> I don't normally post on Google boards or read it for that matter,
> because there is so much bashing and complete B.S. on here that alot
> of times it's more frustrating than helpful.

> But today I noticed at around the time the sell offs started there was
> this post from a user name "chef":

> Link/post from "chef":

> http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717627/browse_thread/t...

> <"According to shortsqueeze.com.
> It just jumped to 50% insider owened and the float jumped to
> 300,000,000 +
> Something going on here?
> 20 minutes ago it was 9% indiser owned and float was 70,000,000http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=spng&submit=Short+Quote%99">

> After reading the above post I was also concern, he stated that the
> insiders ownership of the company had increased from 9% from earlier
> in the day to 50.xx% and that the float had increased by 300Mil
> shares. But I did some research later and found a cached Google page
> of shortsqueeze.com on SPNG as of March 17, 2009. In this link you
> will see that back in March they had 960,132,289 shares outstanding
> with a float of 636,920,000 and ownership % was 38.65% - that all
> makes perfect sense as the outstanding have been reduced, the float
> has been reduced to 390mil while the insiders ownership would
> naturally be increased due to the reduction in available shares.

> Link to shortsqueeze.com SPNG page dated March 17, 2009:

> http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kLmLVZxK2igJ:www.shortsqueeze.com...

> IMO there was nothing that should have caused any distress other than
> the fact that this person may have either lied intentionally or
> misunderstood the report, but where he came up with 9% ownership
> increased to 50% and the float and shares is beyond me.

> At that time I was ready to dump all my shares as well, not that I
> didn't trust the company but because everyone else was selling off and
> I was watching my profits disappear, that caused me to panic. At the
> time I had no way to confirm if anything he said had actually changed
> since you can not check on their previous data without paying.

> IMO the company is still a solid company with great revenue and many
> new products on the horizon.

> Great post wowthere!  I hope a lot of people read this post before
> they panic based off the misinformation that has been generated by
> other posts today.  We have big news in store from SPNG.  I sure hope
> it comes this upcoming week to hush all these critics back up.  The
> biggest news I'd like to hear is that SPNG retired some more of their
> shares.  That would be more then enough to shut all the critics up and
> even more importantly would be great for our accounts.

> On Jun 13, 9:52 am, s c <wowthere...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I don't normally post on Google boards or read it for that matter,
> > because there is so much bashing and complete B.S. on here that alot
> > of times it's more frustrating than helpful.

> > But today I noticed at around the time the sell offs started there was
> > this post from a user name "chef":

> > Link/post from "chef":

> >http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717627/browse_thread/t...

> > <"According to shortsqueeze.com.
> > It just jumped to 50% insider owened and the float jumped to
> > 300,000,000 +
> > Something going on here?
> > 20 minutes ago it was 9% indiser owned and float was 70,000,000http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=spng&submit=Short+Quote%99">

> > After reading the above post I was also concern, he stated that the
> > insiders ownership of the company had increased from 9% from earlier
> > in the day to 50.xx% and that the float had increased by 300Mil
> > shares. But I did some research later and found a cached Google page
> > of shortsqueeze.com on SPNG as of March 17, 2009. In this link you
> > will see that back in March they had 960,132,289 shares outstanding
> > with a float of 636,920,000 and ownership % was 38.65% - that all
> > makes perfect sense as the outstanding have been reduced, the float
> > has been reduced to 390mil while the insiders ownership would
> > naturally be increased due to the reduction in available shares.

> > Link to shortsqueeze.com SPNG page dated March 17, 2009:

> >http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kLmLVZxK2igJ:www.shortsqueeze.com...

> > IMO there was nothing that should have caused any distress other than
> > the fact that this person may have either lied intentionally or
> > misunderstood the report, but where he came up with 9% ownership
> > increased to 50% and the float and shares is beyond me.

> > At that time I was ready to dump all my shares as well, not that I
> > didn't trust the company but because everyone else was selling off and
> > I was watching my profits disappear, that caused me to panic. At the
> > time I had no way to confirm if anything he said had actually changed
> > since you can not check on their previous data without paying.

> > IMO the company is still a solid company with great revenue and many
> > new products on the horizon.

