Recent

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

Velti Halka Acık Limited Şirket Message Board

jim_201190 2 posts  |  Last Activity: May 13, 2015 10:01 PM Member since: Aug 9, 2011
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Not Velti news

    But I find it interesting new. Was posted today, you can Google it.

    "Mobile multi-channel messaging platform mGage has acquired the Bangalore-based cloud communications company Unicel Technologies for an undisclosed amount. Speaking to Medianama, mGage mentioned that it would integrate Unicel completely, including its employees and technology.

    Unicel provides various cloud based APIs and applications for communications including for two-way messaging, SMS, voice, email and USSD (Unstructured Supplementary Service Data). It also provides various enterprise solutions for mobile banking, sales force automation, supply chain management, location based services, marketing solutions and IT network management etc., other than solutions like MessageOne, AlertOne and TrackOne for mobile network operators."

  • Found a summary of Velti court case on this blog below

    From Google search for "Pleasanton Business & Commercial Law Blog . velti" should have a date of April 30 2015
    Title of blog
    "Shareholders Claim Misrepresentations in Connection with Company's IPO after Stock Price Collapses"

    Key sentence from below :
    "In all three relevant claims, the court held that the plaintiffs FAILED to establish a connection between the receivables and any representations made by the defendants (Velti).

    "A plaintiff alleging fraud must "state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake." Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b). The Ninth Circuit has held that this requires pleading "the time place, and content" of allegedly false or misleading representations, along with the "circumstances indicating falseness" or the "manner in which the representations at issue were false and misleading." Rieckborn at 9, quoting In re GlenFed Inc. Sec. Litig., 42 F.3d 1541, 1547-48 (9th Cir. 1994). In all three relevant claims, the court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a connection between the receivables and any representations made by the defendants.