"while you are part of a group that does not own the stock and posts about it 24/7."
Well, "i'm a survivor" too. I have spent almost 9 years now exposing the REFR stock fraud (mostly on Yahoo) despite threats of law suits, private investigators hired by shills to follow me, and laughingly enough was told I would be prosecuted by the SEC for my trash talk.
I always felt it was my duty to expose fraudulent companies or posters by using information available to the public, especially information that shills would rather keep not want brought to light.
I was the first to give a heads up on: IMGN, KNOS, PKDV, and am especially proud of the work I did on IGII exposing the fraud a full year before the filings proved I was correct.
In this case, it is important that people considering buying PLNI understand that the company is pretty much a printing press and that it has negligible sales. Really negligible.
It also appears that the company is really good at deception as in the 10-Q filed on 5/4/2006 they make the following statement:
"Plasticon International, Inc. (“Plasticon”, “we”, “us”, “our” or, “the Company”), was incorporated in Delaware in 1981 and re-domiciled in Wyoming on January 22, 2004. We are engaged in the business of designing, producing, and distributing high-quality concrete accessories (rebar supports), informational and directional signage, and plastic lumber, which are all produced from recycled and recyclable plastics.
We have been in the oil and recycled plastics business since 1981. The Company's line of plastic concrete accessories has been approved or accepted in all 50 states and several foreign countries including Poland, Israel, Canada, Mexico, and Egypt. In addition, its transportation signage has received Department of Transportation (DOT) approval or acceptance in all 50 states. Specifically, the Company offers for resale:
1.
Rebar supports
2.
Plastic lumber
3.
Information and Directional signage (i.e.; highway and state signs, etc.)
4.
Impermeable concrete-like products made from recycled glass.
A unique feature of all our products is that they are of the highest quality, yet do not require virgin raw material. Using recycled materials significantly reduces the cost of manufacturing and thus, we are considered a "green Company." Our use of environmental waste as raw material in the production of new and innovative products will continue to reduce waste since the new products are themselves, recyclable.
Our primary products (80% of revenue) are concrete accessories."
Later on in the same filing they state the following:
"Year Ended December 31, 2003
Net Sales - $ 0.00"
So, please explain how a company that has $0.00 revenue can receive 80% of that revenue from concrete products. Hmmmm
In the same filing they make this statement:
"We currently lease 2,000 square feet of office space at 3316 Custer Drive, Suite 101, Lexington, KY 40517. The terms of our lease is month to month at $1,930 per month."
However, there seems to be a problems as they also state in the same filing:
"Our sales and distribution activities are managed from our Kentucky and Florida locations."
Shouldn't PLNI be paying rent on these distribution centers also?
And that begs the question of how with only 2 employees in 2004 ("In the year 2004, we had 2 full-time employees to manage day to day operations.") PLNI could operate THREE locations simultaeously.
Also interesting to note in the filing is that during 2004 the shares O/S increased from a mere 37,000,000 to over 1,400,000,000 or a dilution factor of about 4000 PERCENT.
Now that we got the easy stuff out of the way let's look at the laundry list of EXCUSES PLNI gave for failure, the interim in which they issued about 1.4 Billion shares. Any company who is inept enough to give this many excuses, especially since they had been in business for 23 years prior, probably should be viewed with skepticism:
"After lengthy negotiations, Promotional Containers, Inc. (“PCI”), an affiliate entity, signed a purchase contract and supplier agreement with Georgia Pacific, effective date February 13, 2004. PCI then subcontracted the contractual agreement with Georgia Pacific to Plasticon. The contract calls for the distribution of the Company’s line of concrete accessories, specifically its rebar support products. James Turek, Sr., the President of Plasticon International, Inc., is also the President of Promotional Containers, Inc.
As a result of PCI’s agreement with Georgia Pacific, the largest supplier of building materials in the United States with 63 strategically located warehouses and numerous subsidiary warehouses throughout the country, the Company is well positioned to be one of the larger distributors of rebar support products in the United States.
In addition to our unique distribution position, the Company is also the first manufacturer in its sector with DOT approval or acceptance in all 50 states and territories in the U.S., all provinces in Canada, and in parts of the Caribbean. This competitive advantage gives the Company the ability to distribute its line of rebar support products that are used in the construction of bridges, highways, roads, buildings and other infrastructure.
Our efforts and potential for success have been predicated on the Company securing significant investment funding to carry out our business plan.
The initial contract with PCI, which was subcontracted to Plasticon, was for $5.3 million. We began gearing up production based on purchase order releases.
It was shortly after this time frame that Georgia Pacific sold its entire distribution network to a new Company called, BlueLinx Holdings, Inc. At the time of Georgia Pacific’s sale of the distribution arm to BlueLinx Holdings, we were informed that we should halt production until further notice, based on the pending sale.
On May 10, 2004, Georgia Pacific completed the previously announced sale of its building products distribution business to BlueLinx Holdings, Inc. At this point in time, BlueLinx informed us that the Company needed time to re-brand and redesign distribution, marketing, packaging, literature and legal materials. As a result, we halted all production until this process was completed.
In the fall of 2004, we geared up for production on the original purchase orders regarding the aforementioned agreement between PCI and Georgia Pacific, which had been assumed BlueLinx Holdings, Inc. as a part of the sale. No sooner did this process take place than production was put on hold once again while BlueLinx Holdings, Inc. completed its initial public offering.
BlueLinx Holdings, Inc. requested that we should begin to expect orders early in 2005, which unfortunately now placed us one year behind on the original PCI/Georgia Pacific contract. The delay was primarily a result of the corporate sale and IPO of BlueLinx Holdings, Inc.