> I wish something like this would happen about every two weeks or so.
> It gave me the opportunity to sell what I had at the top, and buy back
> what I had at the bottom + 50,000 shares AND take $16,000 profit.  Not
> to mention I'm up another $14,000 because the price shot right back up
> to .17 after I re-bought.  Today was a GOOD DAY!!

> On Jun 13, 11:10 am, eugenekro...@yahoo.com wrote:

> > Great post wowthere!  I hope a lot of people read this post before
> > they panic based off the misinformation that has been generated by
> > other posts today.  We have big news in store from SPNG.  I sure hope
> > it comes this upcoming week to hush all these critics back up.  The
> > biggest news I'd like to hear is that SPNG retired some more of their
> > shares.  That would be more then enough to shut all the critics up and
> > even more importantly would be great for our accounts.

> > On Jun 13, 9:52 am, s c <wowthere...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > I don't normally post on Google boards or read it for that matter,
> > > because there is so much bashing and complete B.S. on here that alot
> > > of times it's more frustrating than helpful.

> > > But today I noticed at around the time the sell offs started there was
> > > this post from a user name "chef":

> > > Link/post from "chef":

> > >http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717627/browse_thread/t...

> > > <"According to shortsqueeze.com.
> > > It just jumped to 50% insider owened and the float jumped to
> > > 300,000,000 +
> > > Something going on here?
> > > 20 minutes ago it was 9% indiser owned and float was 70,000,000http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=spng&submit=Short+Quote%99">

> > > After reading the above post I was also concern, he stated that the
> > > insiders ownership of the company had increased from 9% from earlier
> > > in the day to 50.xx% and that the float had increased by 300Mil
> > > shares. But I did some research later and found a cached Google page
> > > of shortsqueeze.com on SPNG as of March 17, 2009. In this link you
> > > will see that back in March they had 960,132,289 shares outstanding
> > > with a float of 636,920,000 and ownership % was 38.65% - that all
> > > makes perfect sense as the outstanding have been reduced, the float
> > > has been reduced to 390mil while the insiders ownership would
> > > naturally be increased due to the reduction in available shares.

> > > Link to shortsqueeze.com SPNG page dated March 17, 2009:

> > >http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kLmLVZxK2igJ:www.shortsqueeze.com...

> > > IMO there was nothing that should have caused any distress other than
> > > the fact that this person may have either lied intentionally or
> > > misunderstood the report, but where he came up with 9% ownership
> > > increased to 50% and the float and shares is beyond me.

> > > At that time I was ready to dump all my shares as well, not that I
> > > didn't trust the company but because everyone else was selling off and
> > > I was watching my profits disappear, that caused me to panic. At the
> > > time I had no way to confirm if anything he said had actually changed
> > > since you can not check on their previous data without paying.

> > > IMO the company is still a solid company with great revenue and many
> > > new products on the horizon.- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> I don't normally post on Google boards or read it for that matter,
> because there is so much bashing and complete B.S. on here that alot
> of times it's more frustrating than helpful.

> But today I noticed at around the time the sell offs started there was
> this post from a user name "chef":

> Link/post from "chef":

> http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717627/browse_thread/t...

> <"According to shortsqueeze.com.
> It just jumped to 50% insider owened and the float jumped to
> 300,000,000 +
> Something going on here?
> 20 minutes ago it was 9% indiser owned and float was 70,000,000http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=spng&submit=Short+Quote%99">

> After reading the above post I was also concern, he stated that the
> insiders ownership of the company had increased from 9% from earlier
> in the day to 50.xx% and that the float had increased by 300Mil
> shares. But I did some research later and found a cached Google page
> of shortsqueeze.com on SPNG as of March 17, 2009. In this link you
> will see that back in March they had 960,132,289 shares outstanding
> with a float of 636,920,000 and ownership % was 38.65% - that all
> makes perfect sense as the outstanding have been reduced, the float
> has been reduced to 390mil while the insiders ownership would
> naturally be increased due to the reduction in available shares.

> Link to shortsqueeze.com SPNG page dated March 17, 2009:

> http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kLmLVZxK2igJ:www.shortsqueeze.com...

