MyImagineTV.com

Well… there appears to be some progress…maybe.  Mr. Steven Samblis, CEO of IC Punch Media announced today (via twitter feed from his @Orlandolive twitter feed) that ImagineTV is launching.  The website is here.  If you don’t like to read, there is a link here where Mr. Samblis is being interviewed about the launch and content (appears to be a “promotional” video).

Without any further explanation, which is par for the course for Mr. Samblis, one is left to assume, speculate and/or conclude that this appears to be an extension, or rebirth, of his Self Help Center endeavor.  If you navigate to the Self Help Center website, you are now simply re-directed to the IC Places website.

One thing that jumped out at us upon initial review, was the “relationship” of the new initiative.  In the graphic below (click to enlarge), notice the highlighted section.  This notation leaves open the question as to what extent this initiative will benefit the shareholders of PNCH.  In our post here about where’s the revenue, one must question where any revenue and/or profit will be accounted for as a result of any sales THIS initiative has.

Image

Also notice the reference in the graphic below.  IC Places has “invested” in Imagine TV.  What does that mean ???  If invested in the traditional terms, does that mean Mr. Samblis, through IC Places Inc. has bought shares in the Imagine TV company?  If so, how much investment, and where did the funds come from for the investment – Mr. Samblis’s “personal” funds, or PNCH funds?  AND… like VU Television, there appears to be confusion surrounding multiple Imagine TV companies all using the same or slight variation of the Imagine name (sort of like MYimaginetv).  So if there was really an investment, i.e. an exchange of funds, which company was the investment placed in?

Image

As usual, with no explanation, and the past history of questionable creditability of Mr. Samblis… this new initiative creates more questions than it provides answers.  What, on the surface, appears to be a good thing, may in fact be not so much.

We guess, stay tuned, hopefully there will be a press release explaining the relationship.  However, as press releases go, they usually create more questions then they answer, and, even if Mr. Samblis were to personally provide an explanation to the investors of PNCH, it will likely be code-speak as suggested in this excerpt from our post here.

Image

Mr. Samblis… please provide a meaningful explanation of the relationship arrangement posted on the MyImagineTV website, along with what, if any, benefit this new initiative will have for the investors of PNCH.  And please… no code-speak !

 

The dreaded Reverse Split !

Well folks… there it was for all to see… the CEO of IC Punch Media, Mr. Steven Samblis acknowledging a reverse split is possible.  For months and months the bashers over on LieHub have predicted Mr. Samblis would do a reverse split.  In contrast, for months and months Mr. Samblis has vehemently denied and had been steadfast in his statements of not doing a reverse split.  Well… Mr. Samblis’s post last night seemed to be acknowledgement of a reverse split certainly being a viable option, and in our opinion, the lead-in and set-up of one.

Image

Some of you may remember our post speaking to a reverse split here.  Also, here is just one of the posts where Mr. Samblis states he would not do a reverse split because “there is no reason to“.  In many, if not all of Mr. Samblis’s statements concerning a reverse split, he has always added that caveat about no need.  We believe this was no accident.  Has he planned on doing a reverse split all along… who knows, but its obvious to us at least that Mr. Samblis knew this was a tool in his toolbox that was at his disposal at any time.  By emphasizing so frequently that he was not going to do a reverse split, he apparently had hoped that readers would latch on to the not going to part and miss and/or underestimate the no need to part.  Pretty slick don’t you think ???

On a related issue regarding carefully chosen wording in an effort to mislead… take a close look at this post.  In the line about getting assets back and damages from Collins, Mr. Samblis makes a true statement… however, true to what extent?  Make a positive difference, a negative difference, or very little difference either way?  Take a look at this post from Mr. Samblis, wherein he states “My attorneys feel he is judgment proof because if we won we would never recover a dime from him.”.  So what is the point of the statement about making “a difference”?  The obvious point that comes to mind is to mislead the reader.

Lets look at the next statement Mr. Samblis makes in the same post.  “There is nothing in either agreement that gave him majority control of the company. He could get shares but no place is any percentage of ownership talked about.“.  Here again, a true statement, however, that is not the accusation of Mr. Collins.  Mr. Collins assertion is that in 90-days he was to “step up as CEO”.  The only “control” Mr. Collins spoke about was being elevated to CEO.  Mr. Samblis carefully and cleverly attempts to mislead the  reader into thinking Mr. Collins has no basis for his statements.  Its clear for all to see that the provision about being elevated to CEO is certainly listed in the Mr. Collins Employment Agreement.

