quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Crashcup:
What do you say to those that say QTN is privately owned by Frank and it is being subsidised by investors of QBID who will never see a return on their money? In other words, we own QBID and have no ties to QTN. Obviously I read this on a another BB.

---

I'd say "show me some proof". Anyone can say anything about any stock but it doesn't make it true (U4, are you listening?). Make your statement and then point us to a legitimate source for the information.

TODAY, WE ARE AT A SERIOUS MOMENT FOR QBID. I AM CONNECTING WITH THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE MOMENT, NOT THE CRITICS. NOW ABOUT THOSE FACTS. I CHARGE THAT FRANK OLSEN IS INCOMPETENT AND I HAVE LISTED TIME AND TIME AGAIN THE CHANGING PATTERN OF STATEMENTS AND FLAT OUT LIES HE DOES AND CONTINUES TO PUT OUT VIA PRESS RELEASE. MY CRITICS TRIPPED OVER THEMSELVES TO POINT OUT THAT Q-TV IS BROADCASTING WHEN IT FACT IT HAD NOT. JUST UNTIL RECENTLY, BEING OCTOBER 1, 2004, THE SIGNAL WAS “LAUNCHED” IN SAN FRANCISCO. WE WERE TOLD THAT MAY 15 WAS THE “SOFT” LAUNCH AND THAT JUNE 1 WAS THE “HARD” LAUNCH WHICH WAS FOR ADVERTISERS TO SEE THE PROGRAMMING FIRST HAND. ADDITIONALLY, WE WERE TOLD ADDITIONALLY CITIES WOULD BE ADDED BEYOND SAN FRANCISCO ON OCTOBER 4 AND TO DATE, NOTHING.

BUT LIKE SO MANY THINGS IN LIFE, TIMING IS EVERYTHING. FRANK OLSEN DOWNFALL HAPPENED WHEN HE RELEASED A PRESS THAT MIS-QUOTED THE MAY 15 “SOFT” LAUNCH AND DELAYED THE “SOFT” LAUNCH. ONLY TO SEE THE STOCK PRICE FALL FROM THE .013 RANGE TO .0055 AND 800-MILLION SHARES TRADED (SOLD OFF) IN A MATTER OF 2-HOURS. SEEING THAT JUST HAPPENED, MYSELF AS WELL AS MANY OTHER STOCK BROKERS FILED INSTANT COMPLAINTS TO THE SEC. FRANK OLSEN WAS AWARE OF THIS AND ISSUED A “CORRECTED” PRESS RELEASE CLARIFYING THE “MISTAKE” AND THE STOCK PRICE CLIMBED TO .01+ RANGE RIGHT AFTER THAT “CORRECTED” PRESS WAS RELEASED. YET YOU STILL TO THIS DAY HAVE PEOPLE CLAIMING HOW U4 FREAKED OUT A FEW MONTHS BACK. JUNE 1 CAME AND WENT WITH NO Q-TV SIGNAL FOR ADVERTISERS TO SEE. JUST MOST RECENT, THE SIGNAL WAS SUPPOSED TO BE UP SEPTEMBER 1 WHICH IT WAS NOT. THEN IT WAS MOVED TO SEPTEMBER 4 WHICH IT WAS NOT ONLY TO BE TOLD AS A LIE THAT WEATHER PROBLEMS FORCED Q-TV TO MOVE TO TEXAS FROM LOUISIANA. NEVER DURING THIS TIME DID FRANK OLSEN EVER DIVULGE THAT THE SIGNAL WAS NEVER ACTIVATED UNTIL OCTOBER 1 SINCE FRANK OLSEN LEFT IT HANGING UN-ADDRESSED THAT THE SIGNAL WOULD NOT START UNTIL OCTOBER 1; THAT INFO HAD TO BE “DISCOVERED” BY MESSAGE BOARD PATRONS MAKING PHONE CALLS THEMSELVES ONLY TO DISCOVER THAT RCN ITSELF BY IT’S OPERATORS ANSWERING THE PHONES THAT THEY HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF Q-TV OR A NEW GAY-TV STATION FOR THAT MATTER OR THAT IT WOULD LAUNCH “SOMETIME” IN OCTOBER.

