Phil(Hot Rod Chevy)
18 years ago
Looks like they merged into another POS loser company:
VYTA CORP(VYTC)
The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements include the
accounts of Vyta Corp, a Nevada corporation (the Company), its wholly-owned
subsidiaries, NanoPierce Connection Systems, Inc., a Nevada corporation (NCOS),
and ExypnoTech, LLC (ET LLC). All significant intercompany accounts and
transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. NCOS and ET LLC had no
revenues or operations in 2006 and 2005. The Company has two investments which
are accounted for using the equity method of accounting. These equity method
investments consist of ExypnoTech, GmbH (EPT) and BioAgra, LLC (BioAgra)(Note
3). The Company's equity investees, EPT and BioAgra, operate in two segments,
the RFID industry and the animal feed industry, respectively.
Oustanding shares almost quardrupled from around 6MM to around 23MM in one year, so dilution is fully in place.
http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/showFiling.go?name=Vyta Corp: 10QSB, Sub-Doc 1&link=http%3A//quotemedia.10kwizard.com/filing.xml%3Frepo%3Dtenk%26ipage%3D4503708%26doc%3D1&type=TEXT
Have fun,
Phil
Phil(Hot Rod Chevy)
19 years ago
Don't forget to WAG.!!!
It's free, fun, and you have a chance to win money.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
10 Millionth Post Grub and WAG Prizes
To celebrate our reaching the 10-million post mark, we're going to give away some prizes as a way to thank the community who has made this possible.
The prizes are as follows:
* $1,000 to the person who posts the 10 millionth post.
* $50 each and a Free Annual Subscription to the people who post number 9,999,999 and 10,000,001.
* $250 to the person who comes closest to guessing the exact date and time of the 10 millionth post.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=1594
Have fun,
Phil
Sputnik
20 years ago
FYI-Sorry
By Carol S. Remond
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--A Nevada judge last week dismissed a lawsuit filed by
Nanopierce Technologies Inc. (NPCT) against the Depository Trust and Clearing
Corporation, or DTCC.
Nanopierce claimed in a complaint filed last July in the Second Judicial
District Court of the State of Nevada, Washoe county, that its stock price was
unfairly depressed by DTCC's clearing and settlement services, specifically its
stock borrow program.
DTCC operates the global clearing and settlement system through which most
securities transactions are processed in the U.S. Under its stock borrow
program, DTCC facilitates the lending of shares from one brokerage firm to the
other in the event a firm is unable to deliver stock to settle a transaction on
time.
Nanopierce had argued in court that the program results in the creation of
non-existent stock and contributes to the illegal short selling of the company's
shares.
Arguing that its stock borrow program was approved by the Securities and
Exchange Commission, DTCC said in court that the program could not be challenged
in state court.
Judge Brent Adams sided with DTCC and said in his decision that: "The stock
borrow program is an automated, non discretionary process specifically approved
by the SEC as a component of the nationwide stock transactions' clearing system.
Therefore, the court finds that federal law preempts (Nanopierce)'s claim for
relief."
DTCC said in a press release Tuesday that it felt gratified by Judge Adams's
decision.
"All of our operations are taken in accord with our SEC-approved rules and
subject to strict federal regulatory oversight. The Nevada court agreed with us
that plaintiffs like Nanopierce cannot attempt to use the laws of the 50 states
to challenge DTCC's SEC-approved operations designed to ensure stability and
uniformity in clearing and settling the nation's securities transactions," said
Larry Thompson, DTCC's first deputy general counsel.
Lawyers for Nanopierce weren't immediately available to comment.
Nanopierce's complaint against DTCC's stock loan program was the latest in a
series of maneuvers by some small companies that argue that the global clearing
system is rigged against them.
These companies, many of them shells without real businesses and minimal
revenues, have for months now been complaining that their shares are being
manipulated by illegal short selling.
Short sellers typically borrow shares to sell them, hoping that they will be
able to replace them with shares bought at a lower price later. Trading without
a borrowing agreement is called naked short selling. It's illegal for most
investors, but legal for firms that make markets in stocks by bringing liquidity
to the market.
Some companies, like Nanopierce and most recently Global Links Corp. (GLKC),
have argued that their stock prices have been unfairly depressed by the fact
that the electronic clearing system allows trades to go through without ever
ensuring that these transactions will be closed out or settled with the delivery
of stock by the seller.