> IMO there was nothing that should have caused any distress other than
> the fact that this person may have either lied intentionally or
> misunderstood the report, but where he came up with 9% ownership
> increased to 50% and the float and shares is beyond me.

> At that time I was ready to dump all my shares as well, not that I
> didn't trust the company but because everyone else was selling off and
> I was watching my profits disappear, that caused me to panic. At the
> time I had no way to confirm if anything he said had actually changed
> since you can not check on their previous data without paying.

> IMO the company is still a solid company with great revenue and many
> new products on the horizon.

> I don't normally post on Google boards or read it for that matter,
> because there is so much bashing and complete B.S. on here that alot
> of times it's more frustrating than helpful.

> But today I noticed at around the time the sell offs started there was
> this post from a user name "chef":

> Link/post from "chef":

> http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717627/browse_thread/t...

> <"According to shortsqueeze.com.
> It just jumped to 50% insider owened and the float jumped to
> 300,000,000 +
> Something going on here?
> 20 minutes ago it was 9% indiser owned and float was 70,000,000http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=spng&submit=Short+Quote%99">

> After reading the above post I was also concern, he stated that the
> insiders ownership of the company had increased from 9% from earlier
> in the day to 50.xx% and that the float had increased by 300Mil
> shares. But I did some research later and found a cached Google page
> of shortsqueeze.com on SPNG as of March 17, 2009. In this link you
> will see that back in March they had 960,132,289 shares outstanding
> with a float of 636,920,000 and ownership % was 38.65% - that all
> makes perfect sense as the outstanding have been reduced, the float
> has been reduced to 390mil while the insiders ownership would
> naturally be increased due to the reduction in available shares.

> Link to shortsqueeze.com SPNG page dated March 17, 2009:

> http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kLmLVZxK2igJ:www.shortsqueeze.com...

> IMO there was nothing that should have caused any distress other than
> the fact that this person may have either lied intentionally or
> misunderstood the report, but where he came up with 9% ownership
> increased to 50% and the float and shares is beyond me.

> At that time I was ready to dump all my shares as well, not that I
> didn't trust the company but because everyone else was selling off and
> I was watching my profits disappear, that caused me to panic. At the
> time I had no way to confirm if anything he said had actually changed
> since you can not check on their previous data without paying.

> IMO the company is still a solid company with great revenue and many
> new products on the horizon.

.com> wrote: you never explained to us why you changed your position

> Great Post. I was screaming all afternoon about that post. And like
> you, it did freak me out. I thought "Jeez, these guys (management) are
> really gonna screw us." After it was all over, I checked out the
> reference and saw it was bullshit. However, I think there may have
> been other posts on other boards doing the same thing at the same
> time. I suspect a coordinated attack by bashers. Hard to believe a
> single post would have that effect. And did you all notice that dozens
> of bashers showed up and flooded the board with taunts and bashes in
> the heat of the confusion? Honestly, we cannot really hope to keep up
> a 24/7 defence against them. So just forget them. Remember that unless
> it comes from a legitimate news service, any "fact" may be, and almost
> certainly is, bullshit.

> They attacted the weakest point of the company. Our fear that
> management might start issueing new shares. I would hope management
> would make a commitment not to do that. GLTA let karma take care of
> it.

> On Jun 12, 9:52 pm, s c <wowthere...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I don't normally post on Google boards or read it for that matter,
> > because there is so much bashing and complete B.S. on here that alot
> > of times it's more frustrating than helpful.

> > But today I noticed at around the time the sell offs started there was
> > this post from a user name "chef":

> > Link/post from "chef":

> >http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717627/browse_thread/t...

> > <"According to shortsqueeze.com.
> > It just jumped to 50% insider owened and the float jumped to
> > 300,000,000 +
> > Something going on here?
> > 20 minutes ago it was 9% indiser owned and float was 70,000,000http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=spng&submit=Short+Quote%99">

> > After reading the above post I was also concern, he stated that the
> > insiders ownership of the company had increased from 9% from earlier
> > in the day to 50.xx% and that the float had increased by 300Mil
> > shares. But I did some research later and found a cached Google page
> > of shortsqueeze.com on SPNG as of March 17, 2009. In this link you
> > will see that back in March they had 960,132,289 shares outstanding
> > with a float of 636,920,000 and ownership % was 38.65% - that all
> > makes perfect sense as the outstanding have been reduced, the float
> > has been reduced to 390mil while the insiders ownership would
> > naturally be increased due to the reduction in available shares.

