Sent from the Hoppe’s April 11th 2009 to shareholders:

“We would be happy to answer any questions brought up by any shareholders who submit the questions in writing, addressed to the Board of Directors.
To that end we invite any shareholders to send us their questions between now and April 30.
Please use this email address:
We will put the questions together, along with the answers, and send the entire Q&A to all shareholders. CCEC corporate finances and records are very well documented.”

This correspondence/questions below was sent to to be answered.

Geoffrey Hoppe @ Linda Benyo never answered avoided answering, tried to make me look stupid and put out a strait out lie that I send 40 pages of questions.

Has anyone but the Hoppes profited from the pooling of shareholder money?

Shouldn’t the Hoppes return shareholder money since their experiment did not work?

Shouldn’t the Hoppes return shareholder money since they did not take prudent steps and their very own actions sabotaged the IPO process?

Shouldn’t the Hoppes return shareholder money since they were responsible for the earnest creation of an IPO in a timely and ethical manner and it did not happen?

Since the IPO will not happen due to the Hoppes own actions shouldn’t they make good-faith repayment to investors that invested more from their hearts than their pockets?

Why did the Hoppes not properly inform shareholders regarding the following?


The Hoppes told shareholders that they gave back their Founders’ Shares. Why did the Hoppes not disclose that they essentially took 100% ownership of a separate company to house the IP (Intellectual Property)?

In essence, the Hoppes took back their Founders Shares by dislodging the IP of CCEC and moving it into a separate entity, which they owned 100%.

Why were Shareholders not properly informed regarding the following?

• The Hoppes took 100% ownership in their IP Company

• Why didn’t the Hoppes properly inform the shareholders that behind the scenes they carved out a separate company to house the IP?

• Regardless of the reasons, this information should have been properly disclosed to shareholders. Why didn’t the Hoppes disclose this information?

• What is the agreement formulated between CCEC and the IP Company? Why was this agreement not revealed to the shareholders?

• How does this agreement affect the shareholder?

• Shareholders should have been allowed to see this separate agreement and be properly informed regarding the formation of the IP Company. Why was the information not made available?

Why were these facts hidden from the Shareholders during Shareholder Meetings? Why didn’t the Hoppes tell the truth regarding the separate IP Company and the facts behind the Hoppes taking 100% ownership of the company? Isn’t this a backhanded way to take back their original Founders Shares?

Why were the Shareholders not told of the following?

The company had a verbal agreement, which stated all revenue, and expenses would go to CCEC after Sept 1, 2006. There are Board Minutes, signed by the corporate secretary Linda Benyo Hoppe, that record this agreement. Unless the revenue is appropriated correctly, the auditors could not sign off on the audit.

Why did it take the Hoppes until 2007 to rightfully turn the 2006 revenue over to CCEC?

Why did the Hoppes keep this money for a long period of time and not turn it over in a timely manner as per the Board Meeting agreement?

The Hoppes refused to return money to the CCEC. This action, among others, led to the resignation of two employees. What types of safeguards are in place to ensure that this cannot happen again?

The Board of Directors was informed in June of 2007 that the Hoppes intended to keep revenue that was owed CCEC. Why did the Board of Directors stay complacent and not ensure that the Hoppes return this money promptly?

Why did the Hoppes complete their 2006 personal tax returns knowing that they were keeping funds that rightfully belonged to CCEC? Isn’t this an indication that they fully intended to keep the money had the auditor, the former business manager and the former COO not caught them?

In Mr. Hoppes own words, he claims the following: “

“Please read this carefully: It actually cost Linda and I $57,000 our own OWN MONEY to turn over five years of hard work to CCEC! For anyone to say that we have taken ANY money from the company in an inappropriate manner is very, very wrong. It is very hurtful. It makes me wonder what the real agenda is.”

How can Mr. Hoppe claim that this was his money when in fact it was CCEC money? How can Mr. Hoppe still claim that this was his money when there was a clear agreement, captured in the Board Minutes by Mrs. Hoppe, stating that all revenue was to go to CCEC after the cut-off date of Sept 1? What was Mr. Hoppe’s real agenda in trying to keep this money? Why is he not telling the truth?

Did the Hoppes have to redo their 2006 tax returns? If so, why?

What measures are in place to ensure that the Hoppes are not able to pocket money?

Mr. Hoppe also states this:

“In summary, Linda and I have not profited from turning over our work to CCEC. It actually cost us $57,000 (plus many other things not mentioned here). Ever bit of information I have presented here is part of the corporate record. According to our COO, it is the most highly documented transaction in our corporate files. I’m sorry you didn’t have all of the information, and I’m hurt that you made the accusations you made…. without asking first.”
Since Mr. Hoppe said this is part of the corporate record, please make this available for review. Why did it suddenly “cost” the Hoppes $57,000 when in fact this was always CCEC money?