Lets look at Mr. Samblis’s statement about the listing of Mr. Samblis’s employment contract.  Mr. Samblis states “Collins said there was no record of my employment contract”.  What Mr. Collins actually stated was…”Samblis failed to disclose his alleged Employment Agreement at that time. Further, Mr. Collins audited all previous SEC filings for IC Places, all signed by Samblis, and not only was there no mention of this agreement, the annual statements for years 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 expressly state “There is no employment contract with Executives or Directors at this time. Nor are there any agreements for compensation in the future”.  Now, look at the statement Mr. Samblis quotes in support of his contention Mr. Collins is lying.  Do you see anything in there about maintaining majority control of the stock?  Mr. Samblis states “but it was in all the books and in public filings”.  Again, do you see any mention of the Greystone Park Enterprises, Inc. employment contract in Mr. Samblis’s “example”.

The public filing dated 11/14/2012 states the following: “On November 18, 2005 the Company entered into an employment agreement with Steven Samblis to be our Chief Executive Officer.”. The passage goes on to list the compensation which includes the provision of majority control being maintained.  Do you see this employment contract listed in any previous filings, and specifically the part about maintaining majority control of the stock. Take a look at the below graphic, taken from the August 12, 2011 Quarterly report filing here. (click image to enlarge).  Do you see anything about an employment contract?  What you do see is the specific statement that there are NO employment contracts !

Image

So… Mr. Samblis’s “example” is correct in and of itself, but has no relationship to the accusations Mr. Collins is making.  Again, this appears an effort to mislead the reader with true statements which have noting to do with the issue at hand.  Pretty slick don’t you think?

Folks, when you read ANYTHING from Mr. Samblis, we suggest you read it carefully.  Read it with the original question or issue in mind.  We think you will begin to realize many, if not all, of Mr. Samblis’s statements are carefully worded to mislead and deflect the original question.  Its the magician concept… shake your left hand to draw attention away from what your right hand is doing.

There were some very good posts yesterday regarding how Mr. Samblis should conduct himself as CEO of the company.  Mr. Samblis would be wise to heed their advice.  However, its doubtful he will.  For instance, take a look at this post here, and Mr. Samblis’s reply to it here.  This exchange was back in June of 2013.  Do you think Mr. Samblis will heed the good advice he has been given ???  It has been suggested many times, by many investors, that Mr. Samblis hire a professional public relations officer, however apparently Mr. Samblis sees no merit in this action, in spite of the vast numbers of investors telling him its needed.  In fact he really doesn’t need to hire one, as it likely any number of posters/investors would be more than happy to step up and volunteer their expertise for this much needed service.  But still, all this good advice falls on deaf ears.  What does that tell you about the future of the company regardless of any productive business decisions Mr. Samblis may make in the future.

Mr. Samblis is quick to blame anything and everything bad on someone or something else… he really needs to consider revisiting that concept if he has any hope whatsoever of turning this company around !

 

Return of assets ???

What has changed between this: (click to enlarge)

Image

and this:

Image

Consider the following:

1)      Punch assets were valued at 2.8 million (or 135 million shares at the time of purchase)… Mr. Collins has returned 153 million shares.  That far exceeds the value of the asset purchase.  Mr. Samblis has said numerous times that the asset purchase is completely separate from the employment agreement.  Did Mr. Collins return the asset purchase shares, or the employment shares?  How could that ever be determined?  Of course it will be argued by Mr. Collins that he returned the asset shares, and how could that be disproved?

2)      What assets are there really?  The biggest asset (some may disagree, (Mr. Samblis has)) is the Punch name.  What else could there be… some camera equipment, office equipment, video library of old movies.  No real estate was listed in the asset listing, so how much could these assets really be worth?  The asset listing listed 1.4 million in “tangible” assets.  There is a lot of interpretation within the term “tangible”, such as the film library at $650,000., and Software and Broadcast Equipment at $757,000, does anyone think that might be just a little over inflated?  Would they be worth spending 10, 20, 50 thousand dollars in legal fees to attempt to get them back… and would the attempt be successful?

3)      The public move to regain assets could be simply the latest maneuver to garner interest in the stock and perhaps drive up the price.  Public statements like the Chinese deal, CVN deal to be in 12 airports by the end of 2013, and each airport worth $192,000. in yearly revenue, new network launch to numerous markets around the country, etc, etc, etc.  There have been numerous attempts in the past to publically release statements to the investing public that many say have proven to be false and/or never come to fruition.   What makes this public statement about regaining Punch assets (that Mr. Samblis has said he didn’t want) any different?  It appears the recapture of Punch assets stands even less chance of becoming a reality due to Mr. Samblis’s very weak argument that Mr. Collins never returned the shares used to purchase those assets.  Mr. Samblis will have a VERY difficult time proving WHICH set of assets Mr. Collins returned.  If Mr. Collins had returned none, that would be a completely different ball game, but as it stands now with Mr. Collins having returned shares in excess of the amount exchanged for the asset purchase agreement, it looks like any money spent in legal fees to get something Mr. Samblis stated is poison… just makes no sense.

Still think attempting to get back “poison” assets makes any sense ???  Perhaps Mr. Samblis can lay out WHY getting these assets back now is different from when he said there would be noting to gain going after them.  What has changed ???

