Complaint Review: Philton Private Equities Group - Bentonville Arkansas
- Philton Private Equities Group 700 SE 5th Street, Suite #2 Bentonville, Arkansas United States of America
- Phone: (479) 286-6366
- Web: www.visntec.com/
- Category: Miscellaneous Electronics
Philton Private Equities Group Vision Technologies, Inc., Robert Lee Thompson, Sr., and Tony N. Frudakis Cease & Desist Bentonville, Arkansas
*REBUTTAL Owner of company: Entrepreneurs beware
This post is to let everyone know that a C&D was filed.
PA Securities Com.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 06/18/2012 01:44 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/philton-private-equities-group/bentonville-arkansas-/philton-private-equities-group-vision-technologies-inc-robert-lee-thompson-sr-and-to-899262. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
#1 REBUTTAL Owner of company
Entrepreneurs beware
AUTHOR: Tony Frudakis - (USA)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, March 02, 2017
This case is an example of regulatory activism and over reach, using activism to create a rules violation that wouldnt have otherwise occurred.
I invested about $1M into a company and agreed to try to help that company find other angel investors afterwards. One way I did this was to post his company information in an online database used by angel investors. A regulator from Pennsylvania got through our process to the Company, and made her way to the accredited investor paperwork step. The paperwork clearly stated the investment was for accredited investors only, so the regulator called back and asked if she could invest anyway. The company believed it was registered for this but was not, and so when they said yes, it constituted a rules violation. No unaccredited investors had previously invested, nor since.
The entire incident was entrapment, instigated by the regulator and would not have occurred were it not for the activism of the regulator. Clearly it was a revenue enhancement scheme. No value was delievered to consumers (since we were not looking for unaccredited investors in the first place).
Note that this was about a month before the crowd funding rules changed.
The entire thing was basically a speeding ticket by an undercover cop pushing you by tailgating from behind, on a road that changed the speed limit the next day.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.