline of events than the oversimplification that Paul went to NYC and then began a dash to dilute that spanned a full 10 months is contained in what appeared today.
Question: Why not make the statement accurately in the first place, especially since today we are fortunate enough to get the following date data showing that dilution was carefully being tracked (numbers for 7/10/07, 12/10/07, 2/12/08, 4/22/08, and 8/01/08 were being kept), and thus accurate dilution info was known at the time the original misleading statement was made?
Answer: Beats me :o)
Now.... Let me tell everyone something. I could care less whether Paul Strickland is "a clown, a dummy, a charlatan, a pink sheet scam artist, a visionary, an up and comer" or "a liar". I frankly could care less if he were the antichrist, waiting in the wings to chip me and make me worship his image.
I frankly don't think any of these characterizations is correct, but for the sake of argument, I'll grant he's a bad man. That having been said, I chose to be objective about the software and let everyone else fight about the personalities. I looked at the events that unfolded and chose to use SpoozChartz so I could see for myself if what I was being told in PRs was actually being done, or whether it was a scam.
Nobody else bothered to do this. I did. I figured that there wasn't enough info coming out on this board or in the PRs to be able to discern what the truth about SpoozChartz was, and since it was very low cost to explore it, I decided to try it and figure out for myself what was really going on.
I did this because I have to be smart & self-reliant; because I trade for a living. I have to make the right decisions on how to spend my time and my money, or I fail. Period. It ain't about whether I like the guy. Its about whether what he is doing helps me or hurts me.
And here's what I wanted to find out by using SpoozChartz: A) Was Spooz a scam B) Was SpoozChartz real C) Was SpoozToolz real D) Could I create an autotrading solution that used SpoozToolz as its heartbeat?
The only way to find anything out for sure was to build something real with SpoozChartz. Once I got into doing this, I very soon realized that SpoozChartz was an irrelevance except for the fact that it used the same datafeeds as SpoozToolz and it used the same Excel spreadsheets. I realized that I could create a spreadsheet that could display data in SpoozChartz, but the important thing was that the spreadsheet whose data was being displayed could be plopped directly into SpoozToolz. Accordingly, I quickly decided that SpoozChartz was like a lab experiment for creating a spreadsheet for use in SpoozToolz.
Today, I could care less about SpoozChartz. SpoozChartz can sink with the Titanic, for all I care, but what I learned in my project is that A) Spooz is not a scam, B) SpoozChartz is real, C) SpoozToolz is real, D) and I can build an autotrading system that will use SpoozToolz as its heartbeat.
4 goals. 4 questions. 4 answers.
I built an Excel spreadsheet that is sitting here on my hard drive at E:\Dataarea\XLS\DiffyXL_v23a17.xls & it is ready for prime time.
While everyone else was acting like life in Spoozland is an episode of Desperate Housewives, or some cheesy dialog from a daytime TV show, I built something real. I've been to the mountaintop. I've looked over at what's on the other side. I'm convinced enough to have built a real solution in Excel that I intend to plop directly into SpoozToolz when it gets released.
I want an opportunity to trade my custom solution using SpoozToolz. If people hate Paul Strickland so much that they have committed this portion of their lives to doing everything they can to stop Spooz from succeeding, then Paul Strickland is not my enemy. Its not a defense of Paul Strickland that you see me engaging in. Its a defense of my hard work and of my chance to break the glass ceiling and trade with the big boys.
And let me also say this: there is a lot more money to be made trading a viable trading solution built on the technology that SpoozToolz is purported to be about to release than there is in the matter of whether or not the last year's price activity has lost me money. People need to kind of get a sense of perspective here. This isn't just another stock to flip. This is their way out of prison.
It’s not about how much money I may or may not have lost in SPZI, the stock. Its about whether the best idea for enabling Everyman to break the glass ceiling and trade with the big boys is crushed before I get a chance to use it. As a pragmatic matter, I don't care whether Paul Strickland is all the things said of him, because I've made up my mind that those saying these ugly things are more dangerous to my needs than he is.
I have an unwavering confidence that even if Paul Strickland is all the horrible things he is alleged to be, the folks who have a vested interest in keeping Everyman (moi being an Everyman) from having a software tool with which he can break the glass ceiling are far worse people than Paul is said to be.
I hope that’s clear, because I don't know how to be any clearer. I've measured the parties in this food-fight by building something that is real and by reading all the posts, and I've made up my mind that those whose commitment apparently is to passionately do whatever it takes to damage Spooz are a greater threat to my succeeding in creating an automated trading system with which I can break the glass ceiling than any past "Pauline" deceit or "Pauline" error. Because I've used SpoozChartz, if I have to decide whether those insisting Spooz is a scam are being deceitful or whether Paul Strickland is, I have to conclude that its not Paul Strickland who is being deceitful and that Spooz is not a scam.
Peace and thanx for being a great moderator.
Imperial Whazoo
EDIT: Always remember that this is a stinky pinky and it is a high risk deal. I hope it does not go out of business because I want to use SpoozToolz, but even so, its a high risk stock to own, and this should never be forgotten.
"Just my opinions, folks. Do your own due diligence & make your own decisions. DO NOT... I repeat... DO NOT make any investment decisions on my comments. They are my opinions. That's all they are... OPINIONS."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