A couple of years ago, several companies had attempted to exit the global
stock settlement system operated by DTCC, asking that their shareholders forgo
electronic ownership of their shares and demand physical delivery of their stock
certificates.
Physical ownership of stock certificates guarantees that brokers don't loan
out stock to short sellers looking to borrow shares before placing a short sale.
But it also greatly impairs the ability of shareholders to quickly trade in and
out of its position.
The SEC in 2003 ruled that although shareholders could elect to hold their
shares in physical or electronic format, companies could not exit the global
settlement system and require physical ownership of stock.
(Carol S. Remond is an award-winning columnist and one of four who write the "
n The Money" feature.)
-By Carol S. Remond; Dow Jones Newswires; 201 938 2074;
carol.remond@dowjones.com
Sputnik
20 years ago
FYI--Sorry.
DTCC Applauds Court Decision To Dismiss Nanopierce Lawsuit [FBZCTWP]
NEW YORK--(Business Wire)--May 3, 2005--
The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) today applauded the decision by Nevada's Second Judicial District Court in Reno to dismiss the Nanopierce Technologies Inc. lawsuit against DTCC and its subsidiaries.
The Nevada court adopted DTCC's argument that DTCC's clearing and settlement functions are subject to the oversight and approval of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and therefore, under the U.S. Constitution, cannot be challenged under state law, as Nanopierce sought to do.
As stated by Judge Brent Adams in dismissing the case, "(S)tate law may not be applied as to impose damages on (DTCC). To do this would be to forbid Defendants from doing what the SEC authorized them to do."
Nanopierce had filed the case in May 2004 seeking to hold DTCC responsible for the drop in its stock price, claiming that DTCC's Stock Borrow Program had somehow enabled brokerage firms to engage in "naked short selling" of Nanopierce shares. DTCC responded by demonstrating that its clearing and settling activities are extensively regulated by the federal government and that the specific program challenged by Nanopierce, the Stock Borrow Program, had been approved by the SEC. DTCC demonstrated that Nanopierce's attempt to use state law to forbid DTCC from utilizing this program is barred by an established legal doctrine known as federal preemption. The Nevada court agreed and dismissed the case.
"We are extremely gratified that the court agreed with us that neither DTCC nor its subsidiaries are proper defendants here," said Larry Thompson, DTCC's First Deputy General Counsel. "All of our operations are taken in accord with our SEC-approved rules and subject to strict federal regulatory oversight. The Nevada court agreed with us that plaintiffs like Nanopierce cannot attempt to use the laws of 50 states to challenge DTCC's SEC-approved operations designed to ensure stability and uniformity in clearing and settling the nation's securities transactions."
While focusing its decision on the federal preemption doctrine, the court heard extensive argument and reviewed voluminous documents regarding the Stock Borrow Program and DTCC's clearing and settlement activities.
"Plaintiffs' claims that the Stock Borrow Program results in the manufacture of artificial shares is pure invention," Thompson stated. "Only shares that are actually on deposit in a broker's account can be borrowed. We hope that Judge Adams' decision will be taken to heart and the ill-considered litigation and media campaign against DTCC will come to an end."
The judge's decision to dismiss the case against DTCC follows a series of nine other case that have been dismissed or withdrawn against DTCC.
DTCC
DTCC is the parent company for the nation's principal clearing and settling firm, National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC) and the nation's principal securities depository, The Depository Trust Company (DTC). NSCC is registered with the SEC to record, clear, and settle equity, bond, money market, government, mortgage-backed, insurance, and other security transactions. NSCC's services are utilized by the country's major brokerage firms, the U.S. government, the New York Stock Exchange, NASDAQ, the American Stock Exchange, and other markets. DTC is the nation's principal securities depository. DTCC's subsidiaries are regulated by the SEC, which approves the rules under which they operate.
The Stock Borrow Program was established and approved by the SEC in 1981 to permit NSCC to borrow shares from its members and use the shares to fulfill delivery obligations where selling brokers had failed to deliver their shares. The Program, as the court found, "operates in a automated fashion without the exercise of discretion by NSCC as to whether any particular open transaction should be covered by (the Program)."
The Stock Borrow Program does not in any way release sellers from their legal obligations to complete deliveries. In addition to regulatory and enforcement action, those sellers remain subject to "buy-ins" by brokers from whom shares have been borrowed, as well as other brokers whose purchase orders remain open.
