Renee
3 years ago
ABWN: SEC Obtains Final Judgments from Two Defendants for Their Roles in $45 Million Fraudulent Scheme
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2022/lr25355.htm
Litigation Release No. 25355 / April 5, 2022
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Airborne Wireless Network, et al., No. 21-civ-01772 (S.D.N.Y. filed March 2, 2021)
On April 4, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered final judgments against Chrysilios Chrysiliou and Panagiotis Bolovis for their respective roles in a fraudulent scheme to gain control of Airborne Wireless Network, promote its stock, and defraud investors.
According to the SEC's complaint, filed on March 2, 2021, Kalistratos "Kelly" Kabilafkas secretly purchased essentially all the outstanding stock of a shell company now known as Airborne, then distributed millions of shares among himself and his associates, including Chrysiliou and Bolovis. As alleged, Chrysiliou and Bolovis participated in Kabilafkas's scheme by deceiving Airborne's transfer agent and their broker dealers in order to have the shares transferred into their names, deposited in their brokerage accounts, and cleared for sale to the public. The complaint alleges that Chrysiliou and Bolovis then sold these shares into the public market while an Airborne promotional campaign was underway, generating proceeds of approximately $1.3 million and $3.8 million, respectively. The complaint also alleges that Bolovis kicked-back all but approximately $4,000 of his proceeds to benefit Kabilafkas and his family.
Without admitting or denying the SEC's allegations, Chrysiliou and Bolovis consented to the entry of final judgments permanently enjoining them from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and imposing penny stock bars. The final judgments also order Chrysiliou to pay $739,630 in disgorgement plus $112,612 in prejudgment interest, and a $75,000 civil penalty, for a total of $927,242, and Bolovis to pay $4,218 in disgorgement plus $789 in prejudgment interest, and a $50,000 civil penalty, for a total of $55,007.
The SEC's ongoing litigation against five remaining defendants and two relief defendants is being conducted by Daniel Maher, Nick Margida, and Drew Dorman, and supervised by Olivia S. Choe. The SEC's investigation was conducted by Paul J. Bohr, Jennie B. Krasner, Drew Dorman, Jeffrey Anderson, and Robert Nesbitt, with the assistance of the Enforcement Division's IT Forensics Lab, and supervised by Peter Rosario, George Bagnall, and Jennifer Leete.
Jack53
3 years ago
FSSN is the new ABWN. Exciting stuff here. Se the link I shared in previous post.
LEOs-19-09-2019-1.pdf
View In App
1
2
3
©
2019 F
re
e Space Secure Network
Contact information:
info@freespace.network
v. 19
-
09
-
2019
-
1
The Future of Telecommunications
Comparing ECO Systems
With the emergence of the Smart Infrastructure evolution the connectivity challenge
is not only becoming more complex but also more desired both across the world as well as
in the air with 4 billion passengers commuting on an annual basis. On the ground th
e 5G
infrastructure acceleration will be primarily limited to urban areas. LEO (Low Earth Orbit)
based systems are argued and perceived to be the best solution to solve the aerial
connectivity challenges with our current knowledge.
However, one piece of
the puzzle is missing. A complementary
“
middle layer
”
airborne system to the existing infrastructures, which is easily upgradeable with higher
speeds in the aerial domain.
Free Space Secure Network Inc. (FSSN) is working on this missing and complementary
link by merging FSO technology with a software platform to lay the foundation for a Free
Space Optics Mesh network to be carried by the existing fleets in the air today. The system
interfaces seamlessly with the existing infrastructures both ground and in
space.
To understand specifically how LEO based systems compare to the FSSN platform
this paper shows a comparison of the features categorized under advantages and
disadvantages. The complementary nature of the approaches is highlighted to unlock higher
internet speeds to remote areas around the world, on the ocean and in the air.
Key considerations in that sense focus on upgradeability, cost, transmission speeds,
limited spectrum, space debris, and compatibility with existing ground infrastructure to
na
me a few. With a broader understanding of the FSSN technology players such as Airbus,
Deutsch
e
Telekom and others have engaged with FSSN to bring this platform closer to reality
as a total eco system solution.
