Slashdot Mirror


Infinium Tries 'Phantom' Name Change

simoniker writes "Former Infinium Phantom 'console' developer and current Lapboard accessory creator Infinium Labs has revealed multiple new details in financial filings, including the fact that it's changing company name to Phantom Entertainment, as long as shareholders approve. But with the SEC prosecuting former CEO Timothy Roberts, 'accumulated losses since inception of $69,331,794', and _another_ former CEO, Kevin Bachus, now suing the company for back pay, will the company ever release a product?"

83 comments

  1. What I like to find out is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who's been bankrolling these ... bottom feeders, because I got a couple of bridges and transmission towers to sell.

    1. Re:What I like to find out is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I like to find out is...

      Brian, is that you?

  2. Will the company ever release a product? by BSDevil · · Score: 5, Funny

    No.

    Next question?

    --
    Cue The Sun...
    1. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by kalphegor · · Score: 5, Funny

      When can I play Duke Nukem Forever on Phantom?

    2. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by Propaganda13 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Only the Phantom knows.

    3. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by iced_773 · · Score: 5, Funny


      Can I play it while ascending a space elevator powered by cold fusion, or will it cause the elevator's quantum computer to crash?

    4. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by creepynut · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, but it's been announced that Windows Vista will be released for the Phantom. Unfortunately, you'll need to wait for it to be released before you can play your copy of Duke Nukem Forever.

    5. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by Isldeur · · Score: 4, Funny

      No.

      Next question?


      Untrue sir. I have one. I've been playing Duke Nukem Forever on it (and with my HURD kernel nontheless) all afternoon!

    6. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by Idolatre · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes that's a known issue. A workaround is to fly up there with your flying car instead.

    7. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by pseudochaotic · · Score: 3, Funny

      And let me guess, you've been playing this all afternoon with your girlfriend...

      No, no, that's entirely too outlandish.

      --
      And the l33t shall inherit the 34r7h.
    8. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by Y0tsuya · · Score: 1

      I'd put it at about the same time we're visited by the four horsemen, give and take a few years.

    9. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by dalleboy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Didn't you get the email? They are bundled.

    10. Re:Will the company ever release a product? by iced_773 · · Score: 1


      And the l33t shall inherit the 34r7h

      And teh jox shall inherit teh wind. Duuude, aww-summm!!!

  3. WTF? Who are the suckers? by randyest · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What I really want is a list of the names of those who loaned that shyster $70 million! Man that'd be a valuable list. :)

    A separate SEC filing released on May 22nd has updated those interested on Infinium's parlous state of accounts: "Our loss from operations for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 was $2,752,327. Our loss from operations for the year ended December 31, 2005 was $29,814,606. At March 31, 2006, we had a working capital deficit of $11,523,869 and accumulated losses since inception of $69,331,794. In their report on our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2005, our independent auditors expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern."

    --
    everything in moderation
  4. Wow. by MBCook · · Score: 4, Informative
    They've spent $70 million dollars. Wow.

    The worst part is the console. I remember a couple of years ago when the phantom was relatively new they showed off the console and some PC ports and the thing seemed at least somewhat real. At this point, they seem to have less of a console than ever. Even if they released the console they originally promised, it would be underpowered. Here are the specs:

    CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2500+
    Video card: nVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 Ultra, with 128MB RAM
    RAM: 256MB
    Hard drive: 80GB "content cache"

    The HDD is good and the RAM is comparable to the 360. The graphics card is very outdated (the Wii is probably more advanced), and the CPU at 1.8 GHz doesn't quite compare with triple 3.2 GHz cores of a 360.

    And they'd probably have to charge PS3 type prices just to try to stay afloat, and I think we all know how well they'd do with those prices.

    Amazing that some investors are just this stupid. At this point, how could they EVER make that money back? Even if they sold that keyboard for $200 and it was pure profit, they'd have to sell 350,000 of 'em and they'll never do that (especially at that price).

    It's like watching Duke Nukem Forever's development, only more absurd.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    1. Re:Wow. by Traiklin · · Score: 1

      hell, the Wii over powers the Phantom at this point.

      and the Phantom was supposed to be a Media Center PC that could play PC games.

