AgFeed Industries, Inc. FEED (last ticker on record)
CIK 1331427Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- 95% wipeout
- Restatement
- Delisting notice (not a red flag)
- Restructuring
- Bankruptcy
- SEC/DOJ scrutiny
- Went dark (not a red flag)
These figures describe clients, not conduct. A lawyer or firm can serve many companies that later had trouble for reasons that have nothing to do with their work, and nothing here says any lawyer or firm did anything wrong.
- Red flags
- 5
- Newest began Sep 2013
- Largest fall in its shares
- 97%
- Apr 2008 to Oct 2011
- Law firms
- 8
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 4
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- SEC action against a company that stopped filingSEC order (opens in a new tab)
- SEC administrative actionSEC order (opens in a new tab)
- An SEC release names it, an officer or its stockSEC release (opens in a new tab)
- A filing mentions a Wells noticeForm 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Bankruptcy or receivership (Item 1.03)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Exit or disposal costs (Item 2.05)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Debt accelerated (Item 2.04)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Said its accounts could not be relied on (Item 4.02)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Delisting notice (Item 3.01)Form 8-K (opens in a new tab)
- Shares down 95% from their high
An SEC release can name a company’s officer, or its stock as what a scheme sold or moved, so the company may be the victim. Each link goes to what to read.
Law firms
The ratios are about all the companies linked to each one, this one included: how many had that outcome, as a multiple of what comparable companies show. 1.00 means no more than expected.
- Stevens & LeeFirst linked Feb 2011 · Named in a filing · 127 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.08× · Went dark 0.74× · 95% wipeout 0.59×
- Buchanan Ingersoll Professional CorporationFirst linked Dec 2008 · Named in a filing · 123 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.14× · Went dark 0.73× · 95% wipeout 1.47×
- Holland & HartFirst linked Dec 2008 · Named in a filing · 240 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.82× · Went dark 0.92× · 95% wipeout 0.86×
- Pryor CashmanFirst linked Dec 2007 · Named in a filing · 229 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.28× · Went dark 1.25× · 95% wipeout 1.28×
- Hale Lane Peek Dennison and HowardFirst linked Jun 2007 · Named in a filing · 14 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.64× · Went dark 0.62× · 95% wipeout 1.68×
- Saul EwingFirst linked Jun 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 100 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.22× · Went dark 1.01× · 95% wipeout 1.14×
- PARSONS LAW FIRMFirst linked Jul 2005 · Named in SEC correspondence · 52 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.86× · Went dark 1.30× · 95% wipeout 1.67×
- Sherman & Howard L.L.C.First linked Jun 2007 · Text search only · 105 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.02× · Went dark 0.99× · 95% wipeout 1.48×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stevens & Lee | Feb 2011 | Named in a filing | 127 | 1.08 | 0.74 | 0.59 |
| Buchanan Ingersoll Professional Corporation | Dec 2008 | Named in a filing | 123 | 1.14 | 0.73 | 1.47 |
| Holland & Hart | Dec 2008 | Named in a filing | 240 | 0.82 | 0.92 | 0.86 |
| Pryor Cashman | Dec 2007 | Named in a filing | 229 | 1.28 | 1.25 | 1.28 |
| Hale Lane Peek Dennison and Howard | Jun 2007 | Named in a filing | 14 | 0.64 | 0.62 | 1.68 |
| Saul Ewing | Jun 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 100 | 1.22 | 1.01 | 1.14 |
| PARSONS LAW FIRM | Jul 2005 | Named in SEC correspondence | 52 | 1.86 | 1.30 | 1.67 |
| Sherman & Howard L.L.C. | Jun 2007 | Text search only | 105 | 1.02 | 0.99 | 1.48 |
Lawyers
The ratios are about all the companies linked to each one, this one included: how many had that outcome, as a multiple of what comparable companies show. 1.00 means no more than expected.
- Brian S. NorthBuchanan Ingersoll Professional CorporationFirst linked Dec 2008 · Named in a filing · 13 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.39× · Went dark 0.88× · 95% wipeout 2.39×
- William W. UchimotoStevens & LeeFirst linked Jun 2007 · Named in SEC correspondence · 8 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.14× · Went dark 1.68× · 95% wipeout 1.16×
- James B. ParsonsPARSONS/BURNETT LLPFirst linked Jul 2005 · Named in SEC correspondence · 97 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.82× · Went dark 1.51× · 95% wipeout 1.23×
- Robert BarandesBeckman Lieberman & BarandesFirst linked Aug 2007 · Text search only · 5 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.94× · Went dark 1.07× · 95% wipeout 2.37×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brian S. NorthBuchanan Ingersoll Professional Corporation | Dec 2008 | Named in a filing | 13 | 2.39 | 0.88 | 2.39 |
| William W. UchimotoStevens & Lee | Jun 2007 | Named in SEC correspondence | 8 | 1.14 | 1.68 | 1.16 |
| James B. ParsonsPARSONS/BURNETT LLP | Jul 2005 | Named in SEC correspondence | 97 | 1.82 | 1.51 | 1.23 |
| Robert BarandesBeckman Lieberman & Barandes | Aug 2007 | Text search only | 5 | 1.94 | 1.07 | 2.37 |