LEO Satellite Technology
and benefit
highlights
•
The
Low Earth Orbiting satellite constellation, which
was known as the “
Iridium
”
communications service
was launched on November 1, 1998 by what was
then Iridium SSC. The first Iridium call was made by
Vice President of the United States Al Gore to Gilbert
Grosvenor, the great
-
grandson of Alexander
Graham Bell and chairman of
the National
Geographic Society.
Motorola provided the
technology and major financial backing.
Iridium
covered a major part of the globe and allowed
people with “satellite phones” to call from remote
locations.
•
With modern technology, LEO (Low
Earth Orbit)
satellites could play a significant short
-
term role in
solving some of the world’s connectivity needs.
•
Over the past few years, the cost to produce and
launch LEO satellites has been reduced significantly
as a result of new technology availabi
lity, “economy
of scale” production, and more efficient launch
vehicles.
•
With a large enough quantity of satellites, a limited
number of target customers can be provided with
excellent performance expectations.
•
Due to their high orbit speeds of around 17
,000
miles per hour, and their typically 800
-
1200
-
mile
altitudes, these are circling the globe in a mere 90
minutes. Hence, LEOs perform best when these
have large, overlapping footprints, as the next
satellite will need to take over seamlessly when their
predecessor has passed.
•
Persons living within the trajectory of these LEOs can
expect reasonable Internet speeds.
•
Investors feel comfortable in investing in LEO
technology, as these are being developed by large,
well
-
known companies, primarily SpaceX, L
eoSat,
and OneWeb. These companies have large
advertising budgets, aimed at making potential
investors feel more comfortable with the prospect s
of a reasonable return on investment.
•
Most high
-
tech investors realize that they would
likely see an ROI befor
e any rollout problems
become evident, making their investments “low
risk”.
FSSN’s Free Space Optics
a
nd benefit highlight
s
•
FSSN’s proposed global meshed network, consisting
of Free Space Optics (FSO) terminals and Radio
Frequency (RF) signaling,
con
figured as a hybrid
system, offer
s
the best of both tech
nologies. FSSN’s
proprietary technology is based on a field proven
FSO de
sign, which has been tested extensively by
the US DOD in their DARPA FOENEX program; FSSN’s
unique dynamic locating algorithms and ability to
mass
-
produce its hybrid FSO terminals. FSSN’s staff
has a proven track record of creating disruptive new
technolo
gies, ranging from the world’s first wireless
consumer telephone in 1977, the wireless in
-
cabin
AIRFONE
(1982),
to numerous global satellite,
mobile, aeronautical and microwave systems.
•
On 14 August 2019, FSSN and Cubic Corporation, its
strategic manufactu
rer/ vendor, successfully
demonstrated a full
-
motion, 10 Gigabit
P
er Second,
Error Free Bidirectional Free Space Optic link for
AIRBUS. This demonstration was the first phase of
an FSSN/AIRBUS Joint R&D agreement. Other
participating companies are D
eutsche TeleKo
m
(terrestrial traffic) and Nokia (LTE switching).
•
In contrast to LEO technology, FSSN’s global meshed
network operates at the speed of light (FSSN’s
signals are carried on beams of light), allowing for
data
-
rates of many gigabits per second
. The
demonstration for AIRBUS was at 10 Gb/sec.
However, the system being developed for AIRBUS is
expected to have a data
-
rate of 40 Gb/sec, and upon
global rollout, speeds of 100 to 400 Gb/sec are
expected, as FSSN’s engineers are developing new
modula
tion techniques.
•
The total number of flying nodes “Satellites” FSSN
intends to “launch” (install on aircraft)
over a 5 to 7
-
year period
is
up to 500,000. There are typically four
hybrid terminals per passenger jet, cargo aircraft
, or
supporting ship (rela
y); fewer on smaller aircraft.
•
FSSN’s “satellites” can be updated or repaired at any
time,
LEOs cannot be repaired or upgraded
.
•
As a telephone company, FSSN intends to augment
the global telecom network, including
“landing
signals for the anticipated
globa
l 5
G networks
.
•
FSSN’s smaller footprints over LEOs mean better
reuse of spectrum and targeted
efficient deliveries
.
