=That's all you have is conjecture.
I have backed up what I say with the supporting documentation... ad nauseam. Right, maria?
= to trade on OTC does not require any of SEC filing requirements
How many times have we proven to you this is a lie? I still say they didn't give you enough money for your traumatic brain injury. It is their class of SEC registration that makes them required to file and not whether or not they are on a regulated exchange. You keep confusing the fact that the OTC Pink does not require quarterly filings like a regulated exchange has nothing to do with the separate duty of ABAT to file with the SEC based on their registration type.
therealfacts... you are the ONLY one left who still believes that. I even proved it to Sutter and he finally admitted the attorneys he talked to confirmed it. The clear evidence is showing you all of the companies on the OTC that got revoked for being delinquent in their filings. How come if just being on the OTC meant they were no longer required to file?
Come up with some new material and not just new aliases to spew the same old nonsense.
LMAO! therealfacts, justice, logic, rwmmail, goalis100000 etc etc made up yet ANOTHER alias. You say the same things that are untrue with each one. You aren't fooling anybody.
= Nasdaq forced and delisted ABAT on basis of some allegations
You are the ONLY one that says that no matter which alias it is. ABAT was delisted from NASDAQ for failure to file a REQUIRED quarterly report. You have been shown this proof many times.
=I will consider SEC irresponsible, if they will go ahead and revoke the registration and I don't see any reason of doing that. (0 % chance
They have been dark for three years. The SEC has bent over backwards to NOT revoke their registration. Especially with all the other proven violations like failure to disclose related party transactions and failure to disclose many 8-K triggering events.
Why don't you just stick to one ID?
Just what point are you trying to make? You said I didn't know what I was talking about yet have done nothing to refute my original premise you called me out on.
Once more, I know EOS well. For years they have made outrageous claims and have never been able to follow through on them. If you want to believe they have a zinc-air battery that has a 10,000 cycle life and costs $160/kWh... good for you. Those of us who DO know what we are talking about know this is not true.
Why? Because they are delusional fools and conmen.
Why do you think Foo needs to do ANYTHING? If he does nothing until the SEC revokes the registration, he owns 100% of the company. Why on earth would he pay a single penny to those who sued him and exposed him for what he is? He will do nothing. He already pulled the cash out of his NY property. He has zero ties to the US anymore. Good riddance to him... and to your money.
=This was from a 3rd party article written ABOUT EOS, not what they said themselves!
LMAO! IT WAS FROM THEIR OWN WEBSITE!
=There are a variety of technologies being worked on by many companies.
Obviously. The line is blurring between batteries, fuel cells, supercapacitors etc. Anytime you see the word "hybrid" in these descriptions, you are talking about newer technologies that are combining features of multiple chemistries and product segments.
It still goes back to my point you tried to say I was wrong about. The hydrogen fuel cell is CURRENTLY being utilized on an ever-increasing large-scale and there are production vehicles being released from many manufacturers in the near future. The chemistries you are talking about are many more years down the road.
At any rate... a one-trick pony with just lithium-ion batteries that spends next to nothing on R&D (ABAT) will never do more than produce some low-margin commodity batteries while the upcoming technologies make them obsolete.
With ABAT it never was about the Chinese operating subsidiaries. It is about shares in the Delaware holding corporation which have no value other than conning the ignorant into thinking it gives them ownership in assets in China... which it does NOT.
=Even though you call yourself a FACTS GUY, this is all SPECULATION that you have written.
It isn't speculation... here is the EXACT passage from multiple filings:
"1.The licensee pays for FAB Kiosk and other equipment and fixtures while the licensor (FAB Media) is responsible for the complete set-up of each FAB outlet from the location selection to construction or conversion, remodeling and equipment installation.
2.All FAB outlets will be owned by the licensee, but supervised by a designated management company - Beijing Huzhong Culture Co., Ltd ("Huzhong Culture") in accordance with FAB's distinctive business formats.
3.FAB kiosks are linked to the server station through the internet to remain updated. Such maintenances are operated by Huzhong Culture."
FAB controls "the complete set-up of each FAB outlet from the location selection to construction or conversion, remodeling and equipment installation."
They should obviously know where each kiosk is as they have the sole authority for site selection, installation and servicing. The EXACT responsibilities are CLEARLY stated in their own filings.
Once more... this is not opinion or assumption. This is verifiable fact from their own filings. You are simply wrong and it is proven.
=I think you're lying that you bought ahead of the Carnes articles, unless you too knew about the bond in advance.
Wrong again. I have shown my post from another board of when and why I shorted FAB. It was before Carnes uttered a word on them. Running out of room, but I will pull up the history AGAIN if you really want it. It is irrelevant to the pertinent facts, but the documentation has been shown.
=To me, fundamentals are most important and SEC filings are just formalities, but necessary to confirm fundamentals
You can't get more contradictory than that. The ridiculous "internal audit" they put out a year ago was not just fantasy... it was blatant lies with what we know from other sources. Heck, the numbers they gave didn't even add up to the totals they supplied. Look no further than Dongguan being classified as Construction in Progress when it was completed in 2011 according to a previous ABAT disclosure.
