I agree. It is best for shareholders to contact the company directly for answers to their questions and keep a record of the emails. It doesn't matter if the company responds or not. The record may be useful later to prove that corporate officers are not communicating with shareholders. It would be hard for them to explain why they did not answer any shareholder questions if a complaint is filed for omission of facts or material information. Shareholders have the right to protect their investments here. They should not get treated this way by the board of directors. Hopefully shareholders can amicably resolved this issue.
The only event to wait for now is Annual Report Due Date - 3/31/2015. It is obvious that corporate officers have decided not to disclose anymore material information to the marketplace and company shareholders.
Latteno owns both GTG and Mekonza. GTG was a dormant company but I suspected that unethical insiders would try to use it to divert seafood revenues from Mekonza (this is my assumption). If they are trying to take the company private for little or nothing, my guess is they would start to transfer Mekonza business to another private entity controlled by insiders. If Latteno did put GTG up for sale, it would have been to insiders who are taking over Mekonza contracts. They also would not have paid much for GTG because it was a dormant company. Let us wait until they post the financial reports and update us on the projects. This group plays a lot of games with shareholders and their money.
Shareholders should prepare for a formal complaint here.
Most long term shareholders on this board should have known this. GTG is 100 percent owned by Latteno. The company has not been using the company name Global Trading Group to do business because Mekonza took pver all the business functions of GTG. I don't know why the GTG is showing up on business transactions of Makonza right now ( if the reports are true). Hopefully insiders have not sold GTG and now using it to do Makonza seafood business transactions (fraudulent conveyance) through a reverse merger.
I told you this a thousand times. The stock price is not going to move up much without the company post of the financial statements and updates on its projects. After this weekend, it will be two reports late. Regulators and the OTC Market Group are also not going to allow third parties promotions of the stock unless the company communicate to the marketplace. Reason for this is third parties could take stocks from the OTC board and promote them via emails, spam, message boards, blogs, etc.....without any companies communication to the marketplace. How nice would this be for scam artists to prey on unsuspecting small investors. To protect the public interest, regulators just begin a process to shut companies out of the public markets that stop communications with the marketplace. I also agree with this process. If this company officers were not communicating with the marketplace early 2014, I would not have bought any of its shares.
Shareholders really need to prepare for a complaint against corporate officers of this company.
"The Company signed a letter of intent in January 2013 to acquire 100% of the stock and assets of GTG Inc (“GTG Acquisition”). As of December 31, 2012, the GTG Acquisition has been deemed closed and the financial statements at December, 31, 2012 have been provided to reflect a consolidation of the Company’s and GTG’s operations." Latteno
Latteno already owns GTG. GTG operations were just merged into Mekonza. There has not been any material change here. Now what corporate officers may try is to sell GTG to an insider or insider friendly private investor while they use it to take over shipments of Mekonza. I already discusses this as an insider fraudulent conveyance of the company's assets to a third party. If so, they would transfer business and revenues to privately owned GTG and claim later that Mekkoza is not generating growth in revenues. Shareholders will have a claim against insiders, directors, corporate officers, third parties and GTG if they try this because it will be considered a fraudulent transfer of property and value away from Lattano shareholders. Dealing with Ms Ta and company can be a headache but I think shareholders will be OK in a complaint ( if she tries this).
Shareholders in this case will likely have to go to court to get fair value for their shares. You are right in your assumption that shareholders get fair value for their investments but this group does not seem to show a pattern of giving outside shareholders much of anything. I am trying to get shareholders to understand that this is where it stops. Keep up the research (DD) and prepare for a complaint against corporate officers of Latteno and company ( third parties). If shareholders get this right, they will be able to apply this same strategy to other OTC companies and/or get rules changes for more transparency before companies can access the public markets for funds.
"The Company signed a letter of intent in January 2013 to acquire 100% of the stock and assets of GTG Inc (“GTG Acquisition”). As of December 31, 2012, the GTG Acquisition has been deemed closed and the
financial statements at December, 31, 2012 have been provided to reflect a consolidation of the Company’s and GTG’s operations."
