InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

CRASSUS

02/07/13 1:42 PM

#284448 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Don't have the time right now, will check it as sson as I can, but if you're right then this is it and we've finally made it. The volume agrees with you. THANK YOU.
icon url

inforthemoney2

02/07/13 1:59 PM

#284450 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Thanks ST on the DD..Very interesting, and I hope you are correct..Would like to see the pps rise out of sub penny into multi-penny in the near future..
icon url

Bigfootbud

02/07/13 2:04 PM

#284451 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Anyone?...from last page-

"Ordering Yorkville, Angelo and Schinik to disgorge any ill-gotten gains from their
violative conduct alleged in this complaint, plus prejudgment interest;"


Does NeoMedia get any benefit? Or has the benefit been the 1.4Bil. forgiven warrants?

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2012/comp-pr2012-209.pdf
icon url

magicmk

02/07/13 2:23 PM

#284453 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Stocktrader828,

Thanks for the link.

I have read through page 20 and I am wondering how are these guys free if they are guilty of half the stuff claimed.
icon url

Jmsberg7

02/07/13 2:40 PM

#284455 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Exellent DD... This may help pps rise indeed !!! Slowly but surely !!!

GO NEOM !!!
icon url

whizknock

02/07/13 2:56 PM

#284456 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Stocktrader. I can almost promise you that YA will NOT buy back diluted shares. These guys are into selling shares as fast as they can get their hands on them.

What's tragic is that they created the very problems they had to lie about. The reasons the companies they loaned money to nose dived in value was because YA never gave them a chance to be healthy by selling their debt & driving the value of the company into the ground. Then they lie telling their investors that the valuation of these companies were much higher.

I have no excuse. I've known about YA from the word go. I just kept hoping that as NEOM kept getting more recognition that YA would cool it's practices for fear of exposure. They didn't & that's why we're bouncing around .002

The big deal is we haven't accepted any more loans since Sept. Hopefully we can just get rid of them & become a successful company.

If YA does buy back stock I will be shocked & yes, that would send this thing up big time.
icon url

stockstuffer

02/07/13 3:08 PM

#284458 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

What is ya waiting for. They will be buying at much higher prices if they wait any longer, with too much great licensing news that may hit anytime, imo.
icon url

nuubie

02/07/13 4:04 PM

#284459 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Excellent DD stockt, could be just the tip of the iceberg for YA...prolly much more wrong doing by them that is currently under investigation with charges pending...

NEOM needs to get the assets out of YA's hands ASAP...

icon url

Harold Fieldt

02/07/13 4:11 PM

#284460 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Nice. Sock it to them, SEC.
icon url

Harold Fieldt

02/07/13 4:13 PM

#284461 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

So what's your prognosis on future selling by YA?
icon url

Poptech

02/07/13 4:21 PM

#284463 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

stock: That is not in the suit. YA does not purchase market shares and has a legal beneficial holding limit of 9.99%. Under their charter, YA uses less expensive PIPE conversion for their share inventory. If they then buy back shares, they would be unable to convert and NeoMedia couldn't use investors to payoff the debt instruments.
icon url

Be Confident

02/07/13 8:14 PM

#284468 RE: stocktrader828 #284447

Sticktrader,

FWIW, I personally do not feel YA will be buying back anything...for several reasons:

a) The agreement between Neom and YA clearly stipulates they cannot own more than 10%of the company. You may argue that they turned over 1.4B shares to Neom and therefore have room to repurchase, however, those were "warrants" which means they had the right to buy those shares...but they remain unbought :)

b) Isn't it more likely that YA turned those warrants back over to Neom based upon the judgement (which was handed down in mid October)? Not that this was necessarily the case, because it certainly may not have been.

c) We simply do not know :/

d) Time will tell...and the last thing iHubbers need to do is spend time diluting this company further when the shares have yet to bear fruit.

Best,
BC