You keep talking about fundamentals and book value yet all your numbers are three years old when the battery sector got WAY overbuilt and nobody was making money in China. You think ABAT had the only battery lines that were finished in that time period? Cash was flowing in China and there was limited barrier to entry. Hundreds if not thousands of companies bought the production machines and became "battery manufacturers". Read the management analysis sections of the companies that DO file to see exactly what happened. They all said the same thing in that they had to sell at or near cost to have any market share at all. How do you equate that to ABAT claiming to have 38% margins? How come ABAT said they had to "restructure" in 2013 and what do you think that means? How much equity was promised in order to get enough cash to keep their doors open?
I don't think you are really this gullible and stupid. You could be forgiven for that. You are a CONMAN. You keep trying to sucker in new people with things you know for a fact to be lies. Like over 20M naked shorts when you know they would be on the Reg SHO Threshold List if this were true.
Enjoy your ill-gotten gains now, but it will catch up to you someday.
=Clearly u didn't look at the EOS site.
LMFAO!!!!! I almost asked you if you were affiliated with EOS! They have been scamming investors for years. Believe me... I am VERY familiar with EOS and know people that fell for their tall tales and lack of follow-through.
Isn't the current EOS hype for an aqueous battery and not for zinc-air? Let's see....
"Eos’ novel, proprietary Znyth™ technology—the first low-cost, long-life, inherently safe, energy dense, and highly efficient aqueous battery."
Yup. You don't know what you are talking about if you think their Zynth technology is a zinc-air battery. I remember when EOS was talking about a lithium-air battery and then switched to zinc-air as that was the latest buzz-word to attract investors. Are they really still claiming 30 year lifetimes for zinc-air batteries when I don't believe anybody else has gone past 500 cycles for proven products and 2000 cycles for experimental chemistries?
Looking for a further explanation of their battery on their website we see:
"Eos has developed and is now commercializing a revolutionary rechargeable zinc hybrid cathode battery technology we call Znyth™."
What they have appears to be similar to the ALTI hybrid in that it is part battery, part supercapacitor. The ALTI chemistry is lithium-titanate. EOS is using zinc, but it is NOT a zinc-air battery!
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since in years past EOS talked about zinc-air-batteries, but you can verify on their website now that their current technology being marketed is NOT zinc-air... it is an aqueous battery they are calling a "zinc hybrid cathode battery".
I have to laugh because you called me out in a subject area where I really do know what I am talking about. Pick something else and you have a better chance to trip me up.
=Did you notice the flash crash during the trading Friday? This is a short seller attempt to take out stop losses.
LMAO... still with the conspiracies? Gee, or it could be somebody who watched it drop over 30% from the high decided to get out and forgot to set a limit.
Let's see your proof it was a "short seller" and not a long who watched too many pump & dumps and wasn't going to ride it all the way back down this time.
Be careful what you wish for, twisty. The lawsuit is going to end and that means the SEC has no more reason to shirk their responsibility to hold ABAT accountable.
1. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-Q Q3 2011
2. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-K 2011
3. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-Q Q1 2012
4. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-Q Q2 2012
5. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-Q Q3 2012
6. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-K 2012
7. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-Q Q1 2013
8. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-Q Q2 2013
9. Failure to file REQUIRED 10-Q Q3 2013
10. Failure to file REQUIRED 8-Ks announcing 3 different changes to CFO
11. Failure to file REQUIRED 8-K announcing change of CEO
12. Failure to file REQUIRED 8-K announcing several changes to BOD.
13. Failure to file REQUIRED disclosure of related party transactions with CLTT
14. Giving out information to select individuals through non Reg FD compliant means
15. Paid promotion while being dark
If you forget every aspect of the lawsuit, there is plenty to suspend/revoke trading of ABAT while an SEC investigation of all the other well-supported allegations takes place. ABAT was allowed to slink away in civil court by saying their assets were untouchable in the PRC, but the SEC will act in the public interest.
=FAB should know automatically where all the Kiosks are.
Of course they should know where all kiosks are. They picked out the location. They installed them. They relocated every one that was moved. They have complete control over all content and all updating of them. The real question is how incompetent must a company be to NOT have this list readily available. For a company that makes money off of the membership cards and content downloads, it is ludicrous to think they would not be promoting the locations where people can go to utilize the kiosks.
=reinforcing the fact you fell for the Carnes Scam
Are you ready yet to answer the question how I fell for the "Carnes scam" when I shorted them before Carnes said a word about them?
=why have two Chinese companies paid FAB 4M to advertise on those non-existent Kiosks?