 

What does 2014 hold for PNCH ?

That’s the big question… what does 2014 hold for PNCH ?  There are some who believe Mr. Samblis walks on water and will pull the company out of near bankruptcy and emerge so strong the stock PPS soars to over a dollar or more.  Just buy more and hold they say… Steve will deliver!

Then there are disbelievers.  These are the people that claim to see the writing on the wall as they say.  They understand their investment is worthless, and Mr. Steve Samblis alone is to blame for the bad decisions that led to the company’s downfall.

Then there are the in-between’s.  The in-between’s understand the severity of the situation, understand their investment is very likely lost, understand Mr. Samblis will very likely not change in order to make things better, and no amount of avid blind support will change the situation at hand.  However… they still hold out unsubstantiated hope.  They know in their logical mind that nothing will bring this company back without massive changes (which are unlikely to happen), but using their emotional mind they still hold some hope that it will.   They hope for a miracle.

We have given the possibilities some thought.  We predict… that PNCH (the public company) will be absorbed by Mr. Joseph Collins of Punch TV and as a result will become the new public company using the same ticker and a modest change to the name but still reflecting Punch in some fashion.  Mr. Samblis will be forced to take a modest payment in return for his agreement to the terms of the settlement.  Let us lay out the reasoning for this bold prediction.  Depending on which group above you align yourself with will determine your reaction to our prediction.

The substance of our prediction is the 50-million dollar lawsuit, however other factors play a role in the prediction.  Although the lawsuit (as of this writing, and as far as we know) is still “pending”.  That is a wild card that could sway any outcome supporting our prediction.  If the lawsuit becomes a reality (and it likely will), then our prediction, in our minds, becomes a certainty.  Mr. Samblis will have no choice but to settle… and any settlement will likely include Mr. Samblis giving up the company as a deal breaker.  If the lawsuit becomes a reality and Mr. Samblis does not settle, which given his previous actions that demonstrate his arrogance, he may bet the farm and lose even the pittance he would have received in any settlement.  Also, and reinforcing our opinion as to the winner in the suit, is that Mr. Collins appears to have far more resources to wage a court battle than Mr. Samblis does.  In most legal actions, the side with the most resources (money to fight) wins.

We have previously laid out the merits of the case against Mr. Samblis here so we won’t list them in this post, but if one looks logically at the evidence, it appears Mr. Collins has a VERY strong case against Mr. Samblis.  Yes, as we said in the referenced post, anything can happen, but we think Mr. Collins has a better than average shot at prevailing in this lawsuit.

Why would Mr. Samblis accept a settlement that involves him losing his company?  We think because faced with the likelihood of a complete legal loss, and likely owing a substantial sum to Mr. Collins for the harm to the Punch TV business if the action would actually go to trial, coupled with the legal fees to fight the suit… he will accept something rather than noting, and likely be in debt to Mr. Collins for the damages accessed.  Mr. Samblis walking away with some pocket change is far more favorable than losing his company AND being in debt to Mr. Collins for the damages accessed by the court, AND being bankrupt by the legal fees fighting a lawsuit he has very little chance of winning.  Also, Mr. Samblis’s reputation is, shall we say, tarnished.  Walking away with some pocket change will allow him to break free from the Punch name and likely start another company, free from the past baggage of the Punch issues, and the current group of investors that have lost big under his leadership.  Given that Mr. Samblis likely blames the company’s downfall on others (never himself), he will likely not associate his past actions as negatively impacting any new venture he may attempt.  He would likely welcome an opportunity at this point to free himself from his current situation… i.e. his company’s stock is in the toilet (as in near worthless), he is about out of shares to sell to raise cash, many investors think he is incompetent, and there is little hope of anything changing significantly in the near future to turn things around before he runs completely out of funds to keep the company operating.

For shareholders, the above may be just what the doctor ordered !  It’s highly unlikely the company will survive under Mr. Samblis’s leadership.  However, Mr. Collins at the helm may just be the spark that ignites a fire under the PPS.  Investors knowing Mr. Samblis is no longer involved with the company, may feel more secure about investing in it, or more secure that their current investment now has a fighting chance of improvement.  Say what you will about Mr. Collins, we doubt he would put himself in some of the situations investors found themselves in with Mr. Samblis.  If you have followed the progress of Punch TV since the breakup, you will see that Mr. Collins has progressed much farther than Mr. Samblis has in the same amount of time, and exhibited far more professionalism while doing such.  Mr. Collins has been in the broadcasting business much longer than Mr. Samblis.  With investment funds behind him, Mr. Collins is likely to progress much farther in a shorter amount of time than Mr. Samblis could ever hope to.   Simply compare the achievements of both men since the breakup and we are confident you will come to the same conclusion.

