Mon, Dec 29, 2014, 10:06 AM EST - U.S. Markets close in 5 hrs 54 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

France T Message Board

bass9189 585 posts  |  Last Activity: 9 hours ago Member since: Aug 20, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Bass....

    by diamond.daze 18 hours ago

    "Also press the donate button without filling in your personal information." This is only for the CannabeeSweet site. MMJOC takes donations by mail or you will have to become a member. My take: MMJOC is for low income serious ill patients who can't afford to pay high prices for treatment. Some of these patients have HIV, AIDS or cancer. I don#$%$ mission is important to Latteno's bottom line.

  • Reply to

    Bass....

    by diamond.daze 18 hours ago

    The site give you an address to make donations. MMJOC is nonprofit with a mission to service the disenfranchised. It is a legit site. Also press the donate button without filling in your personal information. A box will show asking for your credit card information. I don't know if you want to try it but you can give out your credit information for a test. In any case, you can make donations by mail through the site. You would also have to be a MEMBER to receive any MJ products.

    I also really think this is more a management problem of a start up company. Ms. Ta's intention was to integrate all the sites under Rx Harvest Collective. In the meantime, the LT 512 vendor saw an opportunity to - launch and market - his product through the Rx Harvest site. This change in direction caused much confusion for shareholders and patients. Notice that he does not even want her to promote Cannabeesweets or MMJOC on the Rx Harvest site. As a result, the company marketing dollars are going towards his product. Who does he see as potential costumers: Patients, shareholders, Yahoo posters and people who visit the Latteno sites.

    Story: There was a person who sold MJ to many years ago. In the beginning he sold to anyone. After he got enough clients and plenty of money, he decided to only sell to a few select clients he knew well and trusted to avoid any risk of being caught and arrested.

  • bass9189 bass9189 10 hours ago Flag

    Internet Troll Alert!

  • Reply to

    Was a bit late for

    by diamond.daze Dec 26, 2014 7:17 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 21 hours ago Flag

    DD that is not the point here. He is not a member of any Rx Harvest Collective. The card the first step in verification process. The point is that you had no reason to order MJ products through your friend. You don't see the problem here. The company cannot have out of state shareholders using their friends to buy MJ products from its sites. Now you are advertising this on Yahoo.*

    The websites are legit too. Ms. Ta created much confusion for patients and shareholders when she tried to integrate the sites under Rx Harvest Collective. The L-512 vendor did not help when he basically took control of the main Latteno and Rx Harvest sites. You should know by now that Ms. Ta and company plays a lot of head games with shareholders.

    "The Company is currently completing its Q3 reporting and will file shortly." She likely already gave the report to some shareholders and now she is playing this game to force some to sell their shares ( her perceived problem shareholders).

    * I can see why the company stop communicating with posters on this message board. Some are creating big problems. Some potential legal problems for corporate officers and the company. This is also a start up unit, it going not be perfect. Ms Ta is not going to be perfect in developing and operating it. It is what it is.

  • Reply to

    Was a bit late for

    by diamond.daze Dec 26, 2014 7:17 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 28, 2014 5:48 AM Flag

    In addition, I don't think the company is interested in servicing too many new or unknown patients through MMJOC. That nonprofit sales are mostly high quality MJ flowers to serious ill patients. Commonsense tells me they really don't want to disclose it location to outsiders. Also, DD through his friend did not have any reason to order from MMJOC. I am sure the company can obtain and distribute the flowers to legit patients.

    It also sounds like the company was overwhelmed with a flood of shareholder and patient questions. Like most small companies, it stopped responding to all the inquiries because of lack of resources and staff. There was also a problem with people using the company email responses to spread negative rumors about company. I am sure this placed in management's decision to responding to these inquiries.

    Place yourself in Ms, Ta shoes, she is operating a business that is not really legal on the Fed level and all of a sudden she has all these shareholders calling, investigating and emailing her about the MJ unit. I am sure she got little paranoid here. I would have.

  • Reply to

    Was a bit late for

    by diamond.daze Dec 26, 2014 7:17 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 28, 2014 4:39 AM Flag

    Kyle, the the company stated that all the phone numbers were combined under Rx Harvest. If you notice CannabeeSweets, MMJOC and Rx Harvest all have the same number. The company is only responding to certain clients and patients. I also do not have any information about patients complaining about it being closed down. The COO, Ms. Ta, did not do a good job of integrating any of the sites into Rx Harvest. It was a management issue that caused confusion for everyone, patients and shareholders.

    It also does make any sense for her to close down MMJOC while keeping the website active for donations. I think she is still open but only servicing select patients or donors. I also called months ago and someone did picked up the phone. And the company responded to my emails. The problem occurred when it announced that it would integrate all the sites and phone numbers under Rx Harvest.

    The point I made to DD is that his friend needs more than a card to order from the sites. He would have to be a member first. He wrote as though all patients need is a card to order but this is not true. As I said before, the COO has caused a lot of confusion for everyone here. This is the problem with this company.