Latteno owns GTG period. GTG is now really Mekonza. Nothing has changed with this unless corporate officers now claim that Latteno does not own GTG and/or it is a private company. This is exactly why shareholders need the financial reports. Corporate officers have too many games going on right now.
So now we are getting some where with our due diligence. Here is another statement of interest. "January 1, 2013: Kaloca goes private. In response to changes in the FSE environment, Kaloca will be transitioning to private company operation and preparing for new a focus on assisting international trading rather than corporate acquisition."
Derek Nguyen of DataLogic is another party of interest here. Notice that most are Vietnamese with a pattern of accessing the public markets and OTC marketplace for cash and then exiting the markets without providing much value to outside shareholders. KCN Capital is another company of interest that owned shares in LATF. It was recently acquired by Sipp Industries. Ms. Ta and company have a lot of games here. She needs to post her reports.
The only way to resolve these issues is to have an investigation into these matter and shareholders to get answers to our questions.
I am glad you still have faith in Ms Ta and company. My guess is that the CEO and COO will not put out anything this week or next. They have took money from the public marketplace to start a medium MJ company and now they want it to be private. The only thing shareholders can do is file a complaint after April 15, 2015, if there are no reports filed by them at that time. Right now, the company officers are not communicating with their shareholders or the marketplace. This will make it very hard for third parties to promote the stock and for price increases. Small shareholders may also hold enough shares of this company to force change at this company.
This is also a learning process, meaning shareholders need to learn how to fight OTC company corporate officers who don't want to do the right thing. Some changes may come from OTC Market Group and some from the SEC on these companies as a result of this case. It was not right for a few insiders to promote a stock to the public to raise funds for their personal benefits. It was also not right for them to cut off all communication with their shareholders and the marketplace after they issued billions of shares to third parties to unwind in the open market (indirect crowd funding). There needs to be changes made here to force these companies to provide more transparency to shareholders and the marketplace about their operations. Lets not sugar coat this anymore, corporate officers of Latteno did an indirect crowd funding to fund several small size MJ projects. They avoided the rules by arrangements with third parties to unwind shares to many small investors. Now they want to shut them (small investors) all out after they have positioned the small companies ( nonprofit and for profits) revenue streams to pay their salaries.
This truck is not going anywhere until the company post the financial statements. They have until the end of the week to post the fourth quarter 2014 report. After that, it will be late on two quarterly reports and shareholders can thank their corporate officers for this.
The article is not going to do anything for this stock price. It is based on old press releases. Also, regulators and market participants are not going to allow this stock to move much higher unless the CEO and the COO start to communicate with the marketplace. Some shareholders are still putting their trust in Ms Ta and company when she is not doing them right at all. She is wasting investors money and time with all this nonsense. If she does not do anything in about 60 days, shareholders should get ready to file a complaint with the SEC and get the case referred to the DA. Third parties trying to promote this stock without any company communication to the marketplace will not help the stock price much.
Under the shareholder derivative concept, we have about 8 days for the quarterly report to be filed and 50 days for the annual report. After the 50 days expire, shareholders should email the board of directors to demand that they force the company subsidiaries update them on all projects and report their financials so this information can be posted to the OTC Market Group disclosure system. It should be noted in the demand that their will be further action if they decide not to disclose this information to include a derivative suit and/or a SEC complaint against the directors and a corporate officer. They will have time to comply before shareholders file the complaints. This is just the procedure that shareholders must follow. At this point, there is no need for a lawyer. A shareholder can file the complaint with or without the assistance of a lawyer. All they need is cause for action, the right jurisdiction and the directors/corporate officers names (defendants).
In reality, the directors and a corporate officer should pay for all this. Shareholders and the company should not have to pay for something they should have did in the first place. I have been this road with some before too ( experience) where the defendant tried to walk off with money and property. Believe me, it can be a big headache for investors who have to deal with people that don't want to disclose important information about their investments and money to them.
"Under traditional corporate business law, shareholders are the owners of a corporation. However, they are not empowered to control the day-to-day operations of the corporation. Instead, shareholders appoint directors, and the directors in turn appoint officers or executives to manage day-to-day operations."