Even if Mr. Samblis would win the lawsuit, which would be like the odds of winning the Powerball lottery, AND Mr. Samblis changed the ticker symbol, AND Mr. Samblis changed the name of the company… the one remaining factor would be Mr. Samblis would still be the CEO.  Even with a new company name, the most significant factor that caused the current sad state of affairs is still present.  As they say, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome is the true definition of insanity.

When investing in a company, you are really investing in the leadership’s skills and knowledge of the person in charge to make the right decisions to grow the company.  Where has Mr. Samblis’s leadership brought the company to date???  Simply changing the company name and trading symbol does no more than changing the label on expired meat.  Does anyone really think that potential new investors in the same company-new-name will not find history on Mr. Samblis?  Would new investors be so naïve to think Mr. Samblis could do any better with the newly named company just because the name was changed ???  Would CURRENT investors think things will change just because the name has changed???

So… we think everyone can agree… SOMETHING will happen… it’s simply a matter of WHAT will happen.  Neither party is going to let the current situation continue as it is.  Mr. Collins feels he is being harmed, and Mr. Samblis is in a desperate situation with the current condition of his company.  What will happen ???

Think we are nuts ?  Then what do YOU think will happen ?  Let’s hear YOUR prediction on how this plays out… and why !  What would you like to see happen, and why ?  Do you think Mr. Samblis has the leadership skills to turn his company around even if the lawsuit were not a factor, and why ?  And if you think Mr. Samblis does have the leadership skills to turn this company around… why hasn’t he done so in order to prevent the current condition of the company ?   IF… Mr. Collins becomes CEO of the public company that is now PNCH, would you feel more or less confident that your investment will increase in value ?  If Mr. Samblis accepts a settlement that allows him to walk away and start a new company… would you invest in his new company ???

Hopefully we have provided some food for thought.  Regardless of you publicizing your thoughts and predictions here, or other public venues… be thinking about the possibilities and likelihoods of how this PNCH thing could play out.  Again, you must agree… SOMETHING will happen, it’s just a matter of WHAT !

Happy New Year !

 

Has Mr. Samblis… “Screwed the Pooch” ???

Has Mr. Samblis, CEO of IC Punch Media (aka VU Television) “screwed the pooch” as the saying goes, with his latest decision to post on LieHub?  It certainly looks that way.  Many investors had long given up on Mr. Samblis’s efforts to reconstruct the company after the breakup of his partnership with Mr. Joseph Collins… however his most recent actions have sealed the deal for many of those who still had a glimmer of hope still in them.  Now it appears only the most extreme fringe of loyal supporters may be left to support Mr. Samblis, in the face of overwhelming sentiment that the company will never recover.

Take a look at the below graphic.  You can see by the vast number of post deletions of investors expressing their opinion over the situation, that there are those that seemingly still support Mr. Samblis.  Their effort to hide the true feelings and opinions of their fellow investors is evidence of their blind and unwavering support of Mr. Samblis and the company.  Do they really think that attempting to hide opinions will change the facts?

Click on any graphic to enlarge.

Image

Pictured below is one of the posts they deleted because they did not want you to see it.  This post is a partial compilation of posts that Mr. Samblis posted over on LieHub last night.  WHY was this post deleted if for no other reason than censorship, in an attempt to shield Mr. Samblis (and YOU ) from his own words ???  Shameful pure and simple.

Image

Then, when Mr. Samblis finally got banned from the IC Punch Board, he continues to embarrass himself on other boards.  See the graphic below.

Image

Then there is this post they also didn’t want you to see:

Image

Folks… this is a hot mess !  The pending Collins 50-million dollar lawsuit, coupled with Mr. Samblis’s seemingly endless string of bad decision after bad decision, and the fact that Mr. Samblis doesn’t seem to learn from his past actions, and seems unwilling to hire someone with the skills and professionalism to begin a rebuilding effort .. all add up to very little, if any, hope that anything good will come of this company.

It’s a shame really, because with the right leadership, this company could do very well given time.  The broadcasting concept of delivering entertaining content to the viewers using the technological advances of late and future, is a sound one.  One that could be very profitable very quickly given the right leadership.  Perhaps, in time, if/when Mr. Collins takes his company public, his might be the company to invest in.  Most investors were overjoyed when the Collins/Samblis partnership was announced, because many saw the potential of what Mr. Collins brought to the table.  Say what you will about Mr. Collins, its very doubtful you will ever see pictures of him in a bar with what appears to be him engaging in a lap dance.  As we posted here, and as can be seen above, there are many differences between the two men.  The full story of the breakup has yet to air, but something tells us Mr. Collins is not the bad guy Mr. Samblis makes him out to be, based on some of the decisions and actions Mr. Samblis has taken since the breakup.

So… you decide… has Mr. Samblis “screwed the pooch” or not ???   Let us know your thoughts by leaving a comment using the “Leave a Comment”  function at the top-right of this post.  Unlike Investors Hangout, your thoughts will not be deleted !

