real time web stats
Archives

For now this section is a little disorganized. But here are some postings our team made regarding another scam, Surgline International, Inc., which we were successful in bringing to the attencion of the public and the regulators. The company was suspended from trading..


February 6, 2012:  Lets look at the companies Henry Fong has run and you will see a pattern. A PATTERN THAT SURGLINE IS REPEATING!
A friend of mine in law enforcement says that criminals tend to stick to patterns. They usually carry out their crimes using the same “modus operandi.” China Nuvo Solar Energy, the predecessor to Surgline: Had no sales for years, only expenses. Raised almost $2 million. But China Nuvo bought technology, none of which it ever was able to exploit. Acquiring technology makes for great press releases, which China Nuvo was able to exploit, trading as high as $.16 a share—100 times the current price. And back then, 2006 to 2011, solar energy was “hot.” Now there has been a shakeout in the industry, profits are falling, it was time to exit the solar energy field and enter what Fong thought was the new “hot” field. To whom did China Nuvo sell its securities? From the July 2010 10k: 
On September 24, 2009, the Company issued 16,666,667 shares of its common stock upon the conversion of $65,000 of convertible debentures to non affiliated third parties. The shares were converted at $.0039 per share. On February 9, 2010, the Company issued 18,000,000 shares of its common stock upon the conversion of $54,000 of convertible debentures to non affiliated third parties. The shares were converted at $.003 per share. On April 1, 2010 the Company issued 55,940,455 shares of its common stock upon the two year mandatory conversion of the Company’s preferred stock of $123,069 (the “Stated Value”). Per the terms of the Certificate of Designation, the preferred stock converted at the result of the Stated Value multiplied by 120%, divided by the average of the closing price for the twenty (20) days prior to the conversion multiplied by seventy five percent (75%). This conversion represents only a portion of the preferred stock outstanding. The remaining amount of preferred stock outstanding at July 31, 2010 is $314,172 and the holders of those shares and the Company have agreed to extend the mandatory conversion period for one additional year to July 27, 2011. 
In the 2009 10-K:
On May 4, 2009, the Company issued 6,357,666 shares of its common stock upon the conversion of $17,500 of convertible debentures and $1,573 of accrued interest to non-affiliated third parties. The shares were converted at $0.003 per share. On June 5, 2009 the Company issued 7,092,195 shares of its common stock upon the conversion of $25,000 of convertible debentures to non-affiliated third parties. The shares were converted at $0.003525 per share. On July 27, 2009 the Company issued 21,697,324 shares of its common stock upon the two year mandatory conversion of the Company’s preferred stock of $98,650 (the “Stated Value”). Per the terms of the Certificate of Designation, the preferred stock converted at the result of the Stated Value multiplied by 120%, divided by the average of the closing price for the twenty (20) days prior to the conversion multiplied by seventy five percent (75%). This conversion represents only a portion of the preferred stock outstanding. The remaining amount of preferred stock outstanding at July 31, 2009 is $437,241 and the holders of those shares and the Company have agreed to extend the mandatory conversion period for one additional year to July 27, 2010. On July 30 and 31, 2009, the Company issued in the aggregate 10,424,089 shares of its common stock upon the conversion of $42,500 of convertible debentures and $2,063 of accrued interest to non-affiliated third parties. The shares were converted at $0.004275 per share. 
From the 2008 10-K:
On February 15, 2008, we issued 1,233,720 shares of our common stock upon the conversion of $68,175 of convertible debt and accrued interest. The debt and accrued interest was converted at $0.075 per share. On March 25, 2008, we issued 504,065 shares of our common stock upon the conversion of $15,500 of convertible debt. The debt was converted at approximately $0.03 per share.
See a pattern here? Fong issued convertible debt which later gets converted into stock. He never discloses the names of who bought the convertible debt. Now, the beauty of convertible debt to a small public company is that the “purchaser” gets to start his 6-month holding period to get the legend off his stock, while deferred until the actual conversion the price at which he gets the shares. This is critical for someone like Fong, because his companies always have a declining share price. If Fong’s companies were successful, then he would not like to issue convertible debt. He would want to lock in the price of his stock, like a normal company.
But wait, there is more. Who are the purchasers of Fong’s debentures? He never tells you. BUT THE LAW REQUIRES HIM TO GIVE THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT. Because Fong wants to hide who the purchasers are, so that no one can figure out Fong’s game. Here is Fong’s secret. His nominees sell their stock in the market to unsuspecting victims. They take part of the money, lets say a third of their “profits” and buy convertible debentures in the company. The rest of their money goes into offshore bank accounts, drugs and fast cars. Wait a few months, the nominees convert their convertible debt into more stock-many more shares since the price has been beaten down. This stock gets sold in the market to more pigeons. And the cycle is repeated. Highly profitable for Fong and his buddies. And highly illegal. But necessary, since no real investor will ever put money in a Fong deal. Anyone who is in the business of making investments can see that they are all scams.
We see from the old 10-K another company Fong was involved in:
Mr. Fong was the president, treasurer and a director of Hydrogen Power, Inc., a pubicly traded alternative energy company, from its inception in 1983 until January 2, 2007.
I am not exactly sure I want to know what a “pubicly traded” company is. But levity aside, I’ll bet the same pattern happened with Hydrogen Power and I will further bet dear readers for this pattern to be repeated with Surgline. You may claim that Fong is no longer involved, but he his. Proof to come not with the next post but the following one. Stay tuned. .