I ALSO CHARGED THAT FRANK OLSEN HAS AND CONTINUES TO THIS DAY TO RELEASE PRESS THAT IS INACCURATE, FLAT OUT LIES, MIS-REPRESENTATIONS OF ACTUAL FACTS AND DOES SO ON A CONTINUING BASIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN. FRANK OLSEN CONTINUES TO ADD AND SUBTRACT FROM ISSUES SUCH AS HE HAS STUDIO SPACES RENTED ACROSS THE COUNTRY WHICH IS A FLAT OUT LIE, THEN TELLS US HE HAS A BUILDING HE JUST BOUGHT FOR PRODUCTION, THEN SAYS AGAIN HE HAS STUDIO SPACE ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

FRANK OLSEN AND HIS FOLLOWERS ON MESSAGE BOARDS DERISIVELY CALL U4 AND OTHERS “BASHERS” BECAUSE IT FITS WITH THEIR WARPED BELIEF THAT FRANK OLSEN IS CREDIBLE. BASIC FUNDAMENTAL MATH SHOWS FRANK OLSEN IS OUT OF HIS TREE WHEN YOU HAVE $2-MILLION IN FIRST YEAR BROADCAST MONEY BUT $7-MILLION DOLLARS EXPENSES. FRANK OLSEN RELEASES THAT HE HAS GUARANTEED 5-YEARS OF BROADCAST ONLY TO SHORTLY TELL US THEREAFTER HE HAS SECURED $2-MILLION IN “LOANS” TO GUARANTEE 1-YEAR OF BROADCASTING. THEN, HE ADDS 5-6 BILLION SHARES AND AUTHORIZES 50-BILLION MORE TO GIVE QBID A TOTAL OF 71-BILLION SHARES FOLLOWED BY HE EXPECTS QBID TO BE PROFITABLE IN 12-13 MONTHS, WE ARE STARTING A BUYBACK AND IN 6-MONTHS THE STOCK WILL BE UPGRADED. FRANK OLSEN OWES ME $10.00; PAYS ME BACK AND IMMEDIATELY ASKS FOR ANOTHER $12.00 AND THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN HIM ANNOUNCING A “BUYBACK” AND ISSUING ANOTHER 50+ BILLION SHARES.

AND MY CRITICS LOVE TO POINT OUT THAT I HAD NICE THINGS TO SAY ABOUT QBID AND FRANK OLSEN JUST A FEW MONTHS BACK. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE AND I MEANT IT. BUT AGAIN, TIMING IS EVERYTHING. THIS WAS BEFORE THE ISSUES THAT CONTINUE TO COME UP TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN WITH FRANK OLSEN LYING FLAT OUT, MIS-LEADING STATEMENTS AND BOLSTERING ITEMS SUCH AS A “MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR DEAL” FOR SOME GAY-OLYMPICS THAT FRANK HAS NO FUNDS COMING FROM BUT HE IMPLIES THAT Q-TV IS ON THE RECEIVING END OF A “MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR DEAL” WHICH IT IS NOT. THE CONTINUOS LIES ON TOP OF LIES CHANGED EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING, THAT IS EXCEPT THE MESSAGE BOARDS SHAMEFUL, MANIC OBSESSION WITH BRINGING DOWN THE FACTS AND AVOIDING THEM COMPLETELY.

SO MY CRITICS CAN CALL ME “BASHER” AND PSYCHOPATH AND FIRE SPIT BALLS AT ME AND FROTH AT THE MOUTH WHEN THE CONTINUE TO POST ANYTHING THEY WISH ON SOME MESSAGE BOARD. THAT’S THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH THEY ALL ENJOY.

MY HISTORY IS A EDUCATED “PROFESSIONAL” TRAINED STOCK BROKER. I HOLD LICENSE FOR THIS AND I HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED PRIMARILY WORKING WITH FUNDS AS YOUR 401K INVESTMENTS AND MARGIN FUNDS WHICH IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS MUTUAL FUNDS.. THAT IS RIGHT, THAT STUFF YOU PEOPLE PUT AWAY FOR RETIREMENT I WAS IN CHARGE OF. I MOVED 500-BILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF FUNDS AT TIMES. NEEDLESS TO SAY, 99% OF YOU ON HERE AREN’T A PIMPLE ON MY REAR END.

I THROUGHLY BELIEVE THAT IF THE APPROPRIATE C.E.O. WAS IN PLACE IN THIS COMPANY AND THE PRESS WAS RELEASED APPROPRIATELY WITHOUT LIES, MIS-LEADING STATEMENTS AND ABRUPT FLUFF, QBID WOULD BE TRADING .50-$1.00+ SIMPLY ON MOMENTUM WITH 15-BILLION OUTSTANDING SHARES.

MY HISTORY IS A EDUCATED “PROFESSIONAL” TRAINED STOCK BROKER. I HOLD LICENSE FOR THIS AND I HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED PRIMARILY WORKING WITH FUNDS AS YOUR 401K INVESTMENTS AND MARGIN FUNDS WHICH IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS MUTUAL FUNDS.. THAT IS RIGHT, THAT STUFF YOU PEOPLE PUT AWAY FOR RETIREMENT I WAS IN CHARGE OF. I MOVED 500-BILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF FUNDS AT TIMES.