 

An interview with Mr. Joseph Collins !

We had an opportunity to interview Mr. Joseph Collins, President of Punch TV.  As can be seen by the introduction to the questioning, Mr. Collins was advised that his responses would be on the record, and likely published for all to see.  One would think that given your comments would be on the record, and you had sufficient time to prepare your responses… you would make sure your responses were truthful and accurate.  It is working under this concept that we make the following observations and comments.  And again, we thank Mr. Collins for his time to respond, and his directness in his responses.

See the interview verbatim text here.

We think many would agree that the central issue that caused the breakup of Collins and Samblis was the issue of viewership.  Mr. Samblis has seemed to maintain that Mr. Collins misrepresented the level of potential viewers/homes their signal would be available to.  In Mr. Collins’s response to question #1 he seems to be saying Mr. Samblis’s assertion is incorrect.  Now, this is question #1, and since this, according to Mr. Samblis, was the central issue that caused the problems between the two, one would need to make a determination as to which man is more creditable, and therefore more believable with respect to the central issue.  There are more questions to follow, and if you don’t think Mr. Collins is creditable on this issue, than you are unlikely to believe his responses to the rest of the questions.  We suspect the avid believers in Mr. Samblis will likely disbelieve anything Mr. Collins says, however keep in mind that Mr. Collins is on the record here with his responses, and, appears to have (previously) provided documentation to support his positions.  Mr. Samblis on the other hand has not really provided much detail on any issues surrounding the breakup, or the cause thereof.  We are confident investors would welcome a response by Mr. Samblis, accompanied with supporting documents to validate his responses.  As the accuser, Mr. Samblis should be required to prove his case.

The second, and likely related, issue is that of control of the company.  Mr. Collins states in his response to question #1 that Mr. Samblis was “not going to yield control of the company under any circumstances, even though the contract clearly stipulated differently“.   As we referenced in our recent blog post here, Mr. Collins provided documentation that appears to support his position that Mr. Collins was to “step up” as CEO.  Additionally as we pointed out, there appears to be no preconditions to this specific clause in the contract.  Lacking rebuttal documents from Mr. Samblis it would appear the document Mr. Collins provided is accurate.

If one were to look logically at the contract agreement overall, and then ask themselves what would be the inducement for Mr. Collins to have his company acquired by Mr. Samblis and his public company IC Places… it could seem reasonable that this CEO clause is believable, and likely valid.  It would just seem to be common sense to think that Mr. Collins would have been asking… what’s in it for me?  Mr. Collins had been in business for some 15 years building Punch TV, and one would need to ask themselves why he would turn over his baby to Mr. Samblis without some assurances that he would still be in control over what he worked so hard building.  Likewise its believable that Mr. Samblis would offer such in order to make the deal happen.  Specifically if he knew, as Mr. Collins states, he had an ace in the hole so to speak in that there was an employment contract in force providing that Mr. Samblis would always maintain majority control of the stock, and therefore the company.  IF, as Mr. Collins states, this document was requested, and not provided (under the guise of no such document existed) Mr. Samblis would feel protected in allowing the specific takeover language be included in the contract.  We will leave it to the courts to decide the legality of this action.

Another interesting point, again of central issue, is the return of the shares exchanged as a result of the agreement.  Mr. Collins states (question #3) that upon acceptance of the rescind agreement, Mr. Samblis cancelled the shares.  If in fact Mr. Samblis “cancelled” the shares, and in effect rendering them worthless, 1) what was the point of returning them, and 2) if the shares were indeed worthless why did Mr. Samblis make such a spectacle of calling and waiting for their return?

Feel free to read the verbatim text of the interview and make your own decision and conclusions.  Many reading such, coupled with Mr. Samblis’s creditability issues, may find Mr. Collins’s responses valid and accurate when not looked at through a self serving bias in favor of Mr. Samblis.  In addition to looking at the information logically, let your gut be your guide.

Mr. Samblis… you are encouraged to air any rebuttal facts in support of your previously stated position.  We would be happy to publish such here.  Given that there are many who question your creditability, supporting documentation would be extremely helpful at rebuilding your creditability.

 

 

Breaking up is hard to do…

Yes folks, breaking up is hard to do… so goes the song, and so goes it in real life.  The Collins / Samblis breakup will be no exception.  Not only will it be no exception, unless one or the other (or both) comes to their senses and agrees to a compromise, this thing is likely to drag on for quite a while.  And what are the chances one or the other of these men will compromise ???  There is a term used in the nuclear arms race… MAD, Mutual Assured Destruction.  Its very likely that this dispute will end in the destruction of both sides if, someone does not realize this and accept a compromise.