February 4, 2012
Henry Fong is still deeply involved in this company and he is running this scam. History will show his prior misdeeds.
Here is the first tidbit, the first LIE about this company I am going to expose. Page 9 of the 8-K filed for Sept 1, 2011 says that the company’s administrative offices are at 5348 Vegas Drive, in Las Vegas. Google this address or better yet drive by as I have done These “administrative offices” are a mail drop. Yes, indeed. I bet they hold staff meetings inside that little mailbox with their number on it. Mail drops used by securities fraudsters is common, here are two of them I found in 1 minute LIARS
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. ALAN BENLOLO aka ALLEN BENDER aka HAIME ESCALANTE aka STUART JEFFRIES, MICHAEL RISMAN aka GRAHAM BAKER, LENNY NACHER aka ALEXANDER HAMILTON aka STUART JEFFRIES, and STEPHEN DALE aka DANE TEMPLETON, U. S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Civil Action Number 99-Civ-0341 (LS) (S.D.N.Y.)
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 16690 / September 6, 2000 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. HOUSTON TEXANS NFL FOOTBALL TEAM HOLDING CO. AND EDGAR A. GUILBEAU, Civil Action No. H-00-3072

February 5, 2012
Okay what is the business plan for our company here?
SurgLine, Inc (“SurgLine”) was formed in March of 2011. Our plan is to provide our own proprietary label, of high quality medical and surgical products at discount prices. The Company’s founders saw the need to help reduce costs in the acute care healthcare system, and particularly that of the Operating Rooms. The Company’s core business strategy is simply: Source and sell the highest quality medical and surgical products for substantially less, thereby reducing the “historical brand premium” that has historically been absorbed by healthcare end users, including hospitals, outpatient surgery centers, medical clinics, self-insured employers, managed care organizations, commercial insurance carriers and state and federal governmental payers. We intend to provide lower cost products by selling high volume disposable medical products at substantially lower prices when compared to the historical supply chain sources available on the market. We plan to accomplish this by sourcing products within the U.S. and globally from many of the same factories that produce similar products for the world’s largest medical companies. The traditional acquisition cost of medical and surgical supplies, instrumentation, equipment, hospital beds, operating lights and more sold by the largest medical/surgical suppliers can hover at five to ten fold markups. We plan on attacking the “brand premium” much in the same way as Costco has with their Kirkland private label brand, or Home Depot has with their Hampton Bay brand. Essentially, we plan on offering virtually similar products, with our SurgLine brand, at substantial savings by reducing the massive markup percentages that are passed on to the end users. We believe our sourcing and competitive advantage is based on over a decade of international business relationships of our executive management team with worldwide manufacturers. Because of the relationships developed by our executives, we have connections to nearly 200 different manufacturers globally and over 10,000 products already identified.
Additionally, our executives have long and successful industry track records and long standing relationships with key healthcare decision makers. We believe that healthcare, like many businesses, is a relationship business. Knowing who makes the decisions within organizations and having access to that person is a distinct advantage over an industry outsider. Our founders’ 100 plus years of healthcare experience will be leveraged to drive our success.
Anyone in the industry will tell you that this is completely bogus. Hospitals do not buy from Costco or Sam’s Club. And there are no “massive markup percentages.” Look for example, at the industry giant, Owens & Minor. It’s a Fortune 500 company and its in the same business as Surgline is entering. Sales of $8,123,608,000 for 2010. Gross margin was $807,725,000- a little under 10%. That is not a “massive markup.” Here is what their 10-K says:
“Consolidation trends in the overall healthcare market, including IHN acquisitions of physicians’ practices and ambulatory surgery centers, have led to the creation of larger and more sophisticated healthcare providers, which increasingly seek methods to lower the total cost of delivering healthcare services. These healthcare providers face a variety of financial challenges, including the cost of purchasing, receiving, storing and tracking medical and surgical supplies. These trends have driven significant consolidation within the healthcare supply distribution industry due to the competitive advantages enjoyed by larger distributors, which include, among other things, the ability to serve customers in widespread geographical locations, buy inventory in large volume, and develop technology platforms and decision support systems. Distributors have also developed services to help reduce supply-chain costs for both healthcare providers and suppliers by streamlining the supply chain through more effective inventory, supply spending and contract management.” Industry practice is for healthcare providers, or their IHNs or GPOs, to negotiate product pricing directly with suppliers and then negotiate distribution pricing terms with distributors. The medical/surgical supply distribution industry is characterized by pricing pressure. The majority of our distribution arrangements compensate us on a cost-plus percentage basis, under which a negotiated percentage distribution fee is added to the contract price agreed to by the customer and the supplier. The determination of this percentage distribution fee is typically based on purchase volume, as well as other factors, and usually remains constant for the life of the contract. In many cases, distribution contracts in the medical/surgical supply industry specify a minimum volume of product to be purchased and are terminable by either party upon relatively short notice.
In other words, the trend now in the industry is consolidation because the little guys (Surgline) cannot compete on price. Relationships are not relevant. Purchasers do not even TALK to distributors like Surgline. They talk directly to suppliers. Oh, but the shills on this board will already be touting the Eric Siu’s etc. who are big shareholders. Yes they have big blocks of stock, for which they paid ZERO. Whoring out their name, why not? They have nothing to lose. Now, if Eric Siu thought this was such a great deal how much $$ would he put in? You know he must have lots if he is so successful. (People like Siu are referred to by Lenin as “useful idiots.” ) And, where is Wilford Brimley in this deal? How come he has not got any stock?