Where I have a problem is where you state something as fact without proof. Case in point, you state there was no signal before October 1st. HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS? You insisted that the most recent deal for programming included only 5 movies. HOW DID YOU DUDUCE THAT FROM THE PR? And while you may not care for Frank Olson as a CEO why do you insist on portraying him as a drunk? DO YOU HAVE SOME EVIDENCE THIS IS THE CASE?

I, and I'm sure a lot of others, would have more respect for you if you would address these questions that are raised about your information. Perhaps not the pumpers, but some of us who try to have a realistic view of the situation. I get the impression that in your anger with Frank and the company you are trying to enlist current shareholders to sell off, without comming out and saying it. But that's just my opinion. I don't know your real motive but this anger sure seems to be something you can't let go of.

quote:

---

Originally posted by GatorMan:
U4, I have no problem with you expressing an opinion, and I happen to agree with you to some extent in that it is interesting that many of the PRs seem to contradict each other (especially regarding the financing).

Where I have a problem is where you state something as fact without proof. Case in point, you state there was no signal before October 1st. HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS? You insisted that the most recent deal for programming included only 5 movies. HOW DID YOU DUDUCE THAT FROM THE PR? And while you may not care for Frank Olson as a CEO why do you insist on portraying him as a drunk? DO YOU HAVE SOME EVIDENCE THIS IS THE CASE?

I, and I'm sure a lot of others, would have more respect for you if you would address these questions that are raised about your information. Perhaps not the pumpers, but some of us who try to have a realistic view of the situation. I get the impression that in your anger with Frank and the company you are trying to enlist current shareholders to sell off, without comming out and saying it. But that's just my opinion. I don't know your real motive but this anger sure seems to be something you can't let go of.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by GatorMan:
U4, I have no problem with you expressing an opinion, and I happen to agree with you to some extent in that it is interesting that many of the PRs seem to contradict each other (especially regarding the financing).

Where I have a problem is where you state something as fact without proof. Case in point, you state there was no signal before October 1st. HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS? You insisted that the most recent deal for programming included only 5 movies. HOW DID YOU DUDUCE THAT FROM THE PR? And while you may not care for Frank Olson as a CEO why do you insist on portraying him as a drunk? DO YOU HAVE SOME EVIDENCE THIS IS THE CASE?

I, and I'm sure a lot of others, would have more respect for you if you would address these questions that are raised about your information. Perhaps not the pumpers, but some of us who try to have a realistic view of the situation. I get the impression that in your anger with Frank and the company you are trying to enlist current shareholders to sell off, without comming out and saying it. But that's just my opinion. I don't know your real motive but this anger sure seems to be something you can't let go of.

---

He says "I THROUGHLY BELIEVE THAT IF THE APPROPRIATE C.E.O. WAS IN PLACE IN THIS COMPANY AND THE PRESS WAS RELEASED APPROPRIATELY WITHOUT LIES, MIS-LEADING STATEMENTS AND ABRUPT FLUFF, QBID WOULD BE TRADING .50-$1.00+ SIMPLY ON MOMENTUM WITH 15-BILLION OUTSTANDING SHARES."

If I am reading between the lines correctly, he's saying that if the network was handled by a different CEO &/or handled differently; QBID would be at .50-1.00. In other words, he's saying its Franks fault for where the price is but the Network is still real.

So great chances that Q Television Network will succeed if mistakes are fixed and QBID will finally move to $1.

Potential is priceless! Thanks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by retireyoung:

Maybe if someone would prove him wrong he would put more effort to proving himself. If not there is no need for him to.

---

The burden of proof is his. So are you saying that I can make any outragous claim I want and it should be taken as fact until someone can proove it wrong? I don't think so.

quote:

---

Originally posted by GatorMan:
The burden of proof is his. So are you saying that I can make any outragous claim I want and it should be taken as fact until someone can proove it wrong? I don't think so.

---

What I can not comprehend is the fact that he spoke highly of QBID in Feb/March/April.. If he is this professional investor, like he says; Did he not know the past of Frank O? Did he not know these "false claims, missed dates, misleading statement, PPS of the past, ect. ect."? Helllooo its happened before, why you choose now to bring it up and not early this year??

Was it just the fact that he knew QBID would surge after 1 year being at .0001? Was it the fact that he "thought" QBID would surge or be big this year?

I need to stop assuming or trying to figure it out but I still believe he's doing it for one reason. Oh well.

quote:

---

Originally posted by retireyoung:
Of course not but his claims are'nt outragous. Why should we believe everything Frank is saying. All emotions aside; think logically.

---

Why should we believe a PR from any pink sheet company? I'd say anyone who's dealt with the pinks any length of time has been burnt by pink sheet lies (GMDP got me big time just this year).

You believe the PR when it can be confirmed by a reputable source. RCN listing QTN on their channel line up, in my mind, confirms that we are, or will be carried by them.

I will agree 100% with U4 that we have been told lies by Frank. The PRs themselves give enough evidence to prove this. But I'll not agree that EVERYTHING we've been told is necessarily a lie, nor will I accept unsubstantiated "facts".