The SEC, the national exchanges and the Nasdaq regulate the activities of broker/dealers engaged in the purchase and sale of securities, including short selling. 03May05 15:20 GMT
Source BW Business Wire
Categories: MST/I/BNK MST/L/EN MST/R/NME MST/R/US MST/R/US/NY TGT/BWB
Sputnik
20 years ago
Betababe
Your buddy, NatureBoyRic aka Josh Cohen, has met his match. ProfitKing is back and he will take care of business over at Raging Bull. HAAAAAAAAAAAA! HAAAAAAAAAAAAA! Go ProfitKing, Go!!!!!!!!!!!!
To: sptnws@lycos.com
From: "PK" <profitking@soon.com> Add to Address Book
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 16:23:11 -0000
Subject: [ITKG] Re: Conversation with IR yesterday...
Dragging things out, but with a purpose...
In conversing with IR the other day, the observed tone has taken a
noticable air of caution over the items said, or not said.
Speculation is out, pure and simple.
The corporate mouthpieces (mouthpiece now because one is out of the
office for a spell) is playing the party line, but more than that,
he is very aware and cognizant of verbage and is going far out of
his way to keep within the boundries that the SEC stipulates in
regards to investor contact.
Also noted is the fact that BR the company CEO too is unaccessable.
Brokers, investors, and others attempting to reach him are now being
funneled through IR. Frustrating as that is, it is an indication
also (good or bad is the question).
Whatever, and however you wish to color it, there is a reason, as I
have noted in past postings, time will tell.
--------------------------------------------------
Alright, now this is speculative (or fantasy as one might call it),
so stop reading now if you do not wish to play that game...
In past posts, I have noted that my belief was that there would be a
one, two punch coming from the intro of the Plastenna, to be
followed by the innovations uncovered via the Electriplast family.
Well, think on it... If (and that is a very small if), if they have
this electriplast deal, why not come out and sell it, or show the
world just what it is capable of...? As a matter of fact, if it can
be sold before the Plastenna, why not go there?
Fair questions, both.
My personal belief is that something very much like that will occur--
no, no. Not that the Electriplast will come out before the
Plastenna, but more that this will be somewhat of a combined play.
The Plastenna first, with the Electriplast coming on its heels.
Coming so much so, that the prospects and the number of innovations
already mentioned in recent press releases will go far toward
propelling ITKG inconjunction with the Plastenna's pending success.
What am I getting at... Well, it was mentioned in both press
releases and in an email from the company's IR team recently...
Integral has become a Plastics company. Antennas are merely a
profitable niche, but the various other innovations will come to the
forefront and each (in their own right) could become a potential
money maker depending on the niche market being addressed and upon
the customers likes, needs, desires and wants...
I have already mentioned one innovation overheard, and during a
recent shopping trip (for a new computer), I ran across some of the
cool toys out there which could make the box under the desk
literally shine. Lit plastic cabling (each in different colors to
indicate use), lit front and side panels. Backlit keyboards.
Granted, these were custom systems costing bucks, but imagine...
What If???
What if Integral is sitting on something like this. Then that beige,
or black box that you call a computer will become lively. If you
were Dell or Compaq, looking to cheaply attract a new generation of
buyers, and something like this fell in your lap, what would you do?
And that is only the computer arena. Think cars, signs, hell
anything that has anything to do with plastic...
This is simply one innovation overheard... There are going on 40
plus others out there, each with provisional patents.
Alright, the thing all want to know is when... When will this
rocket be lit? When will forward momentum become apparent? When
can we stop saying, are we there yet?
I could do like one of the IR guys and simply say we are sooo
cloose. Unfortunately, according to what I've been able to glean
that statement is on tune. Specifics, with as tight lipped as all
at Integral have become, only they can give that answer, but I am of
the feeling that the legal deal is almost finished. 2 to 3 weeks
for all players to come together, and coordinate their prospective
announcements. ((Now, remember, I said this is the speculative
portion...)) Speculative or not, we are close and I have given my
best guess... Timing would not be bad either, with an initial
announcement before labor day, and follow-ups on prospective
electriplast initiatives, the fall quarter could become very
heated...
OK, that was me in my cheerleading hat. Let's see if time proves me
right or wrong...
PK sends...