SurgLine’s 3rd quarter 10-Q shows huge decrease in sales, same old game, reverse stock split on horizon

  By admin2 | March 20, 2012 News

Analysing the 10-Q: 63% drop in revenues death spiral

With the  noise about the 1 billion share cancellation has everyone losing focus on what is actually happening at SurgLine. Yes its a good think that insiders are cancelling some shares, but they are shares for which they did not pay anything at all. Its mostly a PR move. The company is going to have a serious issue selling shares in any private placement, because these shares have to be sold for less than the public trading price–but since that price, $.0007 or $.0008, is less than the par value of $.001, this will be an illegal share issuance. Any shareholder could sue and force the person getting the shares to make good the difference between $.001 and the price they paid.

Who is buying the debentures and funding the company? The 10-Q says its the same “institutional investor” who has been putting money into the company. First of all, no “institutional investor” is going to be investing in a subpenny stock.  And why is the name of this “institutional investor” hidden? Its a required disclosure to provide the name of the investor. But if it were disclosed, YOU, the public, would be able to see that is really going on. That the “institutional investor” is just a front for the promoters. Since September 13, they got net proceeds of $75,500. The notes are convertible at 50% of the market price. So the investor is doubling its money. But what is really happening is that the “institutional investor” is selling shares into the public marketplace, keeping half for itself and recycling the other half into the company. This is known as an unregistered public offering and highly illegal. You see it done this way all the time on these subpenny stocks.

Now, since the management’s discussion in the 10-Q is so deficient, let me analyse some numbers for you.

Sales for the three months ended January 31, 2012 were down from $75,272 in the prior quarter to $27,876, a decrease of 63%.  What happened to the $10 million projected sales for 2012? Only put out there to help promoters sell their stock.

Gross margin decreased from 52% to 21%. This is a huge decrease and there is no explanation anywhere in the 10-Q.  As of January 31, 2012, accounts receivable was $68,238. That means SurgLine sold product but has not yet got paid for it. The accounts receivable as of 10/31/11 was $45,272. So, accounts receivable in the quarter increased by $22,966, almost as much as the sales in the quarter. It looks like payment on the company’s sales is 90+ days. That is not good. Inventory as of 10/31 was $16,095 compared to $116,005- that means that in the last quarter they bought $99,000 more than inventory. If this is indicative of the future, the company needs a huge amount of cash to fund inventory and to carry its receivables. No bank is going to lend to a little company like this, and we know Toland is not anyone the bank will accept as a guarantor due to the 4 judgments against him. Dutch has such a small percentage of the company, and so its unlikely he will guarantee any bank loan. No sophisticated investor will put in equity at less than par value, since they would be legally on the hook for the shortfall between par value of $.001 and their purchase price. The only place the company has been able to get money is from, in effect, promoters selling stock in the market and sending part of the money to the company. As the stock price continues to have downward pressure from promoter stock sales, the company is likely faced with a death spiral. A reverse stock split is inevitable whether or not the company can stay alive.