> > Link to shortsqueeze.com SPNG page dated March 17, 2009:

> >http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kLmLVZxK2igJ:www.shortsqueeze.com...

> > IMO there was nothing that should have caused any distress other than
> > the fact that this person may have either lied intentionally or
> > misunderstood the report, but where he came up with 9% ownership
> > increased to 50% and the float and shares is beyond me.

> > At that time I was ready to dump all my shares as well, not that I
> > didn't trust the company but because everyone else was selling off and
> > I was watching my profits disappear, that caused me to panic. At the
> > time I had no way to confirm if anything he said had actually changed
> > since you can not check on their previous data without paying.

> > IMO the company is still a solid company with great revenue and many
> > new products on the horizon.

> I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> level. JMHO but I am always right...

> HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:

> > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:

> > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:

> > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> BTW mapp, I'm in at .0077. read the dates on the posts. if i would
> have sold on their advice in april 18 i would have sold for .01, like
> i said your still the same dick!

> On Jun 13, 11:00 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> > On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:

> > > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> I believe that the drop psicologically will work against new
> investors.
> But this one shows the potential of this stock to make money.
> SPNG will go up anyway.
> A lot of people believe that $1 is very close and may be will go up
> more.
> Last week I sold because the moron in the forum. I was stupid and I
> lost $7000 in profit. I made money anyway..
> But I want to say to a lot o people here that are happy for the nice
> business that they did, selling high and buying low...
> It does not happen everytime and believe me, next time you can loose a
> lot. Those kind of things require experience and you don't have it.
> If you want to really make money, in a short term, think for a long
> run. I think few months and the stock will over $2.
> Don't play game with money. It does not work always.

> On Jun 13, 1:00 pm, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> > On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:

> > > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> Agreed.  In so low I'm just ridin it out.

> On Jun 13, 2:08 pm, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > BTW mapp, I'm in at .0077. read the dates on the posts. if i would
> > have sold on their advice in april 18 i would have sold for .01, like
> > i said your still the same dick!

> > On Jun 13, 11:00 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> > > On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > > > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > > > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:

> > > > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> Agreed.  In so low I'm just ridin it out.

> On Jun 13, 2:08 pm, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > BTW mapp, I'm in at .0077. read the dates on the posts. if i would
> > have sold on their advice in april 18 i would have sold for .01, like
> > i said your still the same dick!

> > On Jun 13, 11:00 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> > > On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > > > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > > > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:

> > > > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> I'm not trying to put it down guys i'm just leaving neutral feedback
> on what happened. I'm still here aren't I. The bottom line is that
> trust needs to be regained in the company before we go anywhere.
> Before yesterday all share holders made a profit as we were building
> the new 52 wk high. Now that isn't the case so it changes things a
> bit. I still believe it will go above $1 and eventually $2 but we need
> to knock out .27 before we go anywhere. Who knows we could be there
> next week or in a month but we wont see the same 40% increases for 5
> days straight like we all know and love until that happens. GLTA.

> On Jun 13, 11:21 am, Kdub <kevinwa...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > Agreed.  In so low I'm just ridin it out.

> > On Jun 13, 2:08 pm, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > BTW mapp, I'm in at .0077. read the dates on the posts. if i would
> > > have sold on their advice in april 18 i would have sold for .01, like
> > > i said your still the same dick!

> > > On Jun 13, 11:00 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> > > > On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > > > > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > > > > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > > > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > > > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > > > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > > > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > > > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > > > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > > > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > > > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > > > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > > > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> On that we do agree mapp.