"Derivative suits permit a shareholder to bring an action in the name of the corporation against parties allegedly causing harm to the corporation. If the directors, officers, or employees of the corporation are not willing to file an action, a shareholder may first petition them to proceed. If such petition fails, the shareholder may take it upon himself to bring an action on behalf of the corporation. Any proceeds of a successful action are awarded to the corporation and not to the individual shareholders that initiate the action."
The first part this process is for shareholders to demand that the board post the financial information and update shareholders on the company project. This would occur after the time expires for them to post the reports to the OTC disclosure system ( 45 days for the quarterly and 90 days for the annual). After time ends shareholders of this company need to consider what action to take against company directors and a corporate to force them to post the information.
"A shareholder derivative suit is a lawsuit brought by a shareholder on behalf of a corporation. Generally, a shareholder can only sue on behalf of a corporation when the corporation has a valid cause of action, but has refused to use it. This often happens when the defendant in the suit is someone close to the company, like a director or a corporate officer. If the suit is successful, the proceeds go to the corporation, not to the shareholder who brought the suit. "
The complaint against directors and a corporate officer would be to force them to disclose material information to shareholders and post the financial record to the marketplace. The cause of this action is corporate officers are refusing to disclose information to the marketplace, shareholders, OTC Market Group or regulators. This refusal to disclose information has resulted in the stock being downgraded STOP sign in the OTC system and could ultimately result in it being identified as Caveat Emptor. This could result is reduced liquidity for the stock and decrease in the stock price. Directors and corporate officers also need to cite their reasons for not disclosing information to the marketplace and their shareholders.
There is really no proof of this. Right now the issue is communication with the marketplace and shareholders. Shareholders can also file a derivative suit to force Ms Ta and company to turn over all the books and records. This is their right. The company is also not in violation of any law for not posting the financial statements. It is not required to do so as a OTC nonreporting company. If corporate officers continue on this path, shareholder(s) can file a derivative suit to get the company financial records. I am sure a judge would like to know what they are doing also.
Shareholders really will have to be care how they approach this problem with company officers. A shareholder can file what is known as a derivative suit to force the company to take certain actions that involve shareholder rights. In this case, shareholders can force corporate officers to provide them with the financial and material information. This action normally does not end with money damages to shareholders unless the court find that the officers acted unlawfully or inappropriate to derive personal gains through their actions. The reason is shareholders are in theory suing themselves as owners and corporate officers are normally not held liable for their actions under the law unless they commit criminal offenses.
It is best to let an SEC investigator look into this case first to determine the facts. If he/she finds something, it will refer the case to the DA for the investigation and prosecution of certain officers. The agency could also force officers to pay restitution and turn over personal assets. Both can also trace third party transactions to recovery money from them. Dealing with Ms Ta and company can be very complex for shareholders.
The problem with a class action lawsuit is corporate officers will release the financial reports before the case goes anywhere. They have the reports but they are just refusing to post them. This is like someone owing you money who has the money to give to you. He treats you like a chump until circumstances force him to give your money back. In the end, he tells you that he was going to give the money to you anyway while acting like you have problems for demanding your money and information. It is best to allow an SEC investigator look into this nonsense.
Corporate officers will try to hind behind laws of incorporation which protect their personal assets against liabilities as a result of shareholder law suits. Now if there was a breach of their fiduciary duty or willful misconduct or intentional violation of law, shareholders and the SEC will have a good chance of going after their personal assets (restitution). I am sure corporate officers are aware of this, so they likely put out truthful information. Some transactions may have been a little shady but the information is likely true. At any rate, it is best to let an SEC investigator look into this.
Some shareholders may not like this idea because they fear it will have a negative impact on the stock. But the reality is that regulators and their task force are not going to allow this stock to increase much without any company communication to the marketplace and OTC Market Group. They are also not going to allow third parties to promote this stock at all unless the company make efforts to post the financial reports. These rule are designed to protect potential and existing investors, especially small investors.