And perhaps "outrageous" was poor choice of words. I tried to find one of U4's old posts to give an example of what I thought was outrageous, but since I couldn't find one with a quick scan I can't give an example to justify the use of that word so I'll withdraw using it. So strike that word from my previous post. But my point still stands.

quote:

---

Originally posted by famtrecrew:
It seems to me that many people have gotten out of qbid... Who still has faith???

---

I do.

quote:

---

Originally posted by famtrecrew:
It seems to me that many people have gotten out of qbid... Who still has faith???

---

Q Unscrambles to Snag Gay Games

By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 10/1/2004 2:26:00 PM

Pay service Q Television Network, the just-launched programming channel targeted to gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders, has secured rights to the 2006 Gay Games in Chicago.

The deal includes broadcast rights to live and taped coverage of the July 15-22 event, joint development of programming, and ad time. Rene Schenk, Q CFO, wouldn't say how much the channel paid for the worldwide rights, but called it a "sizable amount."

The sports include softball, dance, and tennis, as well as an arts festival, band, cheerleading and chorus.

Currently, Q is available in Palm Springs and San Francisco on RCN. Schenk says it should also be available via RCN in Boston, parts of New York, and Washington, D.C. within a matter of days. The channel also has a hunting license for Time Warner and is currently hunting.

As part of the deal, the signal will be unscrambled and made available worldwide

1. Demonstrate a demand
2. Avoid the competition
3. Hire pros
4. Build a realistic model
5. Raise beaucoup bucks
6. Sweeten the deal

Call it cable's rite of spring. At the National Cable & Telecommunications Association's annual gathering, wannabe cable networks pitch—hard. But few will turn up on your cable listings. (Q Television is on RCN's listing) Hype is the easy part, says one cable vet: "Until you get funded, you are not a network." New channels typically need $100 million to $150 million to break even.

There was a time when operators needed networks to populate their digital packages. Not any more. "We're looking to leverage the relationships we already have," says Cox Vice President of Programming Bob Wilson.

Industry consultant Cathy Rasenberger, who specializes in startup networks, has heard an estimated 200 proposals in the past few years. The odds of their success are slim, she cautions prospective clients.

About a dozen recently launched channels are making it. Among them: G4, Fine Living, Sí TV, and sports diginets Fuel, CSTV, and Tennis Channel (see list at right). New networks associated with a big media company or distributor stand the best chance. Independents face an uphill climb.

National Cable Television Cooperative President and CEO Mike Pandzick says operators are focused on growing their businesses, not taking on more costs. "Most look at new networks and ask, How much it is going to cost me? How many new subs is it going to get me?"

Adds Pandzick, "That's why most new networks are almost dead in the water. There are so few interests that are not already being met."

But if you want to brave the odds, do it with Rasenberger's help. Here is B&C's tip sheet for starting a digital network.

1. Demonstrate a demand
Cable already offers a dizzying array of niche networks. There are channels for foodies, videogamers, and history buffs. Aspiring outlets must find something new—and prove that people want it.

Launching a channel "is about the hardest thing to do in the world," says Brad Siegel, formerly a Turner Entertainment executive and now vice chairman for startup Gospel Music Channel. "If you don't have a large, passionate fan base, it's a nonstarter."

You need to identify the target and then find data to back up your plan. For the Gospel Music Channel, Siegel and network founder Charles Humbard, a Discovery Networks vet, see a wide-open space. (BET offers some gospel programming, but only a few shows a week.) More important, Gospel Music Channel says this is a proven marketplace: 80 million people a week tune in to such programming. And 8% of all U.S. music sales are for gospel music. Jazz, in contrast, makes up 4% of sales.

2. Avoid the competition
"It can disturb or destroy your business if someone else is competing for distribution and programming," says Rasenberger. Operators and advertisers might say they want alternatives to big, established cable networks, but it's tough going up against major players.

Stand Up Comedy Television, another first-time exhibitor at this week's NCTA show, will offer a lot of standup specials. Remember, Comedy Central has carved out the standup turf; even HBO and Bravo do it. In the gaming space, Game Show Network (now called GSN) and G4 are already up. Two new channels: Casino & Gaming Television is still looking for carriage deals, while Edge TV is joining the fray (see page 32). The channel is eyeing an early-2005 launch and has enlisted the expertise of former ABC Family distribution exec John Burns III, distribution specialist Hot House Media, and talent agency Creative Artists Agency.

Consider diversity. The National Football League's channel is everything NFL, while The Football Network will offer the rest (college, high school, women's football). But do operators want two football-themed channels? Do viewers want all football all the time? Clearly, only the strong survive. So far, The NFL Network has major deals on DirecTV, Charter, and Insight. TFN has secured deals with MSOs Time Warner and NCTC. The NFL Network kicked off last November, but TFN has been plagued by financial problems and may not run till year's end.