Long
-
term potential problems
and issues
with LEOs
•
Because of their high orbiting speeds, LEOs must use
limited Radio Frequency (RF) bandwidth to carry
their uplinks, as well as the downlink
-
footprint,
making it virtually impossible to provide the service
levels which they promise.
•
Alternative connection
methods, such as the much
faster Free Space Optics (FSO), could see a practical
application between satellites in the same orbit, as
the difference in speed between satellites is
minimal, but FSO up and down
-
links at these speeds
are, in the foreseeable f
uture, not feasible.
•
If all envisaged customers were online at one time,
the system would bog down; it would not be able to
exceed “dial
-
up speed”, which was the norm in the
early days of the Internet, if it performed at all.
•
Furthermore, it is not just th
e short
-
term
development and deployment costs that should be
considered. A LEO’s orbit decays rapidly and after
only approximately 5 years these will “fall out of
orbit” and burn up; some of the remaining parts will
fall down to earth, but the rest become
s space junk,
which can damage other LEOs and hamper human
space travel.
•
Although the LEOs’ concept to commissioning costs
are significantly lower than a few years ago, the
long
-
term costs associated with these are expected
to far exceed those of other via
ble methods of
providing global services.
•
The LEOs are primarily supported by independent
ISPs (Internet Service Providers), while the
telecommunication industry in general favors m
o
re
permanent solutions.
•
One Web’s part
-
owner, AIRBUS (Defence and
Space),
is exploring alternate systems despite
investing heavily in One Web
.
•
Single points of failure; when one satellite is
damaged or destroyed by a collision or by space
junk, there will be a data
-
interruption until the next
satellite wizzes by. (Assuming a l
ink can be
established to the next satellite in the same orbit.)
•
Heavy rain may impede service or cause complete
outages.
•
LEO constellations may need the support of FSSN
and vice versa to fully cover the globe.
©
2019 Free Space Secure Network, Inc.
Disadvantages of FSSN’s tech
a
nd possible solutions
•
When an
aircraft
encounters
heavy clouds, it can no
longer support the global mesh. As FSSN is a hybrid
system, the affected aircraft is isolated, dropped
from the mesh, and supplied with RF only to service
its “onboard needs
”
and to use its location data
for
managing its anticipated return to the mesh.
•
Severe weather and/or v
olcanic
ash
could ground or
force rerouting of aircraft, creating
local
voids in the
global coverage.
The first “line of defense” is routing
signals to unaffected
ground stations, in
some cases
this will mitigate the issues.
As this is a rare but
possible scenario
,
FSSN,
as a telephone company,
would
rel
y
on its associated
global telecom partners
to cover most of these outages
. Although the cost
per minute may be greater, it is a viab
le solution for
minimizing interruptions. Once the weather has
moved out, full service can be restored. As a side
-
note, because of their operating frequenc
ies,
LEO
satellites are also affected, especially by heavy rain.
Under these rare circumstances, s
atellites may offer
a slight advantage over FSSN’s network.
•
FSSN’s planned global mesh requires participation
by many airlines and air cargo carriers for its primary
infrastructure.
Initially, this could create some
difficulty. FSSN’s solution is to roll
out in strategic
areas. In addition to the targeted commercial
aircraft, FSSN plans to use dedicated aircraft to fill
these initial gaps; as the system is rolled out,
commercial aircraft would take over and “filling
gaps” would be limited to certain circum
stances
only. The aircraft designed to fill these gaps would
also be used to offer services to disaster areas, as
these could operate as part of the global mesh, or
independently.
•
A
s with satellite, LE
O
s included, the initial costs are
very high. Current
ly, a single set of terminals costs
in excess of $10 million USD. FSSN needs to attract
investors who understand high
-
tech development
and can help guide FSSN to be successful. With
FSSN’s experience in commercializing high
-
tech
equipment, in large volumes
the target price per
airborne terminal needs to be in the $70,000 USD
range, but it will take a
significant
investment in
manufacturing equipment.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
Ask ADVFN Intelligence (AI)
JMoneyHoops
1 month ago
Mercedes99
5 months ago
mckvee
9 months ago
lucky, mydog
1 year ago
MasterBlastr
3 years ago
Stockman1010101
3 years ago
Werbe
3 years ago
Hot Features
Premium
