jocust
4年前
SANDRO IS ALIVE AND WELL and is a "Mexpert" as an Amazon Mexico franchise
Looks like Sandro reinvented himself and is alive and well and started a franchise with Amazon Mexico. He has a comapny called "Mexico Sales Made Easy" Here is the link: http://www.mexicosalesmadeeasy.com/msme/
It even has a picture of him with some of his old Nascent logos. He is adverising himself as a "Mexpert". Here is his profile in the advertisement:
"Sandro Piancone is the Chief 'Mexpert' Officer of Mexico Sales Made Easy. What is a Mexpert you ask? The leading authority in doing business in Mexico, relied on by some of the world’s largest companies, for a step by step process and successful export of consumer packaged goods into the Mexican marketplace without lawyers, or international trade hassles-guaranteed.
He sits on several boards and consults on trademark issues, labeling requirements, Mexico import permits, and sales and marketing strategies.
Since 1998, Sandro has generated well over 500 million dollars in sales and profits for his clients and partners helping them export their products into Mexico.
Mr. Piancone is a serial entrepreneur, international business consultant and “recovering” CEO of a publicly traded specialty foods distribution company in Mexico. 'I introduced a number of U.S. brands to Mexico and built them into multi-million dollar brands for U.S. companies that had no previous experience exporting to Mexico. Brands such as: [ images of brand logos ].'
His team shares his insistence on timely communication, quick turn-around times, flawless execution of tasks and first-rate customer service. And they all speak excellent English! They are experienced entrepreneurs who get things right the first time.
Do you have questions about our services? Contact info@mexicosalesmadeeasy.com by email, and they will get back to you promptly."
mahi mahi man
6年前
Regrep, here is some info that may be of interest to you...……
www.nerysusa.com
www.nascentfoodservice.com
Corporate office: 774 Mays, #10-450, Incline Village, NV 89451
775-338-7060
info@nerysusa.com
Headquarters: 1872 Nirvana Ave, Chula Vista, CA 91911
www.neryslogistics.com
FBI/PHX: 21711 N 7th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85024
FBI/SAN: 10385 Vista Sorrento Pkwy, San Diego, CA 92121
FBI/LAS: 1787 West Lake Mead Blvd, Las Vegas, NV 89106-2135
SEC: Division of Corporate Finance, 100 F Street NE, Washington DC 20549
I am not sure how up to date all this is but hope it helps.
Good luck in tracking down Sandro Piancone.
Keep us posted RE your findings. Good Luck...MMM
$treet Trader
8年前
NCTW .004 only 35 mil float MJ?
CEO Victor Petrone, is also with PFWI.
-PFWI had news in Feb that they are going into MMJ business.
Could NCTW be doing the same?
from transfer agent NCTW only has 35 million float.
a/s-195,000,000
o/s-87,502,190
restricted-51,661,825
jocust
8年前
According to the court record Sandro misrepresented to Cathart the financial status of Targa at the time of the SPA:
"As found above, Genesis stands in the shoes of Nascent [ as its legal "assignee" - jocust ] , and is subject to the defenses Nery’s has against Nascent. The court concludes Nascent materially breached the SPA it entered into with Nery’s and, furthermore, the breaches were immediate upon execution of the SPA. The breach was multifaceted, consisting of several failures by Nascent, many of which would serve as an independent basis for breach.
Nascent represented that the accounts payable (interchangeable with
“liabilities”) did not exceed $150,000. In truth, total liabilities claims exceeded over $800,000, over $550,000 of which were paid or negotiated by Nery’s.
Within two months of executing the SPA, Nery’s first learned of pre-existing liabilities exceeding $300,000 over and above the $149,000 disclosed bank liabilities earlier incurred by Targa to purchase product. The misrepresentations regarding accounts payable/liabilities by Nascent were grossly negligent,2 if not reckless, and consisted of a material breach of the contract excusing further
performance by Nery’s, and independently constituting a basis for rescission.
Nascent further represented in the SPA that all of Targa’s accounts
receivable were collectible. In truth and in fact, they were not and, under the circumstances of Nery’s acquiring Targa on such a precarious basis with only $300,000 cash to resurrect the moribund Targa, this misrepresentation constituted a material breach and was sufficient to justify rescission.
Nascent further represented in the SPA that all labor costs and liabilities were paid and/or fully funded. In truth and in fact, they were not and, given that almost $50,000 was due under the circumstances discussed above, this misrepresentation constituted a material breach and was sufficient to justify rescission.
In addition, Nascent represented that no tax liabilities or liens existed. In truth and in fact, at the time the parties entered into the SPA, approximately $285,000 of such obligations of Targa existed, constituting another grossly negligent or reckless misrepresentation by Nascent which was material at the time of contract formation and sufficient for rescission by Nery’s.
Nascent also represented in the SPA that it would defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Nery’s for any loss or liability resulting from a breach of any representation or warranty of the SPA. It is fair to say that this promise, so important to Nery’s as it provided for Nery’s’ sole recourse, was itself breached when Nascent was unable to reimburse Nery’s for the most minimal undisclosed pre-existing liabilities such as product arrearages to vendors and “front door demands” for past taxes due to be paid in cash. As Cathcart attempted to pass those bills, statements, and demands for payment directly to Nascent through Piancone and Alvarez, Nascent declared its inability to indemnify in even the smallest amounts. The misrepresentations related to indemnification were, under the circumstances, unconscionable on the party Nascent, and the indemnification remedy itself totally illusory and fictional. All of those representations were material and of themselves sufficient to justify rescission. Further material breaches were committed by Nascent regarding the transfer of taxes due by Targa.
The parties have acknowledged that Nascent’s breaches were immediate and material."