3. Hire pros
TV people are good. Cable people are better. There is nothing like the personal touch. It helps open the right doors at Comcast and Time Warner. Take CSTV, for example. Co-founder Brian Bedol is a familiar face in the cable industry. He started Classic Sports, then sold it to ESPN. He's calling on many of the same cable operators pitching his new channel.

Most new channels recruit an industry vet in their executive ranks or on their boards. The reason is simple: Cable can be a frustrating business. "You need to be prepared for a marathon," says TFN chief Jerry Solomon, a former sports agent. "I've negotiated a lot of deals, but I've never seen deals take as long to materialize as [carriage deals]."

4. Build a realistic model
Cable can be a great business, thanks to the dual revenue streams from subscriber fees and ad sales. But that model doesn't apply to many new diginets. With programming costs soaring for existing services, operators don't want expensive new services. They might be willing to shell out a few pennies per subscriber, but not immediately. Maybe not ever.

And don't count on advertising as a stable revenue stream. Sure, a few advertisers will take a leap early. "Some ideas are so interesting, you can take a flyer on it" and make a small buy, says Doug Seay, senior vice president for Publicis & Hal Riney. An early investment can pay off. Buyers usually get in for a dirt-cheap CPM and try to grandfather the rate. If a channel grows, the gamble is a good one.

Most advertisers want to see Nielsen ratings first. Says Seay, "A lot of people won't buy on concept." With hard data, they see who is watching and when.

It's also wise to consider other revenue streams. Rasenberger is keen on concepts with merchandising extensions. She's handling distribution for lifestyle startup Wine Network, which plans to sell wine and travel packages as a way to intoxicate coffers.

5. Raise beaucoup bucks
To begin, you'll need about $5 million in hand. The initial funds go for research, programming, and a road show to woo potential investors, as well as cable and DBS operators. But seed money goes only so far. The building blocks of a channel—more research, acquiring programs, commissioning originals, launch fees—run into a lot of money. The benchmark is at least $100 million. If you plan a lot of originals or live events, kick it up.

Trouble is, venture-capital money is hard to get. And startups face a tough predicament: Cable operators often want to know there is funding before they'll seal a deal. Investors want to see distribution before committing. It takes time to finesse both ends. Budget for at least three years to launch. It could take six to eight years to break even. Some networks die out because they can't sustain the investment. Jokevision, intended to show jokes 24/7 and commercial-free, has put the brakes on development. Backers are devising a sustainable business model.

6. Sweeten the deal
Understand what the operators want and need. Many distributors are pushing specialty tiers like Hispanic and sports packages. That has helped CSTV and the Tennis Channel get carriage. Startup Spanish-language kids network Sorpresa is finding a home on Hispanic tiers.

Other enticements may help sway an operator. Proposed young-adult network XY.tv says it will share ad revenue with early distributors. A few channels, including Wine Network, would share revenue from merchandise sales. Many are offering high-definition and video-on-demand content.

High-tech boondoggles may also work. Take the Anime Network. The channel's parent company A.D. Vision Inc. already owns a vast library of anime programs that it produces and sells on DVD. Starting a cable channel seemed a logical extension. Except that operators pushed back. To prove Anime Network's worth, the channel started as a video-on-demand service. Big MSOs like Comcast, Time Warner, and Cablevision—all eager to push VOD—were hooked.

Going VOD first, says President Kevin Corcoran, "allows us to demonstrate there is a sufficient demand for a 24/7 channel." At least one operator agrees. Anime is expected to announce its first deal, with Insight Communications, this week at the National Show.

Rasenberger's best advice: "Find a model that is expense-neutral and revenue-positive for the operator."

quote:

---

Originally posted by U4TSAF2:
...blah, blah, blah...

---

Thank you for your opinion.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bill1352:
wouldn't it be nice to be able to go back in time and read bill gates's pr's when microsoft was .50, ya think maybe we would find a few that excitement not in the bank fact had something to do with. maybe even a few mistakes. dell, gateway, intel to name a few others. all companies in the last 20 yrs that started from scratch in a new area of an existing market. i'm not saying in any way that q will or could ever become what these companies are today, but q is a new area of an existing field and it started from scratch run basically by 1 guy. if a bunch of the prs in the last couple yrs have been over stated or ahead of reality can anyone really blame him. q probably is very undervalued if it was reporting it would probably be in the .10 range right now. the current pps probably has a lot to do with franks prs and past mistakes. they opened the door for big time mm manipulation. but just like the fore named companies things worked out in the end and as long as frank & co. keep doing as they have been all will work out here too.

