IH Admin [Shelly]
16 hours ago
Folks, I know many of you have been around for a long time but the overzealous personal ("of or concerning one's private life, relationships, and health") attacks on/about each other needs to end.
Yes, people can offer their opinions about public figures whether positive, negative or neutral. But, going forward, let's keep the focus on opinions about business practices and not veer into making it personal, as described above, about anyone.
SCAMBUSTERKING
1 day ago
1) If you disagree with your lawyers statement about an open hearing take it up with him not me.
2) Ive not emailed the judge, so good reach there.
3) Who said the SEC approves 3a10's? You said they do things on a case by case basis and not blanket statements. Please keep strawmanning, it makes you look smarter.
4) There is no re-interpretation. They stated it in plain english and nothing you submitted to the court can be found in any law, sec bulletin, or case law. In fact, other CEOs who tries to use a 3a10 for capital formation went to jail. So, I have case law for that Mr financial wizard.
5) If you knew what you were doing you wouldnt have tried to lie to the TA to state you had an approved 3a10 agreement. Then file two 3a10 lawsuits at the same time in two courts, with one being dismissed with prejudice. Then finally finding some idiot lawyer who would use magic (legal fiction) to defraud the court for you.
6)
Stock performance: You are literally the worst OTC CEO ever. Your companies blow and no one will buy your stock. You are an embarrassment to everyone around you who keeps trying to help you bail out from your repeated stupid decisions. To no avail, because you just do something even more dumb the next round. You fancy yourself a financial wizard, but that isn't a wizard cap, its a dunce cap.
You are a complete failure and you think youre being witty, yet anyone can see youre a scammer. No one respects you, we are all laughing at you.
The fun this will be when the SEC files their complaint is going to be hilarious reposting all these things you said. Im going to LMAO so hard. If a meme was CEO on iHub its never been more perfect:
SCAMBUSTERKING
1 day ago
First, you're own default judgement states it is an open hearing for the purposes evaluating the fairness of the 3a10, so my plan is to just cite your own court filings, have you even read them?
Second, show me where the SEC reviews and approved this. They did make a blanket statement, thats what the SEC bulletins are literally designed to do. Thats why no one else but a scammer and an idiot lawyer would be dumb enough to get a 3a10 for an active affiliate.
Third, the judge was not afforded all the details by you and your idiot attorney, therefore he could not properly review and assess. Thats what happens when you lie and hide things from the judge.
PS: you have the worst performing stock on the OTC in the past year from what I can tell and your constant dumping will make it even funnier when you try to pretend there is shareholder value. You are literally so bad at this mediocre would be a compliment at this point. You are toxically awful and make some of the stupidest decisions Ive seen. At least it seems you are willing to admit I could make you mediocre instead of what you are.. a scammer.
Jake-P-Noch-
1 day ago
Dear Courtroom Spectator in Spirit,
I appreciate your enthusiasm, but let’s get a few things straight. First, you’re not a party to this case, nor are you involved in any capacity that would allow you to attend, let alone interrupt, a court proceeding. If you’re genuinely planning to "show up" to a 3(a)(10) hearing, I’d love to hear how you intend to explain your presence—because disrupting a judicial process when you have no standing is not only laughable but legally inadvisable. That’s not how the system works, but I wouldn’t expect someone who misinterprets SEC guidelines to understand court decorum.
Second, claiming the SEC categorically says affiliates "can’t" utilize 3(a)(10) is simply incorrect. The SEC doesn’t issue blanket statements like that because it reviews transactions on a case-by-case basis, considering compliance with applicable rules. That’s the beauty of a court-approved 3(a)(10) proceeding—it involves a judge’s review of all details. If you’re struggling with these concepts, I’d recommend a securities law primer over your current approach of throwing shade from the sidelines.
As for your critique of my business performance, I’m flattered by your fixation on my success, even as you try to spin it as failure. The fact that you’ve spent this much time monitoring my activities—while simultaneously misunderstanding them—suggests I’ve achieved something you could only dream of: relevance. Keep watching, though; I hear courts tend to side with substance over internet trolling.
Lastly, it’s amusing that someone so keen on hurling insults about “cockiness” and “failure” is this obsessed with my work. If mediocrity is what you think you see, I wonder what that says about your own accomplishments—or lack thereof. When you’re done recycling emojis and outdated memes, feel free to engage in a real conversation about the law. Until then, enjoy playing armchair attorney.
Best regards,
Jake P. Noch
SCAMBUSTERKING
1 day ago
"No you cant" - The SEC
"Yes I can, through magic" - Jakey
Sorry, but this is too funny. You're so sure about this you had to hid the 3a10 bulletin from the SEC from the judge 😂
Cant wait to see you at the 3a10 hearing for BCAP. Ill be fully ready 😘 Youre only reply is "I know you are but what am I" instead of explaining why the SEC is wrong. You didnt explain to the judge why, in spite of the SEC saying you cant, you think you can. You just didnt inform them, neither you or your idiot lawyer know what you've done and I love it even more.
Not the first scammer who got cocky before their fall. Whats even funnier, as youre first stock, is down for $40k post split pps to .0175 just from you market dumping stock for a year after saying you wouldnt. 😂😂😂 Thats not mediocracy, thats actually sucking at everything you do 😂😂😂🚮🚮🚮
Jake-P-Noch-
1 day ago
Dear Self-Proclaimed Expert,
It’s amusing how you conflate your personal anecdotes with actual legal knowledge. The SEC has no obligation to rebut your misinterpretations—it’s busy enforcing real compliance issues, not entertaining self-serving commentary from internet hobbyists. Your assertion that affiliates are “not allowed” to utilize a 3(a)(10) exemption demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how these exemptions work. Court-approved 3(a)(10) transactions allow for flexibility in structuring deals that comply with SEC regulations. Your failure to grasp this isn’t my problem.
As for your alleged "chunk of unrestricted shares," congratulations on your victory lap for the most basic corporate activity. If the highlight of your career is consulting for an OTC company and bragging about unrestricted shares, it’s no wonder your arguments lack substance.
You accuse me of strawmanning, yet your entire tirade rests on the false premise that my actions contradict SEC rules. Let me clarify: my approach is fully compliant, court-approved, and thoroughly vetted by legal professionals who actually specialize in securities law—not internet commentators moonlighting as consultants.
If you have a genuine question about SEC compliance, I’d be happy to educate you further. Otherwise, I suggest focusing on your consulting gig—it sounds like you’ve finally found a niche where mediocrity is acceptable.
Warm regards,
Jake P. Noch