There are those who think this is a slam-dunk for Samblis.  We suspect its those that are avid supporters of Mr. Samblis, and his company IC Punch Media.  What you are about to read will likely not change the minds of avid supporters, but those of you who have an open mind will likely see some validity in the concepts.  There are some, according to some message board posts, that are seemingly already thinking of ways Mr. Samblis should spend the winnings.  Folks… it is unlikely either side will benefit from this breakup.  However, there is one group that will benefit from this dispute… the attorneys !

Since the breakup… who has done better, or maybe look at it as who has minimized their business as a result.  Mr. Collins has a robust website, Mr. Samblis closed down his website and forwarded any traffic to FilmOn.  When Mr. Collins and Mr. Samblis were together they had a lavish “upfront” party.  Since the breakup Mr. Collins has scheduled a New Years Eve gala for late December (http://www.video.punchtvnetwork.com/index.php/party ).  Mr. Samblis on the other hand has no such events scheduled, and didn’t even put something together for the launch of his new network.  Mr. Collins has press releases frequently, while Mr. Samblis has them rarely, if at all, and simply chooses to utilize FaceBook as his media PR outlet.   Mr. Collins’s network is broadcasting on over 20 affiliates, while Mr. Samblis’s network is simply broadcasting on FilmOn, where anyone with a video camera can obtain air time (http://www.filmon.us/alkidavid).  Mr. Collins has a production studio, and Mr. Samblis apparently does not.  Mr. Collins is recognized by the California Assembly (https://www.prbuzz.com/entertainment/139083-punch-tv-ceo-joseph-collins-recognized-by-california-legislative-assembly.html and https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=708917485793183&l=5cb6d15b99 ) while Mr. Samblis is photographed with playboy bunnies and women at bars.  We could go on and on but I think you get the picture… one CEO is moving forward, while the other CEO is… well lets just say not so much.  The thought here is… who has more resources to defend legal actions, and who has creditability as an upstanding businessman in the community ?

According to wording that was listed in the most recent 10-Q (http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1437596/000155724013000402/pnch_q3-sept2013.htm )… Mr. Collins returned 153 million shares.  The business “assets and business” were valued at 135 million shares (see graphic below).  So… Mr. Collins returned more than the value of the business assets, therefore he will likely be deemed the rightful owner of the Punch name, and any associated assets of the company.  Perhaps what could be at dispute here is the shares for the employment contract, NOT the assets.  Mr. Collins appears to have returned a portion of his employment contract shares (some 18 million shares) and the balance is in question.  Perhaps there is an open dispute regarding service rendered and the shares were held back, or, deemed rightfully his to do as he saw fit.  In any case, there will likely be a creditable defense put forth by Mr. Collins’s attorneys that there is no dispute with the assets (because he returned those shares), just the employment contract.  Mr. Collins obviously contributed to the company while he was there, so all that is left to determine is to what extent his services should be compensated.  Perhaps there was a calculation by Mr. Collins (and/or his attorney) that would account for the return of shares over and above the asset value.  Mr. Samblis can not have the Punch name AND keep the money (shares) used to pay for such.  Remember… Mr. Samblis has repeatedly maintained a distinction between the asset purchase, and the employment contract.

Click any graphic to enlarge for reading)

Image

Additionally, Mr. Samblis (see post below) has stated recently, and repeatedly, that he wants to distance himself from the Punch name, and at times has called the Punch name “poison”.  WHY then is he taking a position of fighting for such?  The classic question is… was he lying then, or is he lying now when he says now that he wants the Punch name, and apparently seems to be willing to spend investor funds to go after it.  This action simply defies logic.

Image

It appears Mr. Collins was to be given 150 million shares of restricted stock as inducement to join the company as President.  In the employment contract, at first glance, it appears that stock exchange only happened if Mr. Collins raised 3-million dollars of capital investment.  However, when read more closely it actually states “the company” needed to raise the 3-million, not specifically Mr. Collins.  Therefore Mr. Collins can not be held personally (specifically and wholly) responsible for “the company” not reaching that goal.  Section 4b seems to indicate that 150-million shares are to be given to Mr. Collins NOT related to any achieved criteria, but simply as an inducement to come on board as President.  The clause appears to be independent of any criteria by using the words “immediate issuance”.  Section 4b stands independent, unlike section 4c, where “bonuses” are addressed, and are definitely tied to achievements (but not necessarily Collins personal achievements) .  If 4b stands up in court, Mr. Samblis could be looking at a situation where he ows Mr. Collins some 18-million shares back of the returned shares.

Image

There was also some disagreement (and some thought it was a ridiculous statement for Mr. Collins to make), that Mr. Samblis was to give up his CEO title after 3-months to Mr. Collins.  If you look at the contract closely you will notice section 4c i, ii, iii, iv all contain the “and” provision, however section 4c V follows no “and”, and appears to stand independent of the conditions placed on the awards above.  You can be sure any good attorney will argue this point.