How can Mr. Hoppe legitimately make the claim he did not profit, when in fact he has complete ownership of the IP in a separate company? Why hasn’t he told shareholders the truth that he never actually turned anything over and he still owns the IP rights?
Isn’t it true that when such questions of corporate malfeasance are asked of Mr. Hoppe, he does one of the following?

1. Delete posts and questions from the company message board
2. Claim the person is of low energy and filled with drama
3. Claim that the person submitting the question is malicious and dramatic.
4. Threatens to turn the questions over to his lawyer.
5. Disregards, deflects and minimizes questions, and categorizes them as part of “Old Energy.”

In Mr. Hoppe’s words:

“Two shareholders have been circulating accusations regarding the Crimson Circle, Linda and I to shareholders, certified teachers and Shaumbra at large. I have invited them to submit any questions to me so we can answer in a professional and non-dramatic way but to date I have not received any questions. Instead, these two individuals are distributing very malicious and misleading information around the world.”

Why does Mr. Hoppe use intimidation, spinning the truth and deflection? Why has he not answered shareholder questions?
In Mr. Hoppe’s own words:

“By 2006, Crimson Circle revenues (under Sundance Group) had grown to about $1.5 million. The company was very profitable, and had no debt. In other words, it was a very successful business. “
Isn’t it true that the consolidated statements for 2006 demonstrate a company close to break-even? How can Mr. Hoppe make this statement when his own financial records say something very different? Why is Mr. Hoppe only telling half the truth? What were the expenses associated with the revenue? What was the Net Income? How can Mr. Hoppe say the company was “very profitable” when in fact it was not?

Mr. Hoppes own words:

“Please understand that Crimson Circle was profitable (under Sundance), it had worldwide recognition, and was getting over 250,000 viewers per month. Depending on what formulas you use, I could have sold this business to the new CCEC for anywhere between $250,000 to $500,000. Instead I chose to GIVE it to CCEC. No stings attached.”

Who owns Crimson Circle IP? Is there an agreement between Crimson Circle IP and CCEC? What do the Shareholders actually own now that Crimson Circle IP is carved out? How can Mr. Hoppe say there are no strings attached when in fact there are strings?

How can Mr. Hoppe legitimately claim he could sell his company for the amounts stated above when in fact after further discovery of his financial records, the income measured against expenses would never justify his price?

According to Mr. Hoppe’s 2006 Financial Statements for CCEC:

“Pursuant to an agreement, CCEC will pay Sundance or its assignees an annual licensing fee of $150,000 to use the intellectual property developed and registered to Sundance and accordingly… On May 10, 2007 CCEC formed a wholly owned subsidiary, Shaumbra Institute, Inc. On June 7, 2007, the shareholders of Sundance formed Crimson Circle IP, Inc. The purpose of this entity is to hold the intellectual property rights of Sundance and to receive payments from CCEC for annual licensing fees as discussed above”

Why hasn’t Mr. Hoppe made the above information clear to shareholders?

CCEC’s financial statements for 2006 prove that the Hoppes created separate companies and carved up the CCEC.
Isn’t it true that the Hoppes were to receive royalty payments according to the 2006 CCEC financial statements (notes)? Why would Mr. Hoppe make the claim that there were “no stings attached” when in fact his very own financial reports say the opposite? Are his auditors lying?
It is evident that the Hoppes carved up the CCEC. What do shareholders actually own now? If the CCEC were ever to dissolve, wouldn’t only the Hoppes benefit since they carved out the key asset for themselves?

Why were the shareholders not properly informed regarding the following?

Contract Employees
The Hoppes refused to become employees of CCEC and remained as contract employees. The Hoppes were properly informed that this choice could prolong the auditors review and opened CCEC up to a potential audit from the labor board and the IRS.
Since the Hoppes stated they made this choice to preserve their personal 401K plan, why is their retirement program more important than the prudent conduct of a company that needed to take extra measures of accountability and proper business conduct in light of an IPO?

Why is the Hoppes’ personal gain more important than safeguarding shareholder investment?

Isn’t this behavior on behalf of the Hoppes another indication that they never planned to take the company to an IPO?
Are the Hoppes still contract employees? If so, why?


Why did the Hoppes not tell the truth regarding the fact that no copyrights or trademarks were in place or ever existed?

Why did the Hoppes tell the shareholders during the investment stage that copyrights and trademarks were in place when in fact they were not?

Is it true that CCEC had to pay for the copyrights and trademarks after the fact?

After making the payments for the copyrights and trademarks, did the Hoppes carve out the Intellectual Property in the form of these copyrights and trademarks and place it in a separate company that they owned?

Who paid attorney fees and related costs surrounding the copyrights and trademarks?