      I think they realized and just forgot to mention that it would be impossable to do. The system would be out of date within 2 years and they would have to constently re-write firmware to fit with the new cards, ram ect.
      then of course you have the OS for the system, if it's supposed to run PC games they would have to use Windows for full compatability right? cause not to many people would be pleased to spend $50 on a game, bring it home only to find out they can't install it cause they have a different OS type (even with Wine and other Linux apps it still takes time for them to make it compatable) so naturally they have to Lisence Windows from microsoft. They probably said No to that and then the Phantom died but the money kept rolling on in.

      I was looking forward to it to, To bad because of this I won't buy anything from them.

    2. Re:Wow. by kfg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      a couple of years ago when the phantom was relatively new they showed off the console and some PC ports and the thing seemed at least somewhat real.

      And demonstrated that they had invested nearly several hundred of those $70 million on something other than coke and hookers.

      You're still talking like the console was ever supposed to be a real product. The object you bring up that was displayed is something called "bait." Myself I prefer to dry fly fish for trout on the surface rather than bait fish for suckers feeding in the muck on the bottom.

      KFG

    3. Re:Wow. by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 1
      And demonstrated that they had invested nearly several hundred of those $70 million on something other than coke and hookers.

      Shouldn't that be 'Coke and dogs' ?

    4. Re:Wow. by kfg · · Score: 1

      >>. . . coke and hookers.
      >>
      >Shouldn't that be 'Coke and dogs' ?

      Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

      KFG

  5. The answer: by advance512 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    No.

  6. Calling it 'phantom' is too subtle by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why they don't just rename the company "Vapor', will save a lot of blog discussions....

    1. Re:Calling it 'phantom' is too subtle by bagsc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The Board of Directors believes that the name change would be in the best interests of the Company because the new name better reflects the long-term growth strategy of the Company."

      Seems pretty straightforward: Phantom growth strategy.

      --
      http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    2. Re:Calling it 'phantom' is too subtle by tb3 · · Score: 1

      At this point, they could call the company 'Murray' and they wouldn't be able to fool anyone. $62 Million in the hole! Wow!

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

    3. Re:Calling it 'phantom' is too subtle by Chonine · · Score: 1

      ...Bullshit Inc.?

  7. Infinitum? by WoLpH · · Score: 4, Funny

    They should change "Infinium" to "Ad infinitum" delay the release till infinity...

  8. STOP THE PRESSES!!!@#! by th0mas.sixbit.org · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Everyone, hold onto what you're doing for a second, I have a joke to make, and I daresay I don't think anyone else's going to think of it - I'm just that clever.

    "The answer is no, the company won't release a product"

    --
    twitter.com/gravitronic
  9. T-shirts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remeber these guys selling Phantom t-shirts a few years back, any idea if they are still available?

    1. Re:T-shirts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why would you buy a phantom t-shirt!?!?!

  10. Re:WTF? Who are the suckers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets get their names! Anybody who funded this deserves only one name, "Moron."

    $69 mill. from Morons. Oh, jeez, let me think what I can come up with, how about perpetual motion, cold fusion in your kitchen!

    Anybody who funded this, anybody who bought into some VC who funded this, should be tearing their clothes with shame. Or maybe not. You bought it, you eat it. Enjoy.

  11. Nice Try Infinium... by agentads · · Score: 1

    Although the company name is now illusive, elusive, and delusive ( http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=phantom ), that $69 million of debts is still quite real.

    1. Re:Nice Try Infinium... by grammar+fascist · · Score: 1

      ...that $69 million of debts is still quite real.

      Nah. They'll just declare bankruptcy and be done with it. The scammers involved can easily find ways to insulate themselves from any repercussions.

      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
  12. Paraphrasing the Bard... by Stormwatch · · Score: 3, Funny

    "What's in a name? That which we call a phantom
    By any other word would smell as fishy."

    1. Re:Paraphrasing the Bard... by TheDreadSlashdotterD · · Score: 3, Funny

      "That is not dead which can eternal lie,
      But with strange aeons even the Phantom may die."