Will ANY of the Collins legal arguments prove successful… who knows, but keep in mind as the saying goes… you never know what a judge will do.  Remember the woman who sued McDonald’s because SHE spilled hot coffee on herself… AND WON !  One has to look no further than to some of the ridiculous consumer warnings on products nowadays.  These warning, in most cases, were put there as a result of someone suing the manufacture of the product because THEY did something stupid.

Folks… if you think Samblis has a lock on emerging a winner in this dispute, you are simply ignoring the facts and possible endings.  Even a “compromise” solution to this dispute will hurt, because in a compromise, neither party gets all of what they wanted.

Stayed tuned (but feel free to get up and make a sandwich, because this will likely take some time).  This will likely get nastier before it gets any better.  And… what happens to the PPS in the meantime ???

 

Rescind the rescind agreement… wait… what ???

Yes, that’s right folks… apparently Mr. Samblis, CEO of IC Punch Media, Inc. has planted the seed that he is rescinding the rescind agreement.  See the graphic below.

Image

According to this Investors Hangout post, which appears to contain information taken from the IC Places Facebook page… Mr. Samblis states we “have revoked the recession agreement“.   Notice Mr. Samblis states he “have“, indicating an action that has already taken place.

So… if the original agreement to rescind has been revoked, then Mr. Collins is President again.  Mr. Collins now owns some 350 million shares of PNCH again.  Mr. Collins is now on the Board of Directors again, etc, etc, etc.  Folks… you just can’t make this stuff up as the comics say.

Keep in mind here folks… Mr. Samblis has a creditability issue.  He also has a financial issue, in that, the stock price is at rock bottom and is about worthless for raising capital, badly needed to keep PNCH afloat.  He needs to prime the pump as they say in order to instil some hope in investors minds in order to get the stock price back up to the point that it can generate some much needed capital to finance the ongoing day to day operations.  And he will likely have a trusted surrogate promote the activity.

Also… its not clear if the original rescind agreement (which by the way to our knowledge has never been made public in or outside of any corporate filing) is actually valid and enforceable.  It has to be assumed that Collins has access to attorneys also, and there must be some reason he never returned his shares.  But of course no one knows if that is accurate either.  Take a quick peek at this document talking about contract rescission here. (and yes, it states California law at the top but other states are similar and was only referenced to illustrate the complexity of such actions).  As you can see, its not as simple as simply stating out loud, or wishing it to be that makes it valid.  Court action is needed for that.  Neither party here likely has the funds for a court battle so it likely remains a stalemate until its validity is adjudicated in a court of law.  And if the original rescind action is complex… what about rescinding the rescind agreement ???   Try looking that action up on the internet… lol.

Yes, perhaps Mr. Samblis has been successful at getting some content removed from YouTube, but also perhaps just temporarily due to the validity of the rescind agreement… i.e. who is really the rightful owner of the Punch name.  It is very easy to get YouTube to pull content, specially when a DMCA request is filed.  It is much easier for YouTube to pull the content in question and avoid any legal issues for themselves than it would be to fight a court battle over the posters right to post the material.  However it is likely Mr. Collins will contest the removal, and if his argument is robust, the content will likely reappear.  Here again, YouTube will not want to get in a legal battle over exactly who has the legal rights to the name at this point and will likely take a neutral position lacking court sanctioned documents citing who is the legal owner of the material and/or name.

This Collins/Samblis feud is a real mess folks… and it is not likely to be settled for a long long time given the financial status of both men.  So… don’t get your hopes up too high.

 

Life’s mystries !

Yes, there are quite a few mysteries with PNCH.  So many questions, and so few answers.  Why is that ?  How hard can it be to answer a simple, straightforward, legitimate, investor question ?

Some important questions that remain unanswered by Mr. Steven Samblis, CEO of IC Punch Media, Inc are:

Revenue.  Why is there NO revenue being reported ?   There is a general understanding that the website IC Places is part of the PNCH company.  It is simply defies logic to think that none of the advertising on the website is, or has (of late), produced even $1.00 in revenue.  OR, any other business endeavor PNCH may have been engaged in, such as the ClearVision Airport deal.  It important to understand the difference between revenue, and profit.  It’s understandable that the company may not be making a “profit” on any advertising or other activities surrounding the business or website due to costs, overhead, etc., however it’s just unbelievable Mr. Samblis is running advertising on the site for free.  If anyone paid to have an ad on the website, that is revenue, regardless of any associated costs to run the ad.  Where is that revenue at ???

There are some who think that any such revenue is being recorded within the accounting of the IC Places Productions company, also owned by Mr. Samblis.   What if… any “revenue” is being accounted for within the IC Productions company (which to our understanding is a wholly owned subsidiary of Mr. Samblis, however NOT part of the IC Punch Media, Inc (PNCH) company)… and the “expenses” to produce the medium that airs the ads (IC Places.com)  receives the expenses ?  Aside from any legal discussions within the IRS and/or SEC over any such a practice … this would seem to indicate a willingness to mislead investors at the very least.   We would welcome Mr. Samblis to set the record straight on this subject.  Lacking such just leaves the issue open to speculation.  In the past Mr. Samblis’s response to such a question was to attack the questioner, but never address the question.  Perhaps now would be the time to come clean and directly address the issue with a full and complete explanation of how it’s possible to run a business and not have even $1.00 of revenue over a 9-month period for those efforts.