---

Microsoft went public at $21.00 in 1986!

anyway – just as frank stated in the interview on ceo cast this has been an 11 year effort there are a few things that he should be cautious of. The whole deal with dish network going awry because of mentioning it before it became official etc Frank even stated it on the hotline once that he was not going to make that same mistake again. For your question though “can anyone really blame him” ? Yeah – shareholders. If he is making promises or statements that he can not deliver on the shareholders and the market will eat him alive.

Personally I liked the hotline when it started but when it started to make announcements the likes of “Due to the fact that we are currently waiting for confirmation from the carriers that we have been added to their billing systems and confirmation of the carriers launch dates for the Q Television network it will be necessary for us to wait until next week to make a formal announcement” and then not following it up with an official PR of course the shareholders have a right to point the finger. There was a PR a few days after this announcement on the hotline but that was the one where it stated there was no business or economic reason for the decline in share value.

No reason?!?! How about not following up with what they said they would do? I sent a few emails and called the offices a few times for them to put the hotline in PR form or even on the website in writing but in the end the hotline was shutdown. I am glad it is. Hindsight of course is always 20/20 and had they kept a tighter reign on what they said or stated they probably would not have had any issues with raising capitol from stock sales due to the decline in price per share.

They did announce RCN about a week and a half after the no economic reason PR but they just need to be careful about what they say and when. I know they just wanted to share the good news with investors alike but promising more than one can deliver can come back to bite them. I run/own a business – I know things do not always happen on my own time table. Sometimes certain factors come into play that are completely beyond my control. Sometimes life just gets in the way. The only people I have to answer to is my employees and my customers. I would start to loose customers and even employees by not delivering what I promise. Frank is essentially in the same boat (granted a much bigger one with a lot more people to respond to). The one difference is that I do own up to it and will do an about face. I find that works better than to just keep going without acknowledging it and risk loosing customers (read shareholders for frank) that I depend upon.

Frank & Co. – keep everything internal and only release information when needed. Yeah you will probably loose some shareholders but I doubt many of them are “long” anyway. The whole investor vs. trader argument. They will probably jump back in when things start to move again anyway. It is not as if by a certain date if you do not own shares you will no longer be able to get any. As long as they are traded people will be able to buy and sell. Remember this is still a pink. Treat it like one. Be in it – don’t be in it. Take everything for what it is – speculation until you yourself see it for your own eyes. I would not start doing the vegas party arrangements just any time soon but hopefully in the near future (6-18 months) we can throw up some old posts on a presentation screen and laugh about them. You never know though right? I believe the CMKX/UCAD party is coming up soon though…. LOL

Anyway – time to get back to work. “It’s all good at Q” <giggle>

Good luck to everyone (that means you too U4) …

Quote From U4 who I truly respected before he began his BASHING !

U4TSAF2
Member posted March 08, 2004 02:21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOOD NEWS :
CEO PUBLISHED A STATEMENT:

"WHILE I AM CEO OF THIS COMPANY, THERE WILL BE NO REVERSE SPLIT".

YES IT WAS THAT BOLD!

IF A PRO WERE TO TRULY EVALUATE THIS STOCK, HE WOULD LOOK AT THE HISTORY AND LOOK FOR CHANGES AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

FOR INSTANCE, THIS SAME STOCK (QBID) WAS IN THE SAME POSITION AS IT IS RIGHT NOW GOING BACK ABOUT 3 YEARS. ABOUT TO BROADCAST, THINGS LINED UP; ETC.

WENT UP TO ALMOST $1.00

I BELIEVE ABSOLUTELY THAT THIS STOCK JUST ON BASIC FUNDAMENTALS WILL SEE A RISE TO .25 AND A MID-LONG TO .50-1.00. DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS THEREAFTER WILL DETERMINE WHAT THE SHARE PRICE WILL MOVE UP TO. I PERSONALLY HAVE MY LIMIT ORDER ALREADY IN AT $2.00 AND DEPENDING ON HOW THINGS GO, MAY SELL ONLY PART AT $2.00 AND LOOK FOR THE $8+ AND UPWARDS RANGE.

THE SIGNAL WILL START MAY 1 AND THEN THE HUNT FOR ADVERTISERS. BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE HAS PREVIOUSLY AGREED TO ADVERTISE WHICH IS GOOD. I THINK THAT THE SAME THING NEEDS TO HAPPEN HERE AS DID WITH MTV IN THE BEGINNING. "STARS" CAME ON COMMERCIALS FOR MTV AND TOLD PEOPLE TO CALL THEIR CABLE PROVIDER AND TELL THEM "I WANT MY MTV".

AMERICA IS A COUNTRY FULL OF DOUBLE STANDARDS AND THE TIMING IS ABSOLUTELY POSTIVELY RIPE FOR THIS STATION TO BEGIN. TIMING IS ABSOLUTE WITH THIS STATION. JUST LIKE WHEN WHITNEY HOUSTON/BOBBY BROWN WERE POPULAR WITH MUSIC IN THE 80'S AND ALL THOSE OTHER BANDS BACK THEN. THEY WERE RIGHT FOR THAT TIME BUT NOW THEY CAN'T SELL BUBBLEGUM.