      --
      I have nothing to say.
  13. Crashed Enzo by toy4two · · Score: 1

    Anyone else think this is the US verison of this guy: http://www.wreckedexotics.com/special/enzo/

    1. Re:Crashed Enzo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't the upsala mafia actually have something that was a viable product, unlike the phantom?

    2. Re:Crashed Enzo by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 1

      You are refering to the Gizmondo, which actually was a product that existed beyond vaporware.

      Wether or not the company was well fitted to bring it to the market in full force is up for debate, but unlike the Phantom the Gizmondo actually existed and units actually were manufactured and shipped.

      It never would have been able to tackle the PSP as a media device, anyway. Not because it wasn't neat, but because they wouldn't have been able to out-market Sony.

      As a game machine, Nintendo wouldn't have come off of 1% of their market share for that thing.

      It still did better than the Phantom ever will.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
  14. Phantom Entertainment by 0racle · · Score: 4, Funny

    I love it! That is the best laugh I have had all day. Have them buy 3D Realms and it will be the joke of the year.

    March 2006: Scott Miller, CEO of 3D Realms, announced that the company intends on developing a sequel to Duke Nukem Forever.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:Phantom Entertainment by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The difference is that 3D Realms was a good company with a good product gone horribly wrong. Infinium labs was an inherently corrupt idea from the start.

      Either way, in comparison, NASA, an often misdirected of an agency, was able to make Deep Space One from project concept approval to launch pad in three years. Deep Space One, a project that tested twelve previously untested technologies in space and every one of those technologies succeeded.

    2. Re:Phantom Entertainment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But... but... the private sector is always better!

    3. Re:Phantom Entertainment by adyus · · Score: 1


      Just you wait until they work up to Deep Space Nine ;)

    4. Re:Phantom Entertainment by patio11 · · Score: 1
      The difference between Infinium Labs and NASA is that one of them squanders tens of millions of dollars producing something of dubious societal value, blows through capital at an obscene rate, has to get more money by going back to the idiots who funded it in the first place and saying "Well, we don't have much now, but concentrate on the potential!", and is defended only by legions of fanboys... and the other makes video games.

      Deep Space One cost $150 million dollars. In return, we got technological research which, at best, means we can fund our next pointless space project in a slightly less inefficient manner. To pick one technology at random, they developed a solar cell. Yay. How much terrestrial research could we have done on solar cells for $150 million dollars? Heck, even if we had an insane desire to blast a research budget allowing for only one prototype into space, how much money would we have saved if we had just put the new solar cell on an autonomous satellite?

  15. Re:WTF? Who are the suckers? by neuro.slug · · Score: 4, Funny
  16. Re:WTF? Who are the suckers? by Columcille · · Score: 1

    I think it was this guy's cousin

    --
    I love my sig.
  17. and...one word... by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

    GameTap.

    "Ohh look! It can download games over the internet!"

    Uh... just like any other desktop.

    1. Re:and...one word... by deathy_epl+ccs · · Score: 1

      GameTap.

      "Ohh look! It can download games over the internet!"

      Uh... just like any other desktop.

      I think you don't really understand what the real point behind GameTap is, then... it's not about the internet delivery, it's about the legitimization of emulation. We can now legally play a lot of the games we loved when we were kids, and also some relatively recent games as well. I think it's more than worth the $1/year I paid for it.

      Haven't decided what I'll do after my beta tester almost free year is up... but abandonware isn't anymore.

  18. YES! by Marthirial · · Score: 0

    It will produce a lot of lawsuits with a defendant with an stupid name.

  19. CNB3 by BiggyP · · Score: 1

    Isn't it common knowledge that Infinium have poured all available resources into development of the CowboyNealBox3?

    1. Re:CNB3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't that be the CowboyNealBoxiii?

  20. Related Stories by Lithgon · · Score: 1

    I just looked at a few of the related stories and got myself a good laugh.

  21. Quote by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 4, Funny

    "The Board of Directors believes that the name change would be in the best interests of the Company because the new name better reflects the long-term growth strategy of the Company."