> On Jun 13, 11:28 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:

> > I'm not trying to put it down guys i'm just leaving neutral feedback
> > on what happened. I'm still here aren't I. The bottom line is that
> > trust needs to be regained in the company before we go anywhere.
> > Before yesterday all share holders made a profit as we were building
> > the new 52 wk high. Now that isn't the case so it changes things a
> > bit. I still believe it will go above $1 and eventually $2 but we need
> > to knock out .27 before we go anywhere. Who knows we could be there
> > next week or in a month but we wont see the same 40% increases for 5
> > days straight like we all know and love until that happens. GLTA.

> > On Jun 13, 11:21 am, Kdub <kevinwa...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > Agreed.  In so low I'm just ridin it out.

> > > On Jun 13, 2:08 pm, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > BTW mapp, I'm in at .0077. read the dates on the posts. if i would
> > > > have sold on their advice in april 18 i would have sold for .01, like
> > > > i said your still the same dick!

> > > > On Jun 13, 11:00 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> > > > > On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > > > > > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > > > > > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > > > > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > > > > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > > > > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > > > > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > > > > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > > > > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > > > > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > > > > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > > > > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > > > > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> The gains daily were just too much, IMO.  This will slow things down
> and people will be more rational with their buying and selling.
> Some made huge money and that's cool.  Others lost huge money because
> they sold.  Now that is stupid.  I am just holding on for the future.
> I have no concerns for the rises and dips.

> On Jun 13, 2:30 pm, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > On that we do agree mapp.

> > On Jun 13, 11:28 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:

> > > I'm not trying to put it down guys i'm just leaving neutral feedback
> > > on what happened. I'm still here aren't I. The bottom line is that
> > > trust needs to be regained in the company before we go anywhere.
> > > Before yesterday all share holders made a profit as we were building
> > > the new 52 wk high. Now that isn't the case so it changes things a
> > > bit. I still believe it will go above $1 and eventually $2 but we need
> > > to knock out .27 before we go anywhere. Who knows we could be there
> > > next week or in a month but we wont see the same 40% increases for 5
> > > days straight like we all know and love until that happens. GLTA.

> > > On Jun 13, 11:21 am, Kdub <kevinwa...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > Agreed.  In so low I'm just ridin it out.

> > > > On Jun 13, 2:08 pm, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > BTW mapp, I'm in at .0077. read the dates on the posts. if i would
> > > > > have sold on their advice in april 18 i would have sold for .01, like
> > > > > i said your still the same dick!

> > > > > On Jun 13, 11:00 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Not the first time its been paniced down. and you know that mapp.

> > > > > > On Jun 13, 10:57 am, scalper1 <stkscal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > HEY map, i can see you still the same dick as always, always putting
> > > > > > > this stock down. Its made of fool of you for a long time.

> > > > > > > On Jun 13, 10:53 am, "mappharm...@gmail.com" <mappharm...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > I would also like to point out that this is no longer the stock it was
> > > > > > > > a week ago. We will not see the same rapid upward movements for a
> > > > > > > > while. Before Friday we had no traders that were in Above the 52 week
> > > > > > > > high. Now we can count on at lease half of them are .20 and above with
> > > > > > > > all of the speculation of this turd moving up. Look for these people
> > > > > > > > to run away once the .20 cent level is reached. In addition, the other
> > > > > > > > half of the shareholders have lost trust in the company as they saw
> > > > > > > > its potential for quick failure, and will be much more weary to hold
> > > > > > > > long. Now we are going to see much stronger resistance levels and less
> > > > > > > > opportunity for increase until we break through the .27-.29 cent
> > > > > > > > level. JMHO but I am always right...- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> I don't normally post on Google boards or read it for that matter,
> because there is so much bashing and complete B.S. on here that alot
> of times it's more frustrating than helpful.

> But today I noticed at around the time the sell offs started there was
> this post from a user name "chef":

> Link/post from "chef":

> http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717627/browse_thread/t...