Alumifuel Power (AFPW) trading pattern today March 1, 2012

  By admin2 | March 2, 2012 News

The reason why there was one ticket for more than 17 million shares right before close, at $.0010, low for the day, is as follows:
Sales were being made throughout the day, not directly by market makers, but through other brokers-this is usually broken up like this to (a) “mask” the brokers through whom selling is coming, (b) keep these low prints from coming out during the day, and (c) to keep down the cost of the ticket charge when trading is done this way. Ticket charge is about $24, which becomes minimal when spread out over 17 million shares versus a on smaller trades like the one today for 300 shares ($.36 cents). The $.0010 price is the average sales price for the 17 million share trades. could be some at that price, some lower and some higher, its impossible to know without getting a copy of FINRA records.
So what does this all mean? Someone who has a lot of shares (relatively speaking, its about $17,000 worth) is unloading and going out the door. If you see this repeat, well its obvious

Bookmark the permalink.




SurgLine’s 3rd quarter 10-Q shows huge decrease in sales, same old game, reverse stock split on horizon

  By admin2 | March 20, 2012 News

Analysing the 10-Q: 63% drop in revenues death spiral

With the  noise about the 1 billion share cancellation has everyone losing focus on what is actually happening at SurgLine. Yes its a good think that insiders are cancelling some shares, but they are shares for which they did not pay anything at all. Its mostly a PR move. The company is going to have a serious issue selling shares in any private placement, because these shares have to be sold for less than the public trading price–but since that price, $.0007 or $.0008, is less than the par value of $.001, this will be an illegal share issuance. Any shareholder could sue and force the person getting the shares to make good the difference between $.001 and the price they paid.

Who is buying the debentures and funding the company? The 10-Q says its the same “institutional investor” who has been putting money into the company. First of all, no “institutional investor” is going to be investing in a subpenny stock.  And why is the name of this “institutional investor” hidden? Its a required disclosure to provide the name of the investor. But if it were disclosed, YOU, the public, would be able to see that is really going on. That the “institutional investor” is just a front for the promoters. Since September 13, they got net proceeds of $75,500. The notes are convertible at 50% of the market price. So the investor is doubling its money. But what is really happening is that the “institutional investor” is selling shares into the public marketplace, keeping half for itself and recycling the other half into the company. This is known as an unregistered public offering and highly illegal. You see it done this way all the time on these subpenny stocks.

Now, since the management’s discussion in the 10-Q is so deficient, let me analyse some numbers for you.

Sales for the three months ended January 31, 2012 were down from $75,272 in the prior quarter to $27,876, a decrease of 63%.  What happened to the $10 million projected sales for 2012? Only put out there to help promoters sell their stock.

Gross margin decreased from 52% to 21%. This is a huge decrease and there is no explanation anywhere in the 10-Q.  As of January 31, 2012, accounts receivable was $68,238. That means SurgLine sold product but has not yet got paid for it. The accounts receivable as of 10/31/11 was $45,272. So, accounts receivable in the quarter increased by $22,966, almost as much as the sales in the quarter. It looks like payment on the company’s sales is 90+ days. That is not good. Inventory as of 10/31 was $16,095 compared to $116,005- that means that in the last quarter they bought $99,000 more than inventory. If this is indicative of the future, the company needs a huge amount of cash to fund inventory and to carry its receivables. No bank is going to lend to a little company like this, and we know Toland is not anyone the bank will accept as a guarantor due to the 4 judgments against him. Dutch has such a small percentage of the company, and so its unlikely he will guarantee any bank loan. No sophisticated investor will put in equity at less than par value, since they would be legally on the hook for the shortfall between par value of $.001 and their purchase price. The only place the company has been able to get money is from, in effect, promoters selling stock in the market and sending part of the money to the company. As the stock price continues to have downward pressure from promoter stock sales, the company is likely faced with a death spiral. A reverse stock split is inevitable whether or not the company can stay alive.

