trader: Sorry to say anything at all, but I did deal with exactly that point in my original post on the MTEY/DCHT contradiction: Message 8687958
There is a section of a 10-K called "Subsequent Events", which is where a company discusses anything significant that happens, in this case after 12/31/98, up to the date the 10-K gets submitted, in this case 3/30/99. (You won't find it in all or even most 10-K's because usually nothing unusual happens in that time period. But if something does happen, it belongs there.)
MTEY does have that section (you'll find it as Note 15 on the financial statements, towards the very end of the 10-K). The only event discussed is the fact that during February 1999 the company convinced a consultant to whom it owed $67,000 to take stock and warrants instead of cash.
This is a trivial matter compared to the formation and financing of Antaeus Corp., or would have been trivial, if in fact Antaeus had existed and had raised money; thus my conclusions about its effective non-existence.
Where I could be wrong would be if MTEY is hiding the existence of Antaeus for some reason, perhaps so insiders could buy more stock cheap. That would be just as fraudulent as pretending it exists when it doesn't.
Obviously, either DCHT or MTEY is lying. MTEY may not be much of a company, with only $20 in the bank, but at least it HAS an audited financial statement, and submits a 10-K. At the moment I consider it to be the more trustworthy of the two. |