WHEN YOU TAKE EVERYTHING INTO ACCOUNT ABOUT THIS STOCK, IT REALLY IS A NO-BRAINER.

KEEP BUSH IN OFFICE, CHRISTIAN TELEVISION TO BASH TRAINGLE TELEVISION NETWORK, MEDIA COVERAGE, THREATS TO BOMB BECAUSE OF TTN AND YOU EASILY HAVE A $10/STOCK.

U4TSAF2
Member posted March 05, 2004 19:22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS IS A WEBSITE FOR ABC NEWS AFFILIATE STATION. REMEMBER, THIS IS ABC AND WHAT ONE KNOWS, THEY ALL KNOW. http://www.hoinews.com/news/features/2/626822.html

Homosexual TV

A new cable channel is hitting the airwaves. The Triangle Television Network will make its debut in the next three months. TTN will specialize in programming for gays and lesbians. It's available to about 10,000 cable TV companies for $2 a month. Time Warner Cable Television has agreed to make the signal available to any of its local subscribers. Programming will include taped gay athletic contests and fashion shows.

THE NICE THING ABOUT THIS ARTICLE IS THAT IT COMFIRMS (INDEPENDTLY) THAT DEAL WITH TIME-WARNER

MARCH 3, 2006

L2 QBID

4.00X1
3.99X3
3.98X8

RESISTANCE IS $4.00 AND IF WE CAN BREAK-THRU THAT, THE SKY'S THE LIMIT!

[This message has been edited by U4TSAF2 (edited March 05, 2004).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 1BigTip:
READ LAST LINE!
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA457795.html?display=Search+Results&t ext=q+television

Q Unscrambles to Snag Gay Games

By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 10/1/2004 2:26:00 PM

Pay service Q Television Network, the just-launched programming channel targeted to gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders, has secured rights to the 2006 Gay Games in Chicago.

The deal includes broadcast rights to live and taped coverage of the July 15-22 event, joint development of programming, and ad time. Rene Schenk, Q CFO, wouldn't say how much the channel paid for the worldwide rights, but called it a "sizable amount."

The sports include softball, dance, and tennis, as well as an arts festival, band, cheerleading and chorus.

Currently, Q is available in Palm Springs and San Francisco on RCN. Schenk says it should also be available via RCN in Boston, parts of New York, and Washington, D.C. within a matter of days. The channel also has a hunting license for Time Warner and is currently hunting.

[b]As part of the deal, the signal will be unscrambled and made available worldwide

[This message has been edited by 1BigTip (edited October 05, 2004).][/B]

---

The unscrambled signal is for the duration of the games right? Like the free preview weekends for HBO or other channels above the basic cable mark?

That would be really good if they did that. Especially of course to entice those folks who want to watch but have not subscribed yet .... till they see the scroll at the bottom saying call now to add it to their lineup.

L2 QBID

4.00X1
3.99X3
3.98X8

RESISTANCE IS $4.00 AND IF WE CAN BREAK-THRU THAT, THE SKY'S THE LIMIT!

U4, U4, U4 when you accuse someone of lying and refer to them as a drunk that should attend AA meetings, What do you expect from people? I know you understand how people feel when you post in all caps.

You pose good arguments at times but when someone challenges a statement, you don't respond.
For example - I am going to ask you "Do you own QBID? if not why are you posting this information?" Lets see if you reply.

If you do not, and you are the almighty stockbroker that you say you are, then QBID is no more than a pimple on your butt (your words). Just leave us alone to form our own opinions as everything plays out.

Or is it that you still are holding those 2,000,000 shares that you purchsed at 2 cents (LOL) and your angry for getting burned for about 30 grand. But there is no way an almighty stockbroker such as yourself would be so foolish as to get mixed up in a stock such as QBID.

Either way, leave us alone and go play with your 500 million dollars.

quote:

---

Originally posted by U4TSAF2:
THE BOTTOM LINE IS MONEY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOUR RIDING FREE SHARES OR HAVE MONEY INVESTED AND I WOULD NEVER PUT ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY IN TRUST WITH A MAN WHO HAS SUCH A FLAMBOYANT DOCUMENTED PAST OF FAILURE AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, A ON-GOING FRAUDULENT COMPANY.

---

so i take it that you have sold off your $40000 worth that you bought at .02?

if not then you are in violation of the above statement. then this could be true. didnt you get fired from this big 401k job? ( oh never mind that wasnt very nice of me)

I highly doubt that you sold off at that great of a loss.

You have been attacked because of the way you come in here and make your statements.

this last message was the first message i have seen from you that shows that you put a little tought into the message and explained yourself in any great detail.