-11-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we geared up for production in the first quarter of 2005, the manufactured product did not meet standards as specified in the original PCI contract with Georgia Pacific, now assumed by BlueLinx, Inc. This was a direct result of an inferior order of recycled resins, which caused further delays in the production cycle and deliveries. As a result, BlueLinx and Plasticon’s engineering staff created a whole new set of specifications and standards of quality for the manufacture and delivery of our products. Once this process was completed, a renegotiation of the purchase contract began with PCI, resulting in a newly signed agreement on October 17, 2005.
As part of the renegotiated purchase contract with PCI, BlueLinx Holdings, Inc., we agreed to take total control of the manufacturing process, which resulted in our acquisition of Pro Mold, Inc., now wholly owned subsidiary. We made a business decision that from that point forward that we would primarily rely on our own manufacturing facilities where we would be able to have complete oversight of all quality control issues for the manufacture and delivery of our products.
As a result of the lack of continuity in the production cycle during the years 2004 and 2005, revenues were unfortunately, not what the Company anticipated.
In December 2004, Edward J. Gartska, whose duties and responsibilities included, but were not limited to, preparing and maintaining the corporate books and records which included the in-house accounting, resigned as the CFO of the Company ostensibly to take a position with another firm.
Press Releases 2004
On June 14, 2004, we announced that we reached an agreement to acquire A.T.G. Sports Industries, Inc. in an all-stock transaction. A.T.G. Sports Industries, with a history spanning over 24 years, is based in Andover, Kansas, and develops and installs artificial athletic surfaces for indoor and outdoor sports applications such as tennis, soccer, football, baseball, rugby, running tracks and field hockey. The Company also develops and installs a wide variety of surfaces for a many court-based sports as well as public parks and playgrounds.
While we have not completed this acquisition, there is still ongoing dialogue concerning construction products to be produced by PLNI. As a requirement of this acquisition, audited financials from ATG were to be presented to us within sixty days. As of December 31, 2004, these financials were not provided and as a result, we were unable to proceed.
On June 17, 2004, the Company announced that that it had received “three follow-on orders in excess of its existing contracts related to three major Washington, DC area projects. That the additional orders would have added in excess of $300,000 in sales to the Company’s rebar supports” (sic).
On June 23, 2004, we put out a press release projecting an increase in revenues since delivery of our rebar supports products was to begin through our national distributor, Georgia Pacific.
-12-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In an effort to procure raw resin that would decrease output costs and increase overall efficiency of the Company’s production cycle, materials were procured from a new source based on our specifications to the vendor. Unfortunately, due to misrepresentations by the resin supplier, the materials which we procured were of substandard quality and did not meet minimum engineering specifications. It was for this reason that the parts produced during this cycle of production were of inferior quality and were rejected by our national distributor. As a result of faulty raw resin, the production cycle and delivery of materials were interrupted, causing delays in the rollout of the contract with our national distributor. This effectively halted the orders with our Washington, DC projects and to the distribution center sales based upon the minimum requirements of the contract with our distributor.
On June 28, 2004, we published a letter which we had sent to all our shareholders in which we made several and various representations which were based upon in-house projections by our acting CFO at the time, Edward Gartska. It was our intention to refocus our efforts on procuring high quality materials that would exceed minimum engineering specifications. The process of procuring these high quality raw resins necessary to complete the specific molds was a problem which was beyond our control and consequently, took longer than expected causing further delays in the production and delivery cycles.
Again, on July 6, 2004, based upon a realistic assessment of the potential opportunities for growth, we put out an announcement modifying our projected revenues. Unfortunately, these projections were not reached due to the fact that the procurement process in reestablishing agreements with high-end raw resin suppliers was a more lengthy and complicated negotiation that ever anticipated. It is evident that it was not completed within a time frame that would have allowed for the Company’s projections to have been met.
July 12, 2004, we announced that we expected out audit to be completed within “90-120
days”. After in-depth discussions with L.L. Bradford and Company, the auditors, this was a time frame which they felt was realistic. However, negotiations with the auditors regarding the costs became a lengthy and exhaustive process as they soon began to exceed Company’s “initial expectations”. Our ability to move forward with this process was severely hampered, causing prolonged delays.
On July 26, 2004, we announced that we had received $40,000 in revenue from delivery of rebar support products. However, we never realized those projected revenues because soon after the press release, we had to recall the product because we discovered some faulty resins that did not meet specifications.
Although the purchase orders specified by our national distributor continued to be realized, we were unable to make timely deliveries and meet distributor demands due to an untimely and lengthy negotiating process in the procurement of superior resins. This was an unfortunate development that caused extensive delays in the Company’s ability to manufacture product and meet production cycles.
Apparently the products we shipped to the companies in Washington, DC had structural problems and were sent back to us with a request that we correct their concerns.
-13-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 14, 2004, a press release that was initially published on June 17, 2004, was inadvertently re-published.
We continued to struggle through negotiations for the procurement of high quality resins and was unable to successfully conclude negotiations for the procurement of these materials for a protracted period of time, completely curtailing the production and delivery of its rebar support products.
October 11, 2004, we announced that we entered into a Letter of Intent to acquire XYLOX of North America, Inc. Upon further due diligence, we determined that although the material was workable in small sizes, we could never validate that in full production, the product’s true commercial viability and more importantly, its compatibility with other product lines. We decided not to proceed with the acquisition.
On December 14, 2004, we announced that we had product being shipped to the BlueLinx distributors. BlueLinx contended that the products received were unacceptable and improperly dated. At that time, we realized that we needed to secure a more reliable and trustworthy resin source and recalled the shipments
|