  • Reply to

    Was a bit late for

    by diamond.daze Dec 26, 2014 7:17 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 7:57 PM Flag

    Finally, your friend is not a member of Cannabee Sweets or MMJOC. He needs more than a card to order from the sites. Sounds like they rejected application and information.

    [After you become our membership, we will send you an email with your Cannabee Sweets ID.
    Fill out the form above with your Cannabee Sweets ID. The address where you will receive our delivery. The phone number which you can answer to verify with our deliverer. Date and time you want to deliver.
    Fill out your order items name, and quantity in the Order Items Box. Make sure it meets our policy "Minimum Order $35 for Delivery"
    Click on Submit.
    Donate the same amount as your order.
    Our deliverer will contact you as soon as we received your donation in our PayPal account to confirm the delivery.]

  • Reply to

    Was a bit late for

    by diamond.daze Dec 26, 2014 7:17 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 7:46 PM Flag

    You also may want to be careful posting: "I had card holders try and order on line." This is totally illegal under CA state law and federal law. The company may think he is trying to get MJ products to resale to someone else. I am sure he tried to ordered from more than one or two places. The question is why are you trying to get a card member to order MJ products from multiple sites. He got red flagged for more than one reason. He is also not a member of a Rx Harvest Collective.

  • Reply to

    Was a bit late for

    by diamond.daze Dec 26, 2014 7:17 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 7:27 PM Flag

    The company is just not going to issue your friend MJ products without verifying his information. Any red flags and he will not get his order. There is a problem with his information.**

    [Members must be at least 18 years or older and possess a valid state issued ID (some instances where minors are able to obtain membership along with parental consent)
    Members must have valid physician’s recommendation on file with the collective at all times and agree that recommendations must be fully verified by and authorized agent of the collective before any medicine may be provided
    Members may not exchange money, share money or split payments for obtaining medication or any other purpose at any time
    **Members agree and understand that the collective’s staff and management reserve the right to refuse service to anyone at any time
    Members understand and agree that maintaining safety, membership rules and adherence to the law are their collective responsibility
    Members understand and agree that while medical cannabis has been authorized by both the people of the State of California and its legislature, and consistently upheld by all California courts, the Federal Government persists in enforcing portions of the Controlled Substances Act, which makes the possession and use of medical cannabis a federal crime and possible prosecution
    Members agree to filling out the collective’s membership agreement upon signing up]

  • Reply to

    Was a bit late for

    by diamond.daze Dec 26, 2014 7:17 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 7:08 PM Flag

    "I had card holders try and order on line through Cannabeesweet as well as MMJOC." Question: Is your friend a CA, Orange County resident and patient. Rx Harvest is the main company. CannabeeSweets and MMJOC operate under it. Your friend may have a problem with information or the company may think he is investigating something. Most of the MJ products are for serious ill people and the company verifies all information and doctors recommendations. I am willing to bet there is a problem with your friends information.

    Just because he had a problem does not mean they are not open to do business with legit CA patients. Your assumption is my friend had a problem ordering MJ products, therefore the MJ units must not be operational. This is a false conclusion. The problem may be in verifying your friend's information and they may not trust the doctor. The company must be able to verify all his information before it can complete an MJ order. This is not the case with the pills.

    "Our mission at MMJ OC is to provide patients with safe and reliable access to alternative forms of medicine. We operate non-profit in the state of California, County of Orange." Try making a donation through MMJOC, this will tell you if it is operational. If it is not, the website will reject your donation.

  • Reply to

    Was a bit late for

    by diamond.daze Dec 26, 2014 7:17 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 3:25 PM Flag

    I told you the company is legit. I inquired into this company months ago and I don't regulators would let it continue to operate the websites and trade on the open market if the company was not legit. The corporate officers just decided to exercise their option not to report 3Q and this allowed our internet trolls to post more slanted negative stories about the company. This is why it is important for investors to do their due diligence on companies before buying or selling stocks. The company checks out.

    The MJ unit operates mostly in the CA patient markets. Shareholders may not see much of a report from that unit until the company can determine the how to report it. CA law will only allow the MJ unit to operate as nonprofits, therefore management has to be very careful in making reference to any for profit operations. I think the best option is to separate the nonprofit business and let it take a equity position in the for profit corp., Latteno. Since this is a holding company, the nonprofit and for profit corporations are likely already separate but the trick is how to report a consolidated report without violating CA state law.

  • bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 2:54 PM Flag

    The company still owns the brand name Teixeira and the company name Global Milk Ltd. but it is no longer producing and marketing the products due to a noncompetitive contract dispute with the previous owner. The previous owner sold them the company and then started competing with them in the same market. There was a eventual management change and name change to Latteno (the holding company) with a new focus on seafood and MJ products. The company's business model still incorporates milk and coffee but currently it is not in those markets.