Zhang had clear motive to make quotas in order to have preferred share tranches converted to common. Funny how they met every quota, but can't show the kiosks that supposedly generated all this revenue. Would you pay $4M to advertise on kiosks without receiving a list of their locations? I sure wouldn't and I don't know of a single savvy businessperson that would. Nothing adds up. No kiosk location list means the revenue numbers are probably made up by Zhang to make quotas to get the preferred shares converted.
You can keep trying to downplay the kiosks, but that is the key to all credibility. Your flailing is comical, but you're running out of time. Produce some answers and begin trading or go dark, get delisted and begin trading. One way or another... game over. No more hiding and taking innocent investor's money hostage.
Admit a problem, confront it and eventually be forgiven. Mess with people's ability to use their own money and you lose. People will take any loss to finally be done with these charlatans. The extended halt was a major mistake and there is no way to justify it.
=Rechargeable zinc/air batteries will revolutionize the World
There is some progress there, but too many unresolved issues for the foreseeable future.
=They have a few finicky requirements
That is a rather generous way of putting it. Universities and Laboratories are always claiming to have some new breakthrough, but until you see this extend to public companies that can make a cogent argument for future use, it is still just an interesting concept.
They are making some progress, but I don't believe anybody is getting past 500 recharge cycles. They could be adequate for consumer items, but that would tend to eliminate them for EVs and for grid storage. I suppose if they could get energy density up, the low cycle life could be minimized, but it is going to be a hard sell to tell someone your battery will last less than a year and a half with daily cycling.
Hyundai has a fuel cell vehicle coming out soon and Honda and Toyota have vehicles being released next year. Once you find a production vehicle release date with zinc/air batteries then come and tell me I don't know what I am talking about.
=CBEH has a huge drop almost everyday and usually ends up at break even or a few pennies higher by the close...
That is one of Sutter's current scams. CBEH doesn't have a single market maker. They are what is called an "Unsolicited Quotation" stock. That means it is 100X easier to manipulate than a stock with market makers. Two people or one person with two accounts can make the price whatever they want there.
=But who knows?
Exactly. It stayed strong enough that I didn't touch it. Short interest has gone from 2M to 18M (20% of float). I think they are getting squeezed now. This huge volume makes me think they might even get on the Reg SHO Threshold List. Shorts could be doubling and tripling down and this crazy volume makes me think the shares don't exist to borrow. The Puts didn't look real attractive to me. I'll have to go out a few more months and see if there is anything that entices me.
After checking the short interest I think I will try some speculative Puts when I think they have topped, but stay away from shorting.
What do you think PLUG is going to do? I shorted at $8.03 and got stopped out when I set a stop for $8.01 when they went down to $7.76. do I short at the close or wait to see if they still have legs on Monday? The volume is incredible so I really thought there would be profit-taking going into the weekend by the momentum traders.
• Feb 24, 2014 4:57 PM
"I can see .75 printing this week and a Friday close in the .80s. We'll see."
I was off a week. Still not the volume. No buyers except for the obligatory small buys right after a sale to give the illusion the price is higher. Yawn.
Now everybody is looking at each other waiting to pull the trigger before they lose all their paper profits. This is the part I like best. You have already seen how quickly it will go back to the .40s. Who will wait too long and get promoted to loyal bagholder of the future?
altaga... if you are still here after it comes all the way back down I am never going to let you forget it. Too danged funny. You had a double after you bought it when it went to .55 and followed it all the way back to .27. Now you followed it from over a buck this far down. Won't you ever learn?
=The MM screwed a bunch of people today
Care to elaborate? Are you saying they filled orders in a manner other than they were submitted? That is serious. I think you should contact the SEC and the FBI immediately with your documentation showing this.
Of course the other possibility is you are clueless. I wonder....
=But in the world of FAB trading we will need to go with the best information we have when trading starts soon
Yup. The best information we have is the company verified some of the allegations and has been unable to provide any documentation refuting other allegations. Doesn't look good.
=My trading will be based on the assumption that Carnes is guilty as charged in the BCSC Silvercorp Case
LMAO! Perhaps the university you teach at will allow you to audit a Logic course. You do understand that Carnes being convicted of fraud, being an axe-murderer and kicking puppy dogs PLUS the findings of FAB being a fraud are not mutually exclusive.
You are either really dense or your target audience is somewhere between Neanderthal and Cro-Magnons.
If Carnes has done improper things in the Silvercorp case, he will justifiably be taken down a notch or two. That has absolutely nothing to do with either Silvercorp or FAB shares. Either allegations made against both companies can be confirmed or not.
Your thought process is interesting. You assume Carnes is guilty, but I'll bet you have not even researched the allegations against him. You assume FAB is innocent of everything yet you have seen documented evidence confirming some allegations and the company has been unable to produce documents that would refute other allegations even though the material should have been readily available to any company with a minimal level of competence. As for myself... my world is not so black and white. Carnes is neither an angel or the devil. FAB is neither a complete fraud or corporate citizen of the year candidate. Some things are verifiable and others are not. You would be better served to keep an open mind instead of prejudicing your research based on "motives" of the reporter, but hey... whatever works for you.