tenac:
IF this company is a scam, it is not of the straight out fraud type. We will not find evidence that the patent, phones, Field Trials, Employees never existed - they do. IF (and I repeat "IF") this is a scam, it is because there is no real market for the patent and technology that they have, and they (the Management) know it. But they can legally get away with carefully worded announcements wich cause a general "misunderstanding" of their product, and how it works, and who may want it. If these announcements cause buying pressure and the stock goes up and they (the management and their friends) sell on this news, again it may be well within the law. I am not saying that this is the case, only that IF this ends up being a scam, it will be little harder to prove that management knew this all along. So what evidence would support this type of "scam" theory?
In my opinion, I think you would need to see:
1. Carefully mis-worded descriptions of the technology.
2. No legitimate company buying the hype.
3. Insiders selling.
4. No insiders buying.
5. Using stock as currency.
6. Contracts with companies who "don't fit the mold", are newly formed, or there is no history of.
7. Constantly changing strategic direction.
8. Legal hassles.
9. Executive changes - early retirements, etc.
10. Difficulty in getting good, accurate information on the company and/or its product.
11. A large amount of outstanding shares, and an under funded company.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