    I'll say.

    --
    Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
    1. Re:Quote by grammar+fascist · · Score: 1

      I get the feeling that someone is playing an elaborate joke on everyone. I just haven't figured out whether it's the Russians, the Mafia, the Chinese, or the Canadians.

      It must be the Canadians. They've wanted both sides of Niagra Falls for years.

      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
  22. Re:WTF? Who are the suckers? by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

    Let's be fair to the people who invested the first few mill. It did seem like a good idea even if it was a long shot.

    But as for the later investors, you guys are total suckers.

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
  23. Read more carefully... by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

    He's insulting the Phantom, not Gametap.

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
  24. Vaporware... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is vaporware.

    1. Re:Vaporware... by Khashishi · · Score: 4, Funny
      This is vaporware.

      no, this is Phantomware

    2. Re:Vaporware... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brilliant!
      I just submitted the new word to Urban Dictionary. ;)

  25. Question by ZpaseMann+Zpiff · · Score: 1

    Is there even one person left that still cares?

  26. Whoa by Parham · · Score: 2, Informative

    This company definitely needs to be put into the Guinness World Records... $69 million wasted with nothing to show. According to the related wikipedia article, they started back in 2002. They had four years to come up with something, anything, and managed to only gain fame through their downfall. They could have bought that for a lot less -__-.

    1. Re:Whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, it cost Microsoft $4 billion to do what you're suggesting.
      *ducks*

    2. Re:Whoa by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      $69 million wasted with nothing to show.

      What are you talking about? That lapboard was worth every penny it cost to develop it!

      --
      This guy's the limit!
  27. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  28. Re:WTF? Who are the suckers? by cgenman · · Score: 4, Informative

    So if they started in 2002, they've been going for 4 years. 4 years at 70 million dollars is 17.5 million dollars per year.

    Assuming a 50% marketing, promotion, and etc cost, that leaves 8.75 million for staff and development. Assuming a generous 100,000 per year compensation package and 100,000 in per-employee support costs (office space, etc), that's a full-time staff of 44 developers.

    44 developers, working full time, for 4 years. With a full marketing budget for a product that doesn't exist. Assume a 50/50 split between hardware and software, that's 22 people making the console and 22 people programming the interface, including artists.

    70 million really should have been enough. Can you say "scam?"

  29. A new phrase coined. by deadhammer · · Score: 1

    You, sir, have won the Internet.

    --
    I'll be honest, we're throwing science against the wall to see what sticks. -Cave Johnson
  30. Hands up all who know why Bachus was booted by MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I really the only one who knows? I think I'm the only one who's willing to tell.

    Mmm, bit later.

  31. I know its been offered before but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Dear Investors:
    I would like to offer you the opportunity of a lifetime. In exchange for a mere $50,000 a year, I will produce NOTHING. Compared to Infinium/Phantom, this will provide a savings to you of nearly 35,000% ANNUALLY with IDENTICAL results, INSTANTLY! This is an offer you CAN NOT refuse. Please let me know when you are ready to sign the dotted line,

    Sure Thing Inc.

  32. Bedazzled by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

    They can't be unaware that "Infinium" and "Phantom" have become brand for vaporware "phantom" products that take "infinium" to reach the market.

    Phantom is in fact more popular as a vaporware brand, why would they want to call their company that?

    It's as if they try to rub it on: "we've wasted millions of dollars and still got just phantoms to offer"...

    None of this makes any sense, is the business system so flawed?

  33. Phantom cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The $70 million that they've spent and lost is dwarfed by the $182 million that investors have taken out of the company by selling stock. Look at the insider
    trading reported on the yahoo finance link here: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=IFLB.OB

      Add all of the estimated proceeds of the insider
    stock sales, and you get $182 million. The real total might be larger or smaller than this -- the proceeds reported are estimated, but the total cash realized by insiders trading in IFLB stock is easily more than 100 million dollars.

    And that ain't chump change.

  34. More like laundered cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What better way for the Russian mob to make their money look clean? Connections have been pointed out in the past. Many, many times. But heck, what don't they have their fingers in? They've got a piece of Starforce for crying out loud... then again we've all seen how terribly effective that is.