Image

Click graphic to enlarge.  Complete Quarterly statement here:

Broadcasting content.  It was with great fanfare that VU Television Network announced that they had purchased the rights to 2000 hours of programming for airing on their network.  See the press release here.  In fact this purchase was such a huge deal that Mr. Samblis decided to delay the much publicized initial launch of the network because of it.  Additionally, although it was not communicated to the investors a that time, the “original” programming content that had been developed for the launch… was set aside in favor of the new content.  There was never any details released to the investors, or the public, related to the cost of this deal.  And there was no mention of it in the most recent quarterly report.  Granted, the report covered a reporting period ending September 30th., so maybe the financial aspect of the deal would not be included, but the report was filed on November 19th, long after the initial launch using this programming.  Why no mention of the purchase ?

Now, fast forward to recently, sometime around the filing of the quarterly report, and there is no more 2000 hours of programming being broadcast on the VU Television Network.  Where did this content go ???  This much publicized content deal, that was important enough to delay a much publicized initial launch… now appears to be non-existent.  The network now appears to be broadcasting the content that was not good enough for the initial launch.  Also, VU Television Network now appears to be airing re-runs of old movies, which is in direct opposition to their (initial) claim that they were cutting edge broadcasting for the 18-34 year old demographic.  We see now that they have changed their company focus wording to programming “that speaks to classic and contemporary ideals and interests, ranging from the inspiring to the hilarious.”  This change is a major shift in direction and it would seem fiscally responsible to have advised the investors about.  This programming issue also needs a full and complete explanation.

Outstanding Share increases.  This also is a major issue that needs a full and complete – and honest, discussion.  As can be seen by the below chart, the outstanding share count is projected to increase to 5-billion shares by June if the current trend continues. Mr. Samblis keeps spouting the same rhetoric about he has not sold a single share in over a year… well the figures that are represented in this chart need an explanation.  We addressed the situation recently here.   Mr. Samblis, as CEO of the company, certainly knows how and why this increase is happening, and should be straight with the investors about it and not repeatedly play them as fools using the I never sold a single share line.

Image

If Mr. Samblis ever expects his company to do better… then HE needs to do better.  He needs to do a better job at being straightforward with investors on simple, but very important questions like the ones posted above.

Can he turn this company around… maybe.  But what he can’t turn around is the past… HIS past.   That’s the one stubborn thing about history… you can’t get rid of it.   Investors don’t care too much about the past if they are making money, but the problem is, will they become investors if they do more than 5-minutes of research on the CEO’s past experience and history of management decisions.   An internet connection, rudimentary knowledge of using Google, and 5-minutes, will likely have 99% of potential investors taking their chances on some other stock.  Mr. Samblis hasn’t made one, or even a few bad decisions… we all have made a few bad decisions in our lives, but Mr. Samblis has frequently, and consistently made bad decision after bad decision.  Some could say that’s the only type of decision he knows how to make.  But the very worst decision he has ever made… is the one where he chose not to be straightforward with investors.  For most, his creditability is shot.  He is frequently called a “liar”.

We think however, Mr. Samblis could begin the process of rebuilding his creditability if he would simply make a choice, a decision, to begin being straightforward with his investors.  We feel he needs to find a venue, perhaps the Investors Hangout, apologize for his decisions that caused this company’s stock to hit a low of .0001, and then open himself up to questions – AND… answer those questions openly and honestly.  Stay for as long as it takes, and return frequently to address open issues.  Hiding behind a Facebook site where tough and unflattering questions are deleted, does nothing to rebuild creditability.

Happy Thanksgiving !

Image

Things PNCH shareholders can be thankful for this Thanksgiving day:

  1. Mr. Samblis hasn’t taken PNCH into bankruptsy yet.
  2. Mr. Samblis hasn’t done a reverse split yet.
  3. Mr. Samblis hasn’t increased the authorized share count yet.
  4. Mr. Samblis hasn’t posted any embarrassing pictures of himself in the last few days.
  5. Mr. Samblis hasn’t posted on LieHub yet today.
  6. Mr. Samblis hasn’t made any announcements yet today of deals he will later rescind.
  7. The PPS has not moved into 4-zeros.
  8. The PPS has increased 100% from its recent lows of .0001
  9. The Outstanding Share count has not reached 4-billion yet.
  10. Major bashing of the stock has significantly reduced.  (Perhaps in accordance with Lesson #1 of the bashers handbook)

If you should know of any others, please feel free to use the comment link at the top-right of the article to add to the list.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone !