Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Plastics to Oil - Pyrolysis and Secret Catalysts and Alterna -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scion who wrote (21881)	4/6/2012 3:40:15 PM
From: scion	Respond to of 53574

In April 2007, the Company's then majority owned subsidiary SportsQuest, entered into an agreement with Media4Equity, Inc. ("M4E") for media production and placement. M4E produces and distributes nationally syndicated print and radio features for its clients in exchange for equity in its clients' business. The agreement stipulates that the sponsorship value of each aired radio feature and each published print feature shall be equivalent to each respective radio station's or newspaper's official ad rate policy, for a total value of $10M. In consideration of M4E's performance, the Company shall transfer to M4E a number of restricted shares of common stock, which shall have a market value of $3.3M. If the market value of all stock transferred to M4E is below $3.3M, the Company shall transfer to M4E a number of restricted common shares necessary for M4E's stock position in the Company to have a value of $3.3M. The share valuation is calculated as 90% of the closing prices of the Company's common stock for the five trading days immediately preceding the initial transfer or any subsequent valuation day. This agreement was terminated on August 15, 2008 and reassigned on same date to Domark under a new agreement. At the time of reassignment, the Company had not redeemed any credits for media advertising. NOTE 6 - PREPAID ASSETS FORM 10-K - For the Fiscal Year Ended May 31, 2009 DoMark International, Inc. sec.gov

To: scion who wrote (21881)	4/6/2012 3:42:07 PM
From: dreaminbig	Respond to of 53574

Someone at Domark had been around penny stocks for a while and knew how to cover his ASSets.

To: scion who wrote (21881)	4/6/2012 6:12:59 PM
From: scion	Respond to of 53574

Regardless-- in all this -- the silly whistling past the graveyard is the obvious: how could such an intelligent person surrounded by so many astute/savvy OTC traders not know Kidd's antics and the probability ratio of being swindled as being considerably high? loanranger Friday, April 06, 2012 5:17:23 PM Re: jimmenknee post# 175580 Post # of 175609 Splits notwithstanding, there is nothing to suggest that the proper price per share to be used in the transaction was $3.79. If you (or anyone) can connect that price to that date after accounting for any split adjustments I'd like to see it. The 2:1 split that occurred subsequent to 8/15/08 (01/22/2009 to be precise), doesn't do it. He backed into either the price or the share number, probably both. Period. siliconinvestor.com jimmenknee Friday, April 06, 2012 5:07:00 PM Re: loanranger post# 175550 Post # of 175607 Thank you for taking the time to review documentation It is goofy for sure, part of the issue relates to the transaction occurring between 2 forward splits (June 08 and Jan 09) finance.yahoo.com The pre-Jan '09 f/s transaction appears on the Q as what would be expected as 1/2 the shares (1,320,000) but there is no ledger entry as to value. sec.gov The 1st ledger entry appears in Q3 post Jun f/s as 2.64 mill = $10 mill, but also notes 1.32 mill w/o a basis. sec.gov Regardless-- in all this -- the silly whistling past the graveyard is the obvious: how could such an intelligent person surrounded by so many astute/savvy OTC traders not know Kidd's antics and the probability ratio of being swindled as being considerably high? This whole portion of the JBI saga IMO points directly to padding the books for a multitude of reasons... ... those reasons included acquisitions and ultimately qualifying for uplisting. siliconinvestor.com

To: scion who wrote (21881)	4/9/2012 12:13:30 PM
From: scion	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53574

We urge all persons who are responsible for the accuracy and adequacy of the disclosure in the filing to be certain that the filing includes the information the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and all applicable Exchange Act rules require. Since the company and its management are in possession of all facts relating to a company’s disclosure, they are responsible for the accuracy and adequacy of the disclosures they have made. In responding to our comments, please provide a written statement from the company acknowledging that: - the company is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of the disclosure in the filing; - staff comments or changes to disclosure in response to staff comments do not foreclose the Commission from taking any action with respect to the filing; and - the company may not assert staff comments as a defense in any proceeding initiated by the Commission or any person under the federal securities laws of the United States. You may contact Michael Henderson, Staff Accountant at 202-551-3364 or Carlos Pacho, Senior Assistant Chief Accountant at 202-551-3835 if you have questions regarding comments on the financial statements and related matters. Please contact me at 202-551-3810 with any other questions. Sincerely, /s/ Robert S. Littlepage for Larry Spirgel Assistant Director UPLOAD Domark International Inc. sec.gov