  • Reply to

    Newbies to PINKS

    by hyborianwar Dec 23, 2014 10:40 AM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 10:33 AM Flag

    Where are our little internet trolls today? hyborianwar who allegedly wrote a complaint to FINRA about a subject that he knows nothing about. Now he wants to be in bed with BURM8 another famous internet troll. Both are playing the same game to discredit others and disrupt on message boards. Show us the complaint hybor boy and stop acting like a class clown. I did not ask you about a cleaning crew. You really did not know the rules of or anything about naked shorting , this why you went back again to the simpleton response about a cleaning crew. This is likely all you know about this company and market.

    What do you really discuss here...nothing. You troll!

  • Reply to

    Newbies to PINKS

    by hyborianwar Dec 23, 2014 10:40 AM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 8:28 AM Flag

    Troll

  • Reply to

    .0007

    by hyborianwar Dec 26, 2014 4:59 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 12:59 AM Flag

    Edit above post should read:Now, here are some things you can file a complain against MM for:

  • Reply to

    .0007

    by hyborianwar Dec 26, 2014 4:59 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 12:41 AM Flag

    "Further, the SEC stated that bona fide market making does not include transactions
    whereby a market maker enters into an arrangement with another broker-dealer or
    customer in an attempt to use the market maker’s exception for the purpose of
    avoiding compliance with the locate requirement by the other broker-dealer or
    customer.9 For example, to the extent that a member engages in short selling activity
    under the pretext of market maker status to establish short positions at the direction of
    customers who would otherwise not be able to comply with the locate requirements,
    such activity would not constitute bona fide market making activity and, thus, not be
    exempt from the locate requirements of Regulation SHO"

    This means that insiders cannot enter in an agreement with the MM to avoid the rules. Regulators are continuously monitor the markets for these activities. If your complaint correctly related to this, regulators would investigate and shut them down. Violators you get away with breaking the rules because people don't know how to file a complaint against them.

  • Reply to

    .0007

    by hyborianwar Dec 26, 2014 4:59 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 12:31 AM Flag

    Now here are some thing you have file a complain against MM for: "The SEC indicated that bona fide market making does not include activity that is related to speculative selling strategies or investment
    purposes of the broker-dealer and is disproportionate to the usual market making
    patterns or practices of the broker-dealer in that security.6 Likewise, where a market
    maker posts continually at or near the best offer, but does not also post at or near the
    best bid, the market maker’s activities would not generally qualify as bona fide market
    making for purposes of the exception.7 Moreover, a market maker that continually
    executes short sales away from its posted quotes would generally not be able to rely on
    the bona fide market making exception."

    You likely did not claim any of this in your complaint. If so, regulators would have been forced to deal with the issue. The MM posting .0007 quote below the best bid price does not qualify as a bona fide market making activities. FINRA can find him/her in violation of the rules while trying to hide their activities behind the exemptions. This is one example.

  • Reply to

    .0007

    by hyborianwar Dec 26, 2014 4:59 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 27, 2014 12:02 AM Flag

    Well, this is your behavior pattern when someone exposes you or proves you wrong. Regulators would be asking for problems responding to your complaint. If they don't give you the answer you're looking, you will likely start to post negative comments about them on this board. You wrote a complaint about MM naked shorting this stock to regulators and expected a response. I just gave you the answer and you still don't get it.

    Now you want to associate with another known internet troll, BUMR8. You two should go fishing together, so BUMR can throw you overboard. Maybe then you will understand him. BUMR only cares about BUMR and trolling the internet to find more victims.

  • Reply to

    .0007

    by hyborianwar Dec 26, 2014 4:59 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 26, 2014 10:20 PM Flag

    I also don't need you to substitute your complaint about naked shorting for my opinion on the subject as it relates to this stock. I am perfectly capable of filing a complaint with FINRA or any other agency about naked shorting of stocks. You have lost your mind here. The issue is you did not know what you were talking about, this why you got zero response from regulators. The MM has certain naked short exemptions when he is trying to make a bona fide market for the shares. You can ask regulators to look into his/her trading but I doubt they will find much because the MMs are profession traders with a right to do this. They know the rules. My discussion was about non market makers who may have used off shore trading platforms to trade this stock. It also had more elements to it than naked shorting of this stock. Legit MMs may have had a hard time with them too.

  • Reply to

    .0007

    by hyborianwar Dec 26, 2014 4:59 PM
    bass9189 bass9189 Dec 26, 2014 9:55 PM Flag

    You are talking BS. The stock closed up and you post a thread claiming the support level is much lower. This was not even a normal reaction for a stock that jump 11 percent on close. You really remind of a class clown who makes jokes when he does not know the answer to something. Show us your compliant to regulators concerning naked shorting of this stock. The issue is important because you are implying that shareholders should not to ask questions about trading of this stock. Why?

    Now you are posting the same nonsense that would have brought reason for your complaint. Why? You have also not filed a proper complaint about the trading of this stock. You just stated that to have small investors feel like you did it and they don't need to inquire about it anymore. This way you can keep on with the cleaning crew and lower price posts.

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.