 




More SGLN (Surgline) shenanigans with Eden Surgical

  By admin2 | June 29, 2012 News

lets examine the Eden Surgical transaction. Tom Toland announced on May 17 that Surgline had acquired Eden Surgical Technologies, LLC in exchange for 50 million shares of stock. There was an 8-K filed at the time, with the promise that audited financial statements would be filed within the required time period (75 days I think). Eden was claimed to “expand our line of trauma products.”
Eden Surgical is a Texas LLC with its address at 205 Stockton Drive, Southlake Texas. Here is a picture of the residence at that address.  Trulia says this is a single family home 4 bedrooms; average list price in zip code is $791,309.
Eden Surgical does not appear to ever have any business. It was formed on September 10, 2010. It has no telephone number of its own listed and no web site. It has five members, Michael Weyand, Dan Brown,  Jessica Ybanez-Morano (a doctor in West Virginia) and Eric Malone, owner of Viola Leasing in North Carolina.
Since the 50 million restricted shares paid have a value of about $20,000, its really unlikely that Eden has any real business or value.  How much value does $20,000 in stiff paper in a subpenny stock buy you? I have a nice, older living room set that Surgline can buy from me for that price. For my table saw I would not take less than 100 million shares.
Face it, this is just hype




MedNPV another SGLN scam

  By admin2 | June 29, 2012 News

Comments Off

 

Now we look at MedNPV, another fake deal

Lets first look at the press release of May 14, 2012 in which this acquisition was publicized:

 

“WEST PALM BEACH, Fla., May 14, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ — SurgLine International, Inc. (SGLN.PK)

Thomas Toland, CEO of SGLN and SurgLine, Inc. (“SurgLine”) announced today it has signed an agreement with MedNPV, LLC (“MedNPV”), a well-established management company and surgical group operator with business throughout the state of California. The agreement between the parties will permit SurgLine to supply its’ low cost spinal orthopedic implants. Based upon MedNPV’s current business they are forecasting up to 40 monthly surgeries.”

As has already been pointed out by another poster here, MedNPV just started business, so its not likely they have much “current business.” Here is the information from the California Secretary of State:

Entity Name:      MEDNPV, LLC

Entity Number: 201134610002

Date Filed:          12/09/2011

Status:  ACTIVE

Jurisdiction:       CALIFORNIA

Entity Address:1301 DOVE ST STE 800

EntityCity, State, Zip:    NEWPORT BEACHCA 92660

Agent for Service of Process:      I. SHONECLARK

Agent Address:1301 DOVE ST STE 800

AgentCity, State, Zip:   NEWPORT BEACHCA 92660

Two things to notice about MedNPV. First, its business address is the same month-to-month executive suite as Surgline.

Secondly, who is I Shone Clark? He must have some medical or medical distribution background, right?

 

Ripoff report Wikipedia

“Mr. Clark is Executive Vice President and Managing Director of MorCap. [MorCap Fund Advisors, LLC www.­morcapadvisors.com website is down ]MorCap a real estate firm headquartered in Irvine, Ca that purchases and disposes of roughly 1000 +/-, nationwide, distressed single family (SFR), real estate owned (REO) properties per month. Clark has sourced, acquired and sold over 2,200 distressed single family REO, assets in over forty (40) states as a principal in the past thirty(30) months through his various entities. Being one of only a handful of private parties in the nation with transactional experience as a principal in closing several $100M + multi-state distressed, SFR, REO transactions and the complexities involved therewith, Clark has his sights on conquering Commercial REO.

As an entrepreneur, Clark’s efforts have been publicly recognized by Las Vegas Review Journal, San Diego Union Tribune and Black Enterprise as operating and co-founding various large minority-owned businesses from 1998–2004. Mr. Clark has successfully managed and operated in capital markets, real estate, retail, media and food & beverage, while combining his love of art, culture, education, faith and love of God as a vessel for his contributions to society.

A member serving on various foundations and advisory boards nationwide, Clark currently resides in Southern California.”

Ripoff report:

“Shone Clark is a ripoff artist . he created a company called Pacnat and sold many many franchise to individuals with false promise of providing REO listings . After 2 years and spending thousands of dollars and running lives . Shone Clark who claims to be a man of God and a good christian is MIA.  I hope he is in Hell now . He ripped many many off and took thousands of dollars from them Including me.he was affiliated with Ali Ganji and Morcap investment firm . I don’t know about morcap but I know his side kick Ali Ganji is also MIA , so it leads me to believe that they were in it together . they collected $60,000 per location and I believe on my last count they sold more than 20 locations or branches under the name Pacifin National Realty Advisors. Shone Clark claim that he knows people inside Fannie and freddie and will be getting REO listing as well as buying assets omn discount … If you hear their name RUN , if you see them  RUN   I believe he is scamming so poor church going people by now    he uses jesus to gain trust   DONT trust either Ali Ganji or Shone ( shark) Clark  “

 

So, the guy running MedNPV is a real estate vulture. No background whatsoever in the field. But he does know how to hustle, more sizzle than steak kind of guy. Fits in well with Tolman, Fong, and Mazer.  Face it, this “acquisition”  is just more BS PR.