Monthly Archives: March 2017

Video Projectors Market by Manufacturers,Types,Regions and Applications Research Report Forecast to 2022

WiseGuyReports.Com Publish a New Market Research Report On – “Video Projectors Market by Manufacturers,Types,Regions and Applications Research Report Forecast to 2022”.

Pune, India – March 30, 2017 /MarketersMedia/ —

In this report, the global Video Projectors market is valued at USD XX million in 2016 and is expected to reach USD XX million by the end of 2022, growing at a CAGR of XX% between 2016 and 2022.

Geographically, this report is segmented into several key Regions, with production, consumption, revenue (million USD), market share and growth rate of Video Projectors in these regions, from 2012 to 2022 (forecast), covering
United States
EU
China
Japan
South Korea
Taiwan

Get a Sample Report @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/sample-request/1138627-global-video-projectors-market-research-report-2017

For more information or any query mail at sales@wiseguyreports.com

Global Video Projectors market competition by top manufacturers, with production, price, revenue (value) and market share for each manufacturer; the top players including
Epson
BenQ
SONY
Optoma
LG
Panasonic
SHARP
CASIO

On the basis of product, this report displays the production, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, primarily split into
DLP Projectors
LCD Projectors
Other

On the basis on the end users/applications, this report focuses on the status and outlook for major applications/end users, consumption (sales), market share and growth rate of Video Projectors for each application, including
Household Use
Educational Use
Business Use
Engineering Use

Report Details @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/reports/1138627-global-video-projectors-market-research-report-2017

Table Of Contents – Major Key Points

Global Video Projectors Market Research Report 2017
1 Video Projectors Market Overview
1.1 Product Overview and Scope of Video Projectors
1.2 Video Projectors Segment by Type (Product Category)
1.2.1 Global Video Projectors Production and CAGR (%) Comparison by Type (Product Category) (2012-2022)
1.2.2 Global Video Projectors Production Market Share by Type (Product Category) in 2016
1.2.3 DLP Projectors
1.2.4 LCD Projectors
1.2.5 Other
1.3 Global Video Projectors Segment by Application
1.3.1 Video Projectors Consumption (Sales) Comparison by Application (2012-2022)
1.3.2 Household Use
1.3.3 Educational Use
1.3.4 Business Use
1.3.5 Engineering Use
1.4 Global Video Projectors Market by Region (2012-2022)
1.4.1 Global Video Projectors Market Size (Value) and CAGR (%) Comparison by Region (2012-2022)
1.4.2 United States Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.3 EU Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.4 China Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.5 Japan Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.6 South Korea Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.7 Taiwan Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.5 Global Market Size (Value) of Video Projectors (2012-2022)
1.5.1 Global Video Projectors Revenue Status and Outlook (2012-2022)
1.5.2 Global Video Projectors Capacity, Production Status and Outlook (2012-2022)

2 Global Video Projectors Market Competition by Manufacturers
2.1 Global Video Projectors Capacity, Production and Share by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.1.1 Global Video Projectors Capacity and Share by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.1.2 Global Video Projectors Production and Share by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.2 Global Video Projectors Revenue and Share by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.3 Global Video Projectors Average Price by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.4 Manufacturers Video Projectors Manufacturing Base Distribution, Sales Area and Product Type
2.5 Video Projectors Market Competitive Situation and Trends
2.5.1 Video Projectors Market Concentration Rate
2.5.2 Video Projectors Market Share of Top 3 and Top 5 Manufacturers
2.5.3 Mergers & Acquisitions, Expansion

……..

7 Global Video Projectors Manufacturers Profiles/Analysis
7.1 Epson
7.1.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.1.2 Video Projectors Product Category, Application and Specification
7.1.2.1 Product A
7.1.2.2 Product B
7.1.3 Epson Video Projectors Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.1.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.2 BenQ
7.2.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.2.2 Video Projectors Product Category, Application and Specification
7.2.2.1 Product A
7.2.2.2 Product B
7.2.3 BenQ Video Projectors Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.2.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.3 SONY
7.3.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.3.2 Video Projectors Product Category, Application and Specification
7.3.2.1 Product A
7.3.2.2 Product B
7.3.3 SONY Video Projectors Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.3.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.4 Optoma
7.4.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.4.2 Video Projectors Product Category, Application and Specification
7.4.2.1 Product A
7.4.2.2 Product B
7.4.3 Optoma Video Projectors Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.4.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.5 LG
7.5.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.5.2 Video Projectors Product Category, Application and Specification
7.5.2.1 Product A
7.5.2.2 Product B
7.5.3 LG Video Projectors Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.5.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.6 Panasonic
7.6.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.6.2 Video Projectors Product Category, Application and Specification
7.6.2.1 Product A
7.6.2.2 Product B
7.6.3 Panasonic Video Projectors Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.6.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.7 SHARP
7.7.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.7.2 Video Projectors Product Category, Application and Specification
7.7.2.1 Product A
7.7.2.2 Product B
7.7.3 SHARP Video Projectors Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.7.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.8 CASIO
7.8.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.8.2 Video Projectors Product Category, Application and Specification
7.8.2.1 Product A
7.8.2.2 Product B
7.8.3 CASIO Video Projectors Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.8.4 Main Business/Business Overview