If you have sold off all your stock though then it really makes no sence for you to spend so much time in here. And if you have not sold then it makes no sence for you to bash the stock.

So what i cant figure out is why either way you would spend such an investment in time on this board. Unless you are being compensated by say Frank himself to try and keep the price down for the buy back.

One thing i have learned is that most people dont do things for free. What are you makeing at this?

Either way, the fact that you are in here talking this down as much as you are shows me that there is potential here and that you have something to gain by this stock.

there for i intend to hold on to my shares because of the shear potential. I fully realise that i can loose all of my money, but i havent invested anymore then i am prepaired to loose. so i cant go wrong on this stock. Thank you for your your genuine concern.

Rod

quote:

---

Originally posted by penny-trader:
so i take it that you have sold off your $40000 worth that you bought at .02?

if not they you are in violation of the above statement.

I highly doubt that you sold off at that great of a loss.

You have been attacked because of the way you come in here and make your statements.

this last message was the first message i have seen from you that shows that you put a little tought into the message and explained yourself in any great deal.

If you have sold off all your stock though then it really makes no sence for you to spend so much time in here. And if you have not sold then it makes no sence for you to bash the stock.

So what i cant figure out is why either way you would smend such an effort on this board. Unless you are being compensated by say Frank himself to try and keep the price down for the buy back.

Either way, the fact that you are in here talking this down as much as you are shows me that there is potential here and that you have something to gain by this stock.

there for i intend to hold on to my shares because of the shear potential. I fully realise that i can loose all of my money, but i havent invested anymore then i am prepaired to loose. so i cant go wrong on this stock. Thank you for your your genuine concern.

Rod

---

Hey buddy wasup?!

Regardless of what U4 is spewing (earlier good and now bad) if he is on the payroll from frank and deliberately keeping the price down currently for a buy back or whatever it would be deemed as manipulation of price and the enforecement division from the SEC would come down on them and any other parties that were involved. Needless to say that would cripple the stock. Hopefully they are not that dumb to try it. But people never cease to amaze me though!

Off topic - Rodney Dangerfield died today at the age of 82.

It is imposible to catch every offender every time. Guaranteed that there are bashers and pumpers for most every company that are compensated in one form or another. they can make it look like a legal transaction as payment for stuffing envelopes, of comision for work done. They are not going to put it in the books Bob made x amount for his bashing efforts on Allstocks board.

and the nice thing is that now with the new rules in the forum, I dont have to bring forward proof of anything as the burden is on everyone to prove me wrong. =)

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharkus:

Hey buddy wasup?!

Regardless of what U4 is spewing (earlier good and now bad) if he is on the payroll from frank and deliberately keeping the price down currently for a buy back or whatever it would be deemed as manipulation of price and the enforecement division from the SEC would come down on them and any other parties that were involved. Needless to say that would cripple the stock. Hopefully they are not that dumb to try it. But people never cease to amaze me though!

Off topic - Rodney Dangerfield died today at the age of 82.

---

Thanks 1BigTip for posting the Chicago information. It seems that RCN may be the holdup again.

quote:

---

Originally posted by penny-trader:
I agree with you but hey anything is possible. to think that the SEC could catch them if it is happening is absolutely absurd. Yes they catch the odd offender, but there is only so may of them caught. It is like the cops trying to catch all speeding violations. We have all drove over the speed limit and how often have you been caught versus the amount you have gotten away with it?

It is imposible to catch every offender every time. Guaranteed that there are bashers and pumpers for most every company that are compensated in one form or another. they can make it look like a legal transaction as payment for stuffing envelopes, of comision for work done. They are not going to put it in the books Bob made x amount for his bashing efforts on Allstocks board.

and the nice thing is that now with the new rules in the forum, I dont have to bring forward proof of anything as the burden is on everyone to prove me wrong. =)

[This message has been edited by penny-trader (edited October 05, 2004).]

---

LOL - hahah true everyone has to prove you wrong now LOL

Not saying that the SEC would catch them – just hoping that the mere threat of that would make some people think twice – I know I am probably wrong on that one though….I know that not all offenders will be caught but with the number of shells and other scams that have been cleaned up over the past few months I believe they (the enforcement division) are on a roll. Plus I am pretty sure they have been keeping an eye on the volume players the likes of cmkx who can eclipse the total volume of the nasdaq and the NYSE in a matter of hours! Plus I am pretty sure that out of all the people here either those who post regularly or even those who wait in the wings at least a few probably have already contacted the SEC in regards to market makers, false posts such as fake PR’s etc R a g I n g B u l l at least has been in many PR’s from the SEC so at least they are aware of some of the stuff out there.

As for the speeding though - If someone is with me I tend to get caught – alone though – I bet I could give the cmkxtreme machine a run for its money…LOL

Where is the penguin army? Can't we send them down to florida - I am sure the penguing army and the 'dragon' can track U4