> <"According to shortsqueeze.com.
> It just jumped to 50% insider owened and the float jumped to
> 300,000,000 +
> Something going on here?
> 20 minutes ago it was 9% indiser owned and float was 70,000,000http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=spng&submit=Short+Quote%99">

> After reading the above post I was also concern, he stated that the
> insiders ownership of the company had increased from 9% from earlier
> in the day to 50.xx% and that the float had increased by 300Mil
> shares. But I did some research later and found a cached Google page
> of shortsqueeze.com on SPNG as of March 17, 2009. In this link you
> will see that back in March they had 960,132,289 shares outstanding
> with a float of 636,920,000 and ownership % was 38.65% - that all
> makes perfect sense as the outstanding have been reduced, the float
> has been reduced to 390mil while the insiders ownership would
> naturally be increased due to the reduction in available shares.

> Link to shortsqueeze.com SPNG page dated March 17, 2009:

> http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kLmLVZxK2igJ:www.shortsqueeze.com...

> IMO there was nothing that should have caused any distress other than
> the fact that this person may have either lied intentionally or
> misunderstood the report, but where he came up with 9% ownership
> increased to 50% and the float and shares is beyond me.

> At that time I was ready to dump all my shares as well, not that I
> didn't trust the company but because everyone else was selling off and
> I was watching my profits disappear, that caused me to panic. At the
> time I had no way to confirm if anything he said had actually changed
> since you can not check on their previous data without paying.

> IMO the company is still a solid company with great revenue and many
> new products on the horizon.

> I have been in SPNG for about 2 months now, when I first found this
> company they were trading at 2 cents. I read about the sponge bob
> sponge and the license agreement they had with Viacom and thought this
> company would be a success. This is the first penny stock I have ever
> invested in and my gut instinct was that I got in on the ground floor
> of an amazing company. Since buying in I have read countless posts
> about how this is only a sponge and its not going anywhere and I have
> watched the shares go from .02 to .28. Needless to say I was married
> to this company, I saw this same thing happen back in may when there
> was a post on google finance about some additional shares being
> authorized, the stock went down 24% and then the next day it went
> right back up. If this company is doing 50m in sales and has licenses
> with Viacom and has its foot in the door with major retailers, why
> would they screw themselves over doing anything negative? There are
> people who make money when this stock goes down and trust me they are
> going to do their best to make it go down... There has been rumor of
> shorts having to cover before this thing was uplisted to the NASDAQ
> and to me it seemed that friday was the perfect day for them to cover.

> On Jun 13, 12:52 am, s c <wowthere...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I don't normally post on Google boards or read it for that matter,
> > because there is so much bashing and complete B.S. on here that alot
> > of times it's more frustrating than helpful.

> > But today I noticed at around the time the sell offs started there was
> > this post from a user name "chef":

> > Link/post from "chef":

> >http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.717627/browse_thread/t...

> > <"According to shortsqueeze.com.
> > It just jumped to 50% insider owened and the float jumped to
> > 300,000,000 +
> > Something going on here?
> > 20 minutes ago it was 9% indiser owned and float was 70,000,000http://www.shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=spng&submit=Short+Quote%99">

> > After reading the above post I was also concern, he stated that the
> > insiders ownership of the company had increased from 9% from earlier
> > in the day to 50.xx% and that the float had increased by 300Mil
> > shares. But I did some research later and found a cached Google page
> > of shortsqueeze.com on SPNG as of March 17, 2009. In this link you
> > will see that back in March they had 960,132,289 shares outstanding
> > with a float of 636,920,000 and ownership % was 38.65% - that all
> > makes perfect sense as the outstanding have been reduced, the float
> > has been reduced to 390mil while the insiders ownership would
> > naturally be increased due to the reduction in available shares.

> > Link to shortsqueeze.com SPNG page dated March 17, 2009:

> >http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kLmLVZxK2igJ:www.shortsqueeze.com...

> > IMO there was nothing that should have caused any distress other than
> > the fact that this person may have either lied intentionally or
> > misunderstood the report, but where he came up with 9% ownership
> > increased to 50% and the float and shares is beyond me.

> > At that time I was ready to dump all my shares as well, not that I
> > didn't trust the company but because everyone else was selling off and
> > I was watching my profits disappear, that caused me to panic. At the
> > time I had no way to confirm if anything he said had actually changed
> > since you can not check on their previous data without paying.

> > IMO the company is still a solid company with great revenue and many
> > new products on the horizon.