Why didn’t the Hoppes allow the shareholders access to their plans and copyright/trademark strategy prior to making the decision to carve it out for Hoppe ownership?

Shouldn’t shareholders have the right to see the agreement between the Hoppes and CCEC regarding the IP? Why was this agreement never made available?


Why did it take the Hoppes nearly one year to get their Sundance books into GAAP for a timely audit?

Mr. Hoppe’s statement that it is “common for an audit to take one year,” is simply not true. Are Sundance’s books very simple like any small business? An average accountant could have moved the books from cash to an accrual basis in a timely manner.

Why didn’t the Hoppes turn over the documents that would have ensured a timely audit?

Mr. Hoppe’s own words:

“Now for the big pain-in-the butt: Sundance used a CASH basis for it’s bookkeeping. But CCEC had to use the ACCRUAL method because we planned to do an IPO. So, all of the Sundance accounting had to be converted to ACCRUAL. This was a big task. Linda had to go through ALL of the receipts, paperwork and transactions for the past 2-3 years. We never anticipated having to do an audit on Sundance, plus we were traveling about 70% of the time. It took nine months to get everything together. (However, it is very common for an audit to take one year).”

It is a fact that the Hoppes were 100% responsible for turning their books over for audit purposes. Through Mr. Hoppe’s own admission, it took him time. If an IPO was a top priority, why didn’t the Hoppes make the books data/info etc., available in a timely manner?

The responsibility of providing correct documentation to the auditors rests squarely and appropriately on the Hoppes shoulders. Didn’t the Hoppes use CCEC money to hire an outside account to move the Sundance books into GAAP and even then did not turn the documentation over in a timely manner? How can the Hoppes make excuses for not turning this information over unless they did not want an IPO and have something to hide?

Why did it take the Hoppes nearly 1 year to have Sundance’s books available for audit?

If an IPO was to occur, shouldn’t the Hoppes have performed this simple task?


Why did the Board of Directors and the Hoppes vote and hire a new COO that did not have the proper work permits for the USA after being informed regarding the proper conduct?

Please provide proof of work permits for the current COO? Typically an I-9 needs to be filed within 3 days of employment.

Is it true that the current COO has been coming in and out of the country as of July 2007, on a Tourist Visa, while he is employed as an Officer and Member of the Board of Directors of CCEC?

If the foreign-born COO has been entering the USA under a Tourist Visa, while gainfully employed by the CCEC, please have a US Immigration Attorney prepare a statement that this is legal, does not violate any US Immigration laws and has not put CCEC at risk.

Please provide verification that the COO was not paid any type of compensation while he was under a Tourist Visa and hired as an employee and Chief Operating Officer of CCEC. If the COO was in fact paid either by wire transfer or some type of direct deposit to accounts in Europe, please have the Immigration Attorney comment on the legal feasibility of this.

If any of these are in violation, why did this occur?

Does the Company believe the SEC or the Immigration authorities would have viewed this favorably in the event an IPO was on the horizon?

Do the Hoppes and their Board of Directors believe that by allowing questionable Immigration law violations, this represents sound judgment and should be part of the go-forward business acumen?

What safeguards will be in place to ensure that management does not willfully and blatantly violate laws?

Why did the Hoppes sanction this conduct if they are truly moving towards an IPO?

What types of measures are in place to ensure that no corporate officer, employee or contractor can misappropriate CCEC money, embezzle or in any way cause fraud?

Who has check signing abilities? Who can wire money? What checks and balances are in place to ensure no fraudulent check/wires can be written?

Are all sales taxes paid and current and can this be verified? Please demonstrate that all sales taxes are paid.

Have any insurance policies been cancelled? If so why?

Have rent, utilities and all operating expenses been paid on time in the last 3 years? If there is evidence that suggests that bills are not being paid on time, what explanation does the company have?

The Hoppes make claims that the business runs efficiently, but in fact do the Hoppes wait until they return from trips to address time-sensitive corporate concerns and correspondences? If there is ample evidence that the Hoppes respond to important corporate matters when they return from trips, how does this safeguard investors’ trust that the business is in competent management hands?

Please provide the following:
The final audited financial’s for 2006 & 2007. Despite the email saying the statements were forthcoming, no shareholder has received them. A “DRAFT” was made available, but not the final audit.

Financial Statements from the audited period to December 2007. – Balance Sheet, Income Statement, Cash Flow & Notes.

Please provide the auditors: Assessment of Management or Opinion of Management letter (The auditor could use another name, but typically the auditor provides a letter regarding management’s competence). Please make this available since it was missing in the draft copies.


Here is a link to a mail from a person that were questioning Geoffrey Hoppe and his ethics: In the mail Geoffrey Hoppe is trying to cover up his fraudulent behavior with more pretty stories : feel between the lines.