Hop On Inc (ID) (HPNN)

Not sure. Since the CEO has felonies for financial fraud and money laundering, they may be forcing Petey to resign.
Sure wouldn't want to be CEO and become liable for all the shenanigans Petey is involved in.
Even if something gets launched someday, it might take real significant verifiable revenue on @HPNN books for those Petey burned with his constant lies to gain a sliver of confidence.
Then there is the problem that @HPNN assets are subject to seizure.

hallejuha, justice to be served finally to all the bag holders of hop-on. May the farce be with you.

CEO is resigning in disgrace, but I still do not see that his successor has accepted the job.

@HPNN failed to disclose - $232,268 court judgment plus 550 million dilutive @HPNN shares that need to be issued by the T/A per the court order. Hop-On is flat broke, per the CEO's disclosure.
V Transfer is a real TA, not the one-person shop $HPNN used to use.
They can't risk violating a court order.
.Court can now issue a "contempt" order and fine Peter "personally" for each and every day he does not comply with the court order.
He could even be remanded into custody if he continues to disobey the judge.

Shareholders can reach out to the CEO to ask him why he has not disclosed his court loss, yet.
contact info below:
1-949-756-9008
Contact@Hop-on.com

may never hit the app store. Not good news.
Have to have contracts in place but apparently didgitalage/@HPNN are worse than flat broke.
Any money that might come in will likely be seized to pay court-ordered obligations.

I’m beginning to think this whole Hop On is a total farce. Nothing but meaningless talk and promises. Does anyone else post here besides me?

THE OLD OWL 🦉🦉🦉

Wow, struck a nerve mentioning Dan Gannon will be new CEO.
Little Petey didn't like that DM question to him, even though it was basically a joke. Maybe it is more true that I thought?
Many might remember that Petey named Dan Gannon as CEO after Petey got himself massively indicted for those felonies and he needed someone to be CEO while he was likely going to get fitted for an orange prison jumpsuit.

Petey surely must not have liked the mention that the @SECGov and @FINRA should be concerned that @HPNN disclosure still does not mention that Hop-On Company and Petey owe Mr. Gannon somewhere around $12 million (interest accruing daily) and that this major corporate liability is REQUIRED to be disclosed in their financial disclosure to investors.

Who is the new CEO? Dan Gnnon? LOL
Peter and @HPNN owe around $12 million to Dan.
Dan has a lien attaching all assets of @HPNN and its subsidiaries.

Reverse split announced next?

@HPNN required to issue 1/2 billion more dilutive shares.

The court order is clear. @HPNN is also required to disclose these court-order liabilities.

CEO is a terrible person. He should be in prison.
Anyone who threatens and beats women and children is a horrible person.
The CEO is known for fraud and stealing $ from his own company/shareholders/customers.
The fraud is even worse when the CEO does everything humanly possible (including more fraud) to avoid paying what he and @HPNN owe.
The CEO is a deadbeat dad, yet he celebrates father's day like the hypocrite he is.
The CEO has lied so many times that he can no longer keep track of his lies anymore.

For all we know he even steals money from his own mother. We know he can't own a home or real property because of all the liens against any assets he/@HPNN has or ever might obtain.

If you do your diligence, the answer will become self-evident.

I am a shareholder who was banned by Michaels on X, because I questioned his BS without substance or action. He talks smack and only promotes HPNN on X. How about some “real” News posts instead of all the BS? The latest, “Apple approval minutes away”. Then nothing. Either he’s full of crap, or he’s just the worst PR guy ever. JMHO

THE OLD OWL 🦉🦉🦉

The hook is the platform; the liability falls on the shareholders ( $hpnn ). The catalog is the prize. Before you buy, you should look into the related entities that are not disclosed and how many Director positions Peter holds in companies that provide, or are positioned to provide, services. #Digitalage NFA NBS NLA DYOR

So is illiteracy

#MentalillnessIsreal

Please do your diligence. The posts here are only the first step. Read the filings.

Hello to all. From all the hype about resignation who is the next CEO to control the company. Does this mean a potential future for all the bag-holders.

Or maybe to spend more time on his other pusuits, like
Digialage Inc (Peter Michaels, President)
SocialSafe Inc (Peter Michaels, President and Director, Neal Newgard & Awan D Nord, Directors)
ThaHOUSE Inc (Ian Caloun, President, Peter Michaels, Director)

That adds a real second layer — not just "does verification survive," but "who actually controls the content while it's in the app, and what happens to creators if that control structure doesn't hold up." Here's the expanded version:
$HPNN / Digitalage — for creators and investors evaluating "infrastructure for verified media" claims:
The June 9 post states server demand is exceeding current capacity, requiring infrastructure scaling. The same post shows 707 views, 19 likes, 4 retweets.
Separately: the platform's core pitch is "content verified at creation" — positioned as infrastructure other platforms will need. A verification layer is only useful if it survives the content leaving the app — reposted, downloaded, re-encoded elsewhere. Standard re-encoding (which happens routinely once content moves across platforms, including X's own re-encoding on upload) strips basic embedded metadata. Durable provenance systems (the industry standard being C2PA / Content Credentials) are built specifically to survive that, or rely on server-side hash verification rather than fragile file tags.
If verification doesn't survive a single hop off the app, creators should ask a follow-up question: who controls their content while it's there? Digitalage is a private Nevada corporation under the sole control of Peter Michaels — no disclosed equity ownership, no standard subsidiary filings, despite "wholly owned subsidiary" language used in HPNN's public materials. There is no disclosed governance structure separating creator content custody from one individual's personal control.
So the two questions compound: if the verification layer doesn't function once content moves, and the entity holding that content has no disclosed governance protecting it independently of one person — what actually happens to a creator's content, and what recourse exists, if either fails?
NFA DYOR NLA NBS
by Deborah

No. If he takes a step back, it will be up into his position, which he currently holds, which is Chairman of the Board

So CEO Petey is resigning? It is about time.
Looks like his fraud, women-beating, and failure to pay court-ordered and lien obligations is catching up to him.

So little CEO Petey could use a creator's content and actually put it on other platforms like youtube or tik tok and then collect revenue from advertising and put it in his own pocket?

Imagine copyrighting your photography and then find Petey is selling "prints" of the art or putting it on shirts, etc.

isnt' the whole premise of Digitalage built on agentic AI? lol And I know how to code so this territory is not foreign to me.

Much better.... Your own words make you sound slightly wiser.

Go DigitalAge. 🚂

that is what you have. That is your diligence rebuttal. Those are your numbers and your documented sources? O.k.

HPNN I wish you would go back to writing your own stuff. Having AI write for you just makes your words hollow. Used to at least enjoy reading your crap, now I can't even read half of it before I stop and puke.
Trains a coming. Go DigitalAge. 🚂

Digitalage's Terms of Service: Marketing Promises vs. Contract Reality

Digitalage's Terms of Service (effective May 16, 2026) use Big Tech–style, perpetual commercial licensing language, while the company itself is a thinly capitalized, pre-revenue microcap with no proven platform, audience, or monetization engine. That combination makes this not a "high-risk, test-carefully" situation but a "do not upload at all" situation for any creator who cares about long-term control of their work, likeness, or brand.

1. What Digitalage markets vs. what the Terms say

Digitalage's public materials and "For Creators" page emphasize an ownership-centric narrative: creators are told they will own their work as infrastructure rather than as inventory on someone else's platform, that every broadcast becomes a permanent, verified, searchable asset owned "from frame zero," and that rights logic and permanent ownership remain in the creator's control.

The actual Terms of Service tell a different story. Section 7.3 grants Digitalage and its affiliates a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, fully paid, transferable, sublicensable license to host, store, cache, index, reproduce, and transmit content; to transcode, reformat, adapt, modify, edit, and translate it; to distribute, publicly perform, and publicly display it; to create derivative works from it; to use it for promotion, marketing, and advertising; and to otherwise use it in any media now known or later developed. The license extends to a creator's name, image, likeness, voice, and persona in connection with the service.

The marketing is ownership-centric. The contract is platform-centric.

2. The license grant and why the counterparty makes it unsafe

The license Digitalage demands is perpetual (it does not expire), irrevocable (it cannot be withdrawn later), and transferable and sublicensable (Digitalage can pass the content and associated rights to partners, vendors, acquirers, or a bankruptcy estate). It also carries derivative-works rights and name/likeness rights tied to the service.

On a mature platform — YouTube, TikTok, Meta — creators sometimes accept similar language because there is massive proven distribution, established monetization, operational history, and a real, measurable audience to weigh against the risk. Digitalage has none of that, and the corporate structure around it compounds the problem: Digitalage is a privately held Nevada corporation under the sole control of its principal, with no disclosed equity ownership or standard subsidiary filings connecting it to any public parent. There is no public-company oversight, audited financials, or governance transparency standing behind the entity asking for these rights.

A perpetual, transferable license becomes an asset in any restructuring, liquidation, or sale. If the company fails, pivots, or is sold, the content and associated rights travel with whatever entity or estate ends up holding them — and there is no practical way to claw those rights back, because the license is irrevocable the moment it's granted. Even if the platform never scales, never pays, or never really launches, a creator's content and likeness can still be held as part of an IP portfolio, packaged into a sale, or used to demonstrate "assets" to future investors or acquirers. The creator gets no audience, no revenue, no stability — but the license they granted remains live regardless.

This is also why "just test with low-value content first" does not work as a risk-management strategy here. That logic depends on being able to evaluate a real, functioning platform and walk away if it disappoints. Digitalage's license has no undo: a single test upload is permanently licensed, transferable, and sublicensable from the moment it's submitted, with no proven infrastructure or track record to evaluate it against. The Genesis creator-cohort structure makes this worse rather than better — to even qualify for the $500 Genesis bonus, creators are asked to register ten original assets plus a verification video, each carrying the same sweeping license. That isn't a small, reversible experiment; it's a material IP commitment to a highly speculative counterparty. Testing doesn't reduce risk here — it just starts the permanent license clock for no reliable upside.

3. No guarantees, no obligations, no safety net

The Terms place essentially all of the risk on the creator and almost none on the company. There is no obligation to preserve or return content: Digitalage may remove, delete, or stop hosting it at any time, with no duty to back it up or hand it back. There are no uptime, quality, or distribution guarantees — no SLA, no minimum reach, no promise of performance or availability. The company retains broad unilateral discretion to change terms, suspend accounts, or modify features at will. And the procedural terms tilt firmly in Digitalage's favor, with binding arbitration, a class-action waiver, a jury-trial waiver, and a one-year limitations period.

In plain terms: creators grant permanent, commercial rights, and the company promises nothing concrete in return — not reach, not stability, not continuity, not even storage.

4. Practical guidance for creators and professionals

For any creator, journalist, educator, or brand evaluating Digitalage, the conclusion is straightforward. Don't upload anything you aren't prepared to see permanently licensed, modified, and transferred by a financially distressed, privately controlled company. Don't rely on the marketing language about "ownership" or "rights you control" when the contract language grants the platform broad, perpetual rights instead. And don't treat this as a normal early-access beta risk — the combination of a perpetual, irrevocable, transferable license with name/likeness rights, no guarantees or obligations in return, and a financially and operationally fragile counterparty makes this structurally different from testing a typical startup product.

If you are serious about your catalog, your likeness, or your long-term licensing options, the clean conclusion is not to bind any content — core or "test" — to Digitalage under the current Terms of Service. For anything beyond casual commentary, creators should read the full Terms themselves and, where the stakes are meaningful, consult qualified counsel before granting any platform a perpetual, transferable license — especially one with no proven scale, no audited stability, and no clear path to honoring the value of what is being given to it.

what have you verified that you find lacking in substance?

Are there any legitimate posters on here?

THE OLD OWL 🦉🦉🦉

**It's a red flag for self-dealing and questionable valuation in a no-revenue microcap.** In standard U.S. GAAP (especially for OTC companies under Alternative Reporting), a parent like **Hop-on Inc. ($HPNN)** can record an "Investment in Subsidiary" (here, ~$6.5M–$6.7M in Digitalage) on its balance sheet. For a *wholly-owned* subsidiary, full consolidation is typically required under ASC 810—line-by-line assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses of the sub flow into the parent's statements (with eliminations for intercompany items). Treating it as a non-consolidated "investment" (often at cost or equity method) while claiming it as a subsidiary raises issues: - **Funding source via officer accruals**: Critics (and forum analyses of the Q1 2026 filing) note the asset largely stems from converted unpaid officer compensation/ obligations (primarily to CEO Peter Michaels) rather than cash infusions, external equity/debt, or operations. No cash changed hands for the bulk of the valuation. This creates a circular, related-party dynamic: the same person approves salary accruals, converts them into equity/value in a private entity he controls, and books it as a major asset for the public shell. - **Valuation support**: With HPNN showing $1,187 cash, $0 revenue, ongoing net losses (~$172k in Q1 alone), and a massive accumulated deficit (~$32.8M), there's no independent appraisal, arm's-length investment, or revenue/traction evidence disclosed to back a $6.5M+ carrying value. Digitalage itself has no separate audited financials visible in public disclosures and operates on minimal infrastructure (e.g., Cloudflare free tier per skeptics). - **Disclosure and governance gaps**: Related-party transactions (loans, accruals, conversions) must be disclosed in detail under OTC/SEC rules. Undisclosed or opaque funding for operations (while paying ~$82.5k in officer comp in Q1) can constitute material omissions. The company's governance portal and filings emphasize Digitalage as wholly-owned, yet keep it non-consolidated to avoid exposing internals. This pattern—accruing high officer pay in a dormant shell, converting to "investment" equity in a private vehicle, and promoting the sub aggressively—is common in long-deficit OTC stories. It lets the officer extract value/liability relief while public shareholders bear dilution risk, judgment exposure (e.g., recent Woolen case not fully reflected), and zero operational upside if consolidation never materializes meaningfully. **Bottom line**: It's "well" within the realm of aggressive OTC accounting that prioritizes narrative over verifiable economics. Investors should demand full consolidation details, independent valuation, and related-party footnotes in future filings. High risk of overstatement; DYOR and treat as speculative. NFA.

Grok 4:53 a.m. CT 20260616

and a $7 trade to paint the tape.
No $ to market anything. Very little buying interest.
Shenanigans don't get the price high enough to allow him to cash-out his special preferred shares.

Digitalage is not running 29 native live broadcasts. It is aggregating TikTok’s existing multi-guest sessions and displaying them inside a single Digitalage-branded window.
Here is what that means in concrete, technical terms:
1. TikTok handles every broadcast — Digitalage handles only the display
Each of the 29 feeds is:
ingested by TikTok,
encoded by TikTok,
transcoded by TikTok,
distributed by TikTok’s CDN,
served from TikTok’s infrastructure,
managed by TikTok’s session controls.

Digitalage is simply pulling the video streams and arranging them visually.

This is not a broadcast platform. This is a multi-window viewer.

2. TikTok’s limits still apply — Digitalage is just stacking sessions
TikTok LIVE Multi-Guest supports up to 5 guests per session.

Digitalage is not expanding that limit. They are:
opening multiple TikTok sessions,
capturing each session’s output,
and placing them into a 29-tile layout.

This is client-side aggregation, not server-side capability.

It does not increase TikTok’s capacity. It does not demonstrate Digitalage infrastructure. It does not show platform scalability.

3. The “29 broadcasts” number is a display artifact, not a platform metric
Real platforms measure:
ingest capacity
transcoding throughput
concurrent stream limits

CDN load
origin server performance

QoS under scale

Digitalage has none of these.

“29” is simply the number of TikTok feeds they chose to display at once.

It is not:
29 Digitalage streams
29 Digitalage ingest points
29 Digitalage encoders
29 Digitalage CDN endpoints

It is 29 TikTok streams arranged in a grid.

4. Digitalage’s own infrastructure confirms this

A platform claiming “public media distribution” must have a CDN.

Digitalage does not.

http://digitalage.tv ? No CDN detected

No edge caching
No origin shielding
No streaming endpoints
No observable broadcast stack

A platform with zero CDN cannot deliver 29 simultaneous live broadcasts. TikTok can. Digitalage cannot.

5. The “blur is intentional” line is part of the pattern
“We are protecting unreleased tools and workflows before launch.”
This is year five of “protecting unreleased tools”:

2021: Fall launch

2023: closed beta
2024: year-end beta
2026: MVP

Today: “days away”
1,128 days of “days away.”

The blur is not protecting tools. It is protecting the fact that the infrastructure belongs to TikTok.

6. The financials make the technical claim impossible
June 15, 2026:
$1,187 cash
$0 revenue
$32.8M accumulated deficit
No CDN
No infrastructure
No filings showing Digitalage as an asset

A company with $1,187 is not running a multi-stream broadcast network. It is running TikTok windows.

7. The market’s response confirms it
Today’s Level 2:
Bid: 3,961,915 @ 0.0007
Ask: 6,549,778 @ 0.0009

If Digitalage had real infrastructure, the market would not be pricing the equity at seven-ten-thousandths of a dollar with a saturated ask wall.

Bottom Line
Digitalage is not running 29 live broadcasts. Digitalage is displaying 29 TikTok broadcasts.
TikTok built the infrastructure. TikTok handles the load. TikTok provides the CDN. Digitalage provides the window.

$HPNN public facing company
#SocialSafe
#OOve
#Digitalage privately held by Peter Michaels et al

That’s not “building the rails.” That’s borrowing the tracks.
NFA • DYOR • NLA • NBS

Using "free" tier server space?
No wonder it crashes with only internal low-volume testing.

Five Years of Imminent. A Documented Timeline.
$HPNN #Digitalage
In July 2021, Peter Michaels announced that Digitalage was "emerging from stealth mode, soon entering public beta testing, and on schedule to launch in the Fall of 2021." Features were described as locked in. AR filters, music integration, content protection, DRM. A Zoom webinar walked investors through the beta rollout. Fall 2021 came and went.
In 2022, press releases referenced an ongoing "closed beta stage" and described the platform as "highly anticipated." A Megatrax licensing deal was announced, positioning Digitalage as preparing for broader rollout into the creator economy. The closed beta never opened.
In March 2023, Michaels announced the "closed beta launch" of what was now described as a decentralized WEB3 social media platform. Influencers were being onboarded. Features were being refined. Michaels was the face of the announcement. The public launch did not follow.
In late 2024, the language shifted to acceleration. "$6 million in investments" and "imminent influx of additional funding" were cited as catalysts for fast-tracking the launch. A closed beta was targeted before year-end 2024. Advisory board additions were announced. A news feed technology was tied to rollout preparation. Year-end 2024 passed.
In early 2025 through early 2026, the framing evolved again — no longer beta, now "deployment." October 2025 brought governance restructuring described as preparation "ahead of the commercial rollout." November 2025 brought timelines for sample apps, demos, and alpha-beta testing. January 2026 brought an announced MVP launch. March through June 2026 brought "production-scale announcements" with apps described as in review and infrastructure described as live.
As of today the app is not publicly available in the Apple App Store or Google Play Store in any form matching the original 2021 promise. Today's post from the official @HPNN
account states that "Apple and Google approvals are getting closer" and that the platform is "moving from buildout to activation."
An X post in May 2026 — cited by @DeborahHat96840
— calculated 37 months and 1,128 days since the last announced launch date.
That is not a development timeline. That is a promotional cycle. The language changes. The framing evolves from beta to WEB3 to deployment to production-scale. But the destination never arrives. And the public company promoting all of it — Hop-On Inc., trading as $HPNN on the Expert Market — reported $1,187 cash on hand, $0 revenue, and $32.8 million in accumulated deficit in its most recent financials.
Digitalage is privately held by Peter Michaels. It is not consolidated in HPNN public filings. Shareholders have no documented equity stake in it.
Five years. Every quarter a new reason it's almost ready.
Do the math.
NFA DYOR NLA NBS

$HPNN public facing entity
#Digitalage
#SocialSafe
#OOve privately held by Peter Michaels, or Peter
Michaels and others

This is the reality of the framework you are working with. Not one filing recognizes the way a 100 percent wholly owned subsidiary exists that would make the public claims or assertions actionable by shareholders.
NFA NLA NBS

I’m a little disappointed in Michael’s. I questioned the lack of substance in his tweets like others have questioned him and he blocked me from future Replies to comments. I legitimately questioned the constant banter with no substance just like others have done. This does not give me much confidence in him or the project. Very disappointing. JMHO

THE OLD OWL 🦉🦉🦉

Important CaveatsLagging & whipsaw-prone: Crosses confirm trends after they've started. In sideways or choppy penny stocks, you can get repeated false signals ("whipsaws") that lead to losses if traded mechanically.

britannica.com

Not predictive on their own: For micro-caps like HPNN, fundamentals (revenue, dilution risk, promotion cycles) and volume matter far more than MA crosses. Many view these signals as noise in this category.

stockinvest.us

Better for context: Use with volume, price action, support/resistance, or other indicators. A Golden Cross on huge volume is more meaningful than one on a low-volume pop.

In short: Yes, it's possible and happens more often in this category than in blue-chip stocks. But treat it as one data point among many—especially with HPNN's high-risk profile. Always DYOR and consider position sizing carefully. NFA.

My OTC swing scanner flagged it this morning: DEATH_X. The 50-day moving average has crossed below the 200-day. Bearish long-term confirmation.
The technicals are catching up to the balance sheet:
$1,187 cash on hand
$0 revenue
$32.8M accumulated deficit
Woolen judgment: $382,268+ unrecorded
7.47 billion shares outstanding
Expert Market — restricted retail access
Five years. Zero delivered launches.

Yet the tape shows 148 volume spike days over four years. Short term runs on thin volume while the long term trend confirms structural decline.

That's not a growth pattern. That's a promotional cycle riding a dying chart.

Today's +12.50% move on 0.9x RVOL tells you everything about who's still in this stock and why.

$HPNN — Liability Vessel. Front-facing Public Co.
Privately held associates: #Digitalage #OOve #SocialSafe — solely controlled by Peter Michaels. Not consolidated in public filings.

Pattern of Promotion: 2021 2026 (Regulator-Grade Chronology)

NFA DYOR NLA NBS
by Deborah

@DeborahHat96840


$HPNN public face debt holder
#Digitalage is privately held by Michaels et al
#SocialSafe is privately held, controlled by Michaels
#OOve is privately held by Michaels et al

@GratwickEnt
Let's talk about transparency, let's talk about clarity, let's just talk. This is what transparency looks like. Pay attention.

@GratwickEnt
published a white paper. Not a press release. Not a promise. A white paper — with actual numbers, actual structure, and actual accountability baked into the model from the ground up.
Here's what laying it out there looks like:
Subscriptions — three tiers, publicly stated. $500 lifetime. $99 annual. $9.99 monthly. Target: 5,000 lifetime subscribers = $2.5M upfront to fund real productions. Not vaporware. A proof-of-concept film — Just Drive — already in motion.
Profit splits — documented to the percentage. After budget repayment and a 15% return to regional media funds: 70% to Creators. 10% to Fund. 10% to Gratwick. 5% to Minority Partners. 5% to Charity. Every stakeholder named. Every cut disclosed.
Reality programming revenue — live interactive streams surrounding productions turn what traditional Hollywood calls a "marketing cost" into a direct income stream. Profitability potentially achieved before a project even wraps.
Network fees — 3–5% on transactions across the entire platform network. The white paper models it plainly: 500 platforms at $500K annual volume = $250M network flow = $12.5M to Gratwick at 5%. Show your work. They did.
Additional streams — managed hosting, developer marketplace, enterprise licensing, sponsorships. All listed. None hidden.
Gratcoin — a participation reward token. Non-tradable. No equity claims. Redeemable annually for rewards and experiences. They told you exactly what it is and exactly what it isn't.
Regional Media Funds — community-backed capital targeting multiple $2.5M+ productions per year per fund. Gratwick's equity stakes and profit shares from those funds — disclosed.
The app is live. iOS and Android. Just Drive is the proof of concept. The infrastructure is designed so creators own their platforms, retain their audiences, and keep their margins. Traditional distribution is described as "gravy." The model works without it.

Now contrast that with five years of "imminent launch." Five years of privately held assets — solely controlled by one individual — promoted publicly as if they belonged to shareholders. Five years of compliance claims while sitting on the Expert Market. Five years of $0 revenue, $82,500 in officer compensation, and $32.8M in accumulated deficit. Five years of broken promises dressed up as momentum.

One entity shows you the math and invites scrutiny.
The other relies on you never doing the math at all.
That's not a coincidence. That's the model.
DYOR NFA NLA NBS
by Deborah

Same bullshit different year.

7:36 AM
Yep.

"Creators build the audience, the archive, the trust, and the value — but platforms own the rails."

Peter Michaels. Posting from @HPNN. About creator ownership.

The man who converted unpaid officer obligations into phantom equity in a privately held company he solely controls, while a public shell sits at $1,187 cash and $32.8M accumulated deficit.

361 views. 7 likes.

Meanwhile your Grok analysis is being served to every retail investor who asks about HPNN.

Same bullshit. Different year. Better documented.

Claude 20260614

$HPNN Liability Vessel and Front-facing Public Co


#OOve
#SocialSafe
#Digitalage associates of $HPNN but privately held by Peter Michaels
NFA DYOR NLA NBS

Pattern of Promotion: 2021 ? 2026 (Regulator-Grade Chronology)

Below is the structured sequence, with each element linked to a pattern type for clarity.

2021: Market-Maker Accusations + Imminent Breakthrough Claims
Examples:
“Market makers are playing games.”
“They are short.”
“Legal will respond within 24 hours.”
“I am loaded with info coming.”
“We just got current!”
“Dividend coming from a license deal.”

Pattern Types:
Unsupported MM accusations
Promises of imminent legal action
Claims of major deals “in progress”
Compliance claims without sustained filings

Outcome: None of the promised events materialized.
2024–2025: Digitalage Promotional Cycle

Examples:
Digitalage is positioned as a major tech platform
Claims of imminent launch
Claims of verified media technology
Claims of partnerships and integrations

Pattern Types:
Promotion of private assets as if public
Technology hype without filings
No audited financials or consolidation

Outcome: #Digitalage remained private, unverified, and not part of $HPNN’s public financials.

2026: Level 2 Pressure Narrative + “Front-Facing Holding” Claim
Examples:
“Level 2 shows pressure.”
“Stock is being leaned on.”
“Transparency matters.”
“Front-facing holding for privately held companies.”

Pattern Types:
Renewed MM accusations
Reframing illiquidity as manipulation
Implying ownership of private companies
Non-verifiable corporate structure claims

Outcome: HPNN remains on the Expert Market, with no accepted disclosures.

Cross-Year Pattern (The Core Finding)
Across five years, the issuer repeats the same structural behaviors:
1. Market-maker accusations
2021 ? 2026 Pattern: MM blame cycle

2. Promises of imminent breakthroughs

2021: dividends, license deals 2024–2025: DigitalAge launch 2026: transparency, Level 2 pressure Pattern: imminent breakthrough claims
3. Claims of legal or regulatory action
2021: “Legal will respond in 24 hours.” 2026: “Reviewing trading activity through proper channels.” Pattern: legal-action implication
4. Promotion of assets not owned by the public company
Digitalage, OOve, SocialSafe Pattern: private-asset association
5. Compliance claims contradicted by OTC Markets
2021: “We just got current!” 2026: Still on Expert Market Pattern: compliance-claim mismatch

Regulator-Grade Conclusion
The behavior is not episodic — it is systemic.
Across 2021 ? 2026, the issuer repeatedly:
makes unsupported market-maker accusations
promises imminent breakthroughs that never materialize
implies legal or regulatory action
promotes private companies as if they were public assets
claims compliance that is not reflected in OTC
Markets’ tiering
cycles through hype during periods of non-compliance

Why HPNN Cannot Afford Full Consolidation of Digitalage

If $HPNN were to consolidate Digitalage fully under ASC 810 — as required for a genuine wholly-owned subsidiary — every asset, liability, revenue, and expense of #Digitalage would appear line by line in HPNN's financial statements.

That creates an immediate problem. Digitalage has no disclosed revenue. Its $6.5M "asset value" was funded entirely through converted unpaid officer obligations — not cash, not investment, not operations. Full consolidation would expose exactly what Digitalage is: a shell funded by debt conversion with no commercial activity, controlled solely by Peter Michaels through a private Nevada corporation with no audited financials and no independent oversight.
The current "Investment in Digitalage" treatment keeps Digitalage's internals invisible. Full consolidation would make them undeniable.

The accounting choice isn't an oversight. It's a firewall.??NFA?
But hey, how 'bout those shorts????

1. Visibility ? Acceptance ? Compliance
OTC Markets has three different states for issuer documents:

Visible – the documents appear on the issuer’s page

Accepted – OTC Markets has processed them

Compliant – the issuer meets all requirements for tier eligibility

HPNN is only at State 1.

If HPNN were at State 2 or 3, the tier would have already changed.

2. OTC Markets posts unverified filings all the time
This is the part most people don’t know:

OTC Markets will display issuer-uploaded documents even if they are incomplete, non-compliant, or fail verification.

Visibility ? approval.
Visibility ? current status.
Visibility ? tier eligibility.

OTC Markets posts them so the public can see what the issuer submitted —
but that does not mean OTC accepted them.

3. The Expert Market rule is binary
To exit the Expert Market, an issuer must pass all of these:

Verified profile

Current financials accepted

Attorney letter / management certification accepted

Transfer-agent-verified share structure

OTC compliance review passed

DNS subscription active

If any one of these fails, the issuer remains on Expert Market, even if filings are visible.

HPNN has not passed this checklist.

4. The proof is the tier — not the documents
OTC Markets does not “wait” to update tiers.
There is no “pending” state.
There is no “review” tier.

If filings were accepted:

the tier would change automatically

the profile would show Verified

the company would move to Pink Limited or Pink Current

Since none of that has happened:

The filings you see were not accepted as compliant.

This is the only conclusion consistent with OTC Markets’ rules.

5. Why OTC shows filings even when they don’t count
OTC Markets is transparent by design.
They show:

accepted filings

rejected filings

incomplete filings

issuer-uploaded documents that fail review

They do this so the public can see what the issuer attempted to submit.

But only accepted, compliant filings change the tier.

HPNN’s filings are visible, but not accepted.

Bottom Line (Regulator-Grade)
You can see filings on the OTC Markets page because OTC displays issuer submissions — even when they are incomplete or non-compliant.
HPNN remains on the Expert Market because OTC Markets has not accepted those filings as verified, compliant, or sufficient to restore Pink status.

Visibility is not compliance.
Tier status is the only indicator that matters — and the tier has not changed.

Meta had 1 billion users before monetization was the conversation. Zuckerberg proved the audience existed first — then monetized it.
Digitalage has an initial creator cohort, no documented user base, no revenue, and a balance sheet with $1,377 in cash as of their last filing.
That's not a monetization story. That's a capital raise story dressed up as a tech company.
The META comparison doesn't hold. Do the filing math before you do the analogy.

It’s all about the ability to monetize.

Look at METAs history.
FB took off after he proved he could monetize the audience.

$HPNN #Digitalage NFA
With regard to the verification layer
"Verification" Layer: Wrap uploads in a web app (Next.js + Supabase/Firebase backend) that forces metadata capture on ingest. Dashboard for creators? Standard React admin panel.

Sometimes the fundamentals are all you can count on.

$HPNN #Digitalage NFA
$HPNN just posted that Digitalage VOD is live and "server demand is exceeding current capacity."
CDN check run today via http://whichcdn.com:

http://hop-on.com ? Cloudflare free tier
http://digitalage.tv ? ❌ No CDN detected

You cannot run live VOD at scale with zero content delivery infrastructure. This is verifiable. $HPNN

Digitalage Opens Commercial VOD Library Intake and Live Broadcasting Across News, Sports, Events, and Faith Programming
Creators, broadcasters, VOD distributors, sports and event content owners, news publishers, and rights holders invited to engage Digitalage’s patent-pending infrastructure with creator-first economics

TEMECULA, Calif., June 09, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Hop-on, Inc. (OTCID: HPNN), through its Digitalage subsidiary, today announced the expansion of its verified media infrastructure into large-scale VOD library ingestion and live broadcasting across news, sports, events, faith and family programming, independent creators, and VOD rights-holder libraries. Since deploying its live streaming infrastructure in March 2026, Digitalage has been operating as a production-stage, patent-pending media infrastructure platform. Digitalage is now accepting content across expanded categories.

The expansion builds directly on a documented public execution arc established between March 10 and June 3, 2026. That record includes the deployment of next-generation live streaming infrastructure (March 10), controlled production deployment and Newsroom OS activation (March 12), a publicly recorded platform demonstration of live broadcasting, multi-host collaboration, persistent replay, creator control center, and AI transcription (March 16), the introduction of stateful media architecture (March 20), an infrastructure-layer market positioning statement (April 2), the introduction of a creator economic model (April 7), production-scale creator onboarding (April 14), entry into production-stage validation (May 6), the launch of Digitalage.com as a public operating platform (May 19), the filing of U.S. Patent Application No. 19/685,869 covering conditional digital licensing and verified delivery (May 26), the opening of commercial intake (June 1), and the launch of the Genesis Creator Pilot Program (June 3). The expansion announced today is the next chapter in that sequence.

“We did not build another app. We built the rails for the next media economy—where live becomes archive, archive becomes asset, and creators get paid like owners. The servers are active. The libraries are loading. The door is open.”

— Peter Michaels, Sr., Chief Executive Officer, Hop-on, Inc.

FROM LIVE BACKBONE TO PERSISTENT MEDIA DESTINATION

Digitalage was built from the beginning as infrastructure, not as a platform. Where traditional streaming services function as closed destination products, Digitalage is designed to operate as the underlying layer—where media is verified at creation, archived in searchable form, assigned ownership attribution, and made available for monetization across its lifecycle.

The March 2026 deployment established the live broadcasting backbone. The stateful media architecture introduced in March 2026 was designed so that a live broadcast does not end when the stream does. Every broadcast on Digitalage is engineered to become a permanent, searchable, verifiable media asset upon broadcast completion. VOD library ingestion now extends that same architecture to existing content libraries—giving rights holders the ability to bring dormant or under-distributed content into a verified, monetizable system.

CREATOR-FIRST ECONOMICS

Legacy distribution models are built around platforms that aggregate audience and mediate the economic relationship between creators and their viewers. Digitalage is designed to return more of that value directly to creators and rights holders.

Under the Genesis Creator Pilot Program, qualifying Genesis participants receive an 85% gross subscription revenue split, with Digitalage retaining a 15% Platform Infrastructure Fee covering payment processing, video encoding, CDN delivery, compliance infrastructure, and platform margin. Net advertising revenue is split 50% to the creator. The Genesis Creator Pilot Program is designed to operate across both subscription and advertising revenue streams. A $500 cash sign-up bonus is available to qualifying Genesis participants upon completing onboarding requirements, which include registering 10 assets and publishing a first verification video.

Digitalage is designed so creators do not have to surrender their content, their audience, or their economic relationship with viewers. They build a verified ownership record, a searchable archive, and a direct economic relationship with every viewer who subscribes or engages.

VOD LIBRARY INGESTION AND RIGHTS-HOLDER CONTENT

For VOD distributors, studios, sports and event content owners, news organizations, faith and family networks, and independent producers, Digitalage is being built as a verified distribution layer for content libraries and live broadcasts.

Digitalage’s architecture is designed to make existing content libraries searchable, verifiable, monetizable, and discoverable across their full lifecycle. A news broadcast, a sports event, a concert, a documentary, a sermon—each is a media asset with an audience that extends beyond its original broadcast window.

Large-scale VOD library ingestion is operational and accepting content from rights holders. The platform is configured to receive, verify, and organize content libraries across news, sports, events, faith and family programming, and independent VOD production. Rights holders interested in verified publishing access are invited to engage through Digitalage.com.

PATENT-PENDING VERIFIED DELIVERY ARCHITECTURE

Digitalage’s underlying delivery and licensing architecture is patent-pending. The Company filed U.S. Patent Application No. 19/685,869, covering conditional digital licensing based on verified delivery and creator compensation infrastructure. Three prior U.S. provisional patent applications—No. 63/756,622; No. 63/908,082; and No. 63/917,946—are also on record. Commercial intake for the patent-pending verified delivery and licensing architecture is open.

The architecture is designed to support rights-based licensing at scale—connecting verified delivery of content to automated creator and rights-holder compensation—without requiring content owners to transfer ownership or exclusive rights.

APPLICATION STATUS

The Digitalage application remains in controlled testing, with access provided to handpicked participants and onboarded creators through the Genesis program. Android access is through Google Play closed testing; iOS access is through TestFlight internal testing. Creator and partner access is provisioned through the Genesis onboarding process at Digitalage.com/genesis.

Creators, broadcasters, VOD distributors, sports and event content owners, news publishers, faith and family producers, and rights holders interested in verified publishing access may apply at Digitalage.com.

About Digitalage

Digitalage is a media infrastructure platform focused on verified video, live broadcasting, VOD distribution, creator monetization, rights protection, searchable archives, and digital media ownership. Built for creators, influencers, broadcasters, news publishers, sports and event content owners, VOD distributors, and rights holders, Digitalage is designed to help media become verified, searchable, monetizable, and permanent.

Digitalage is a subsidiary of Hop-on, Inc. (OTCID: HPNN).

About Hop-on, Inc.

Hop-on, Inc. (OTCID: HPNN) is a U.S.-based technology company focused on digital media infrastructure, intellectual property development, creator monetization, verified content delivery, and rights-based technology platforms. Through Digitalage, the Company is building infrastructure designed to support the next generation of verified media ownership, distribution, live broadcasting, VOD monetization, and creator economics.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws, including statements regarding Digitalage’s platform capabilities, VOD library ingestion, live broadcasting services, creator monetization, commercial intake, rights-holder participation, patent-pending technology, future partnerships, future content availability, future product development, and potential commercial opportunities. These forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and assumptions and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied. Factors that could cause actual results to differ include, but are not limited to, product development delays, app store review processes, creator and rights-holder onboarding, technology performance, market adoption, financing requirements, competitive conditions, regulatory changes, and other risks associated with early-stage technology and media infrastructure businesses. Hop-on, Inc. undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements except as required by law.

Media & Investor Contact

Peter Michaels, Sr., Chief Executive Officer

Hop-on, Inc. / Digitalage

peter@digitalage.com

www.digitalage.com

SOURCE: Hop-on, Inc.
https://www.globenewswire.com/newsroom/ti?nf=OTczNDIyNSM3NjUzNjc5IzIzMTAwNjY=
https://ml.globenewswire.com/media/YmFlMzkxMDItM2YyOC00YmNjLWI0ZTYtNWE5MTYwMTY3MjNmLTEzMjE2MTYtMjAyNi0wNi0wOS1lbg==/tiny/Digitalage.png

Source: Digitalage

© 2026 GlobeNewswire, Inc.