  35. SEC is also after them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They started in Sarasota and hosed quite a few local investers, then moved. So we follow the tale of these crooks.

    http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article ?AID=/20060517/BUSINESS/605170595/-1/GOOGLE01

  36. They have shareholders? by flobberchops · · Score: 1

    Or are the shareholders phantom too?

  37. Tim Roberts by mybootorg · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Having known Tim Roberts and his twin brother Peter since they were suburbian teenagers growing up in West St. Louis County, I can tell you that this console will never happen. (His twin brother Peter died of a drug overdose several years ago). I shouldn't say that it will never happen - that's just my opinion - because there's always the possibility that Tim will somehow manage to sell the company to someone that will ultimately deliver.

    Do some searching on Tim and you'll find that he's started a whole host of companies where investers were coralled and then the money was spent in lavish style. See DBN and Savvis Communications. These companies were sold off early on, and after Tim bowed out, one did rather well. Savvis continues to this day. But as far as I can tell, Tim only excels in bullshitting investors into opening their wallets, then spending and spending and bullshitting some more.

    Do some more searching and you'll find whole web pages devoted to exposing either Tim or his Phantom console as a hoax, scam, pump n' dump scheme etc. Some of them are really entertaining to read through.

    (I knew Tim when he was teenage phone phreak trafficing in Commodore 64 games over a 300 baud... then the screaming fast 1200 baud Hayes modem. Anyone C64 people remember the "Wacko Cracko Brothers"? Hehe. Name that year.)

  38. HardOCP called it 3 years ago! by 9Nails · · Score: 1

    This is not news. It's demise was predicted 3 years ago at HardOCP. http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTEy

    I do feel bad for the investors. However I can't understand how they didn't see the warning signs.

  39. Why didnt they by jlebrech · · Score: 0
    Just make an OS, i.e a linux distro with a topnotch SDK, and charge for comercial use of the linux SDK but let gnu projects live.
    then when the OS is mature and they have a bunch of free games they could pimp the games distro DVD with free stuff.
    then who cares about the machine. make some money first.

    it would have been like loki, but instead of porting games, make spiffy games engine.

  40. Re:WTF? Who are the suckers? by jason+ward · · Score: 1

    $8.75 million a year for development? Try less than half that. Total. Such a scam.

    Source:
    http://www.gamespot.com/news/6144631.html

  41. Re:WTF? Who are the suckers? by Bobartig · · Score: 4, Informative

    according to their own SEC filings, they've spent about 10% or so of their budget on R&D (on a new console here, mind thee), and about 70%+ on 'consulting fees'. Scam? Yes.

    --
    This is where I get my recommended daily allowance of "Foot in Mouth."
  42. Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I always find it amazing that investors are willing to throw their money in the trash like this. This company has failed to demonstrate anything, for all the previous investment. It has failed to ship anything, it has repeatedly failed to deliver on schedule, and has shown signs of having criminals on the board manipulating share prices for their own gain. Why don't the investors just just go and invest in SCO (the failed UNIX company that has been perpetrating what appears to be a crude fraud to boost share prices) They might even make some money on that - if they dump before SCO is swatted like a bothersome fly around the anal cavity of an angry donkey.

  43. Actually Duke Nukem Forever could be released 1st by AzraelKans · · Score: 1

    Is a lot more possible for Duke Nukem Forever to show up, BEFORE any release date for the phantom is at hand.

    at least apparently:

    From wikipedia:


    2006

            * February: In an interview Broussard had this to say about Duke Nukem Forever[15]:

    Duke Nukem Forever
            It's definitely going well now. Things are together; we're in full production. We're basically just pulling all the pieces together and making the game out of it. There's a lot that's finished. All the guns are finished. Most of the creatures are finished. And as I said, we're just basically pulling it all together and trying to make it fun. We've kind of got all these disassociated elements that make up a game, and you put them together and things happen. And then you just tweak it and polish it until it's fun, and that's kind of the phase we're in now, just trying to make something that is really fun to play and interesting.

    Duke Nukem Forever

            * March: Scott Miller, CEO of 3D Realms, announced that the company intends on developing a sequel to Duke Nukem Forever. [16]
            * April: In an interview with Computer Game Magazine George Broussard made the following statement.

    Duke Nukem Forever
            The problem is that when we show it, people are going to be like, 'Yeah, whatever'. Honestly, at this point we just want to finish it.

    Duke Nukem Forever

    Broussard also demonstrated samples of the game, including an early level, a vehicle sequence, and a few test rooms [17]


    So apparently they are working on it, and actually theres a strong humor it could be released THIS xmas. (check the www.gamasutra.com article)

    --
    Go ahead MOD my day!
    More opinions here
  44. Re:Actually Duke Nukem Forever could be released 1 by geminidomino · · Score: 1

    The problem is that when we show it, people are going to be like, 'Yeah, whatever'. Honestly, at this point we just want to finish it.


    At this point, they could just change the title splash of Daikatana and release it, and we'll all be surprised enough by the release alone to soil our shorts.

  45. Re:WTF? Who are the suckers? by Fordiman · · Score: 1

    Hmph.

    Given a month, some parts, and a soldering iron, *I* can design a 'next gen' console. These guys have scammed nearly $70 billion and, aside from their CEO, I'd be completely nonplussed to find out they have dodged out to the caymans somewhere, where they 'telecommute' by responding to emails from venture capitalists.

    --
    110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
  46. Reminds me of Robin Hood:Men in Tights by HAKdragon · · Score: 1

    Prince John: Such an unusual name, "Latrine." How did your family come by it?
    Latrine: We changed it in the 9th century.
    Prince John: You mean you changed it TO "Latrine"?
    Latrine: Yeah. Used to be "Shithouse."
    Prince John: It's a good change. That's a good change

    --
    "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
    1. Re:Reminds me of Robin Hood:Men in Tights by chawly · · Score: 1

      And that was the second time they changed it. Originally it was simply "Shit" . But, as somebody said, "What's in a name ?", in this case the answer's obvious ! Same fellow (William somebody, I think) said "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" and, applied to this case, we can see that he sure got that right !

      --
      How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
  47. The Accumulated Losses Aren't The Best Part... by Cixel+Sid · · Score: 1

    LOL... whoever investing $70 million, I'd love to have that list... funny. The $69 million loss isn't too surprising--almost every starteup operates at a loss. That's normal. Moving along this far and already having stock-scam lawsuits AND no product... that's not. But this is my favorite... "The Board of Directors believes that the name change (to Phantom whatever) would be in the best interests of the Company because the new name better reflects the long-term growth strategy of the Company." Translation: Our strategy is that we're banking everything on this Phantom gizmo, because it's all we've got. We're renaming the company to demonstrate this. We reeeeeally hope someone down the road inveted time-travel and brings something cool and Pahntom-like back to us." And then this... "Our Board of Directors has unanimously approved, subject to stockholder approval, an amendment to our Certificate of Incorporation to increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock from 600,000,000 to 1,200,000,000... (WHAT?! You're DOUBLING your stocks in the middle of all this? #1, that move should have been tried before your auditors announced to the world that you're screwed. #2, that could completely rearrange ownership of the company--current stockholders get first crack at new shares, but I'm guessing NO ONE WANTS ANY MORE, which means anyone with a lot of money and some wild scheme could take over. Which I doubt wil happen, since YOU HAVE NO PRODUCT) The Board believes that the increase in authorized common shares would provide the Company greater flexibility with respect to the Company's capital structure (translation: the board believes that if people buy more stock, we'll have more money) for such purposes as additional equity financing (for such purposes...? Wait, you're saying you want to get more money through equity... so you can get more money through equity? This reads like "We're going to sell off more shares of the company... so that we can, then, sell more shares after that." Maybe the Board wants people to buy more shares so that they can sell their shares... except that's, well, legally risky at best.), and stock based acquisitions, (we're praying someone out there has a product that they will sell to us for stock)." I'm no stock broker, but... i'll list this one as a 'sell'...