………..CONTINUED

For more information or any query mail at sales@wiseguyreports.com

Buy 1-User PDF @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/checkout?currency=one_user-USD&report_id=1138627

ABOUT US:
Wise Guy Reports is part of the Wise Guy Consultants Pvt. Ltd. and offers premium progressive statistical surveying, market research reports, analysis & forecast data for industries and governments around the globe. Wise Guy Reports features an exhaustive list of market research reports from hundreds of publishers worldwide. We boast a database spanning virtually every market category and an even more comprehensive collection of rmaket research reports under these categories and sub-categories.

Contact Info:
Name: Norah Trent
Email: sales@wiseguyreports.com
Organization: WiseGuy Research Consultants Pvt Ltd.
Address: Office No. 528, Amanora Chambers Magarpatta Road, Hadapsar Pune – 411028
Phone: +1-646-845-9349

Source URL: http://marketersmedia.com/video-projectors-market-by-manufacturerstypesregions-and-applications-research-report-forecast-to-2022/181966

For more information, please visit https://www.wiseguyreports.com

Source: MarketersMedia

Release ID: 181966

Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Market 2017 Global key Players – DONG Energy,Duke Energy,Alstom Grid,Bosc ,IBM ,Analysis and Forecast to 2022

WiseGuyReports.Com Publish a New Market Research Report On – “Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Market 2017 Global key Players – DONG Energy , Duke Energy , Alstom Grid , Bosch , IBM , Schneider Electric Analysis and Forecast to 2022”.

Pune, India – March 30, 2017 /MarketersMedia/ —

This report studies the global Virtual Power Plant (VPP) market, analyzes and researches the Virtual Power Plant (VPP) development status and forecast in United States, EU, Japan, China, India and Southeast Asia. This report focuses on the top players in global market, like
DONG Energy
Duke Energy
RWE
Alstom Grid
Bosch
GE Digital Energy
IBM
Schneider Electric
Siemens
ENBALA Power Networks
Joule Assets
Power Analytics
Power Assure
Spirae
Ventyx/ABB
Viridity Energy
Comverge
Consert
Cooper Power Systems/Eaton
Customized Energy Solutions
EnerNOC

Get a Sample Report @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/sample-request/1137630-global-virtual-power-plant-vpp-market-size-status-and-forecast-2022

For more information or any query mail at sales@wiseguyreports.com

Market segment by Regions/Countries, this report covers
United States
EU
Japan
China
India
Southeast Asia

Market segment by Type, Virtual Power Plant (VPP) can be split into
Centralized Controlled VPP
Decentralized Controlled VPP

Market segment by Application, Virtual Power Plant (VPP) can be split into
Commercial & Industrial
Residential

Report Details @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/reports/1137630-global-virtual-power-plant-vpp-market-size-status-and-forecast-2022

Table Of Contents – Major Key Points

Global Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Market Size, Status and Forecast 2022
1 Industry Overview of Virtual Power Plant (VPP)
1.1 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Market Overview
1.1.1 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Product Scope
1.1.2 Market Status and Outlook
1.2 Global Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Market Size and Analysis by Regions
1.2.1 United States
1.2.2 EU
1.2.3 Japan
1.2.4 China
1.2.5 India
1.2.6 Southeast Asia
1.3 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Market by Type
1.3.1 Centralized Controlled VPP
1.3.2 Decentralized Controlled VPP
1.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Market by End Users/Application
1.4.1 Commercial & Industrial
1.4.2 Residential

2 Global Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Competition Analysis by Players
2.1 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Market Size (Value) by Players (2016 and 2017)
2.2 Competitive Status and Trend
2.2.1 Market Concentration Rate
2.2.2 Product/Service Differences
2.2.3 New Entrants
2.2.4 The Technology Trends in Future

……..

3 Company (Top Players) Profiles
3.1 DONG Energy
3.1.1 Company Profile
3.1.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.1.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.1.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.1.5 Recent Developments
3.2 Duke Energy
3.2.1 Company Profile
3.2.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.2.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.2.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.2.5 Recent Developments
3.3 RWE
3.3.1 Company Profile
3.3.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.3.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.3.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.3.5 Recent Developments
3.4 Alstom Grid
3.4.1 Company Profile
3.4.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.4.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.4.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.4.5 Recent Developments
3.5 Bosch
3.5.1 Company Profile
3.5.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.5.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.5.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.5.5 Recent Developments
3.6 GE Digital Energy
3.6.1 Company Profile
3.6.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.6.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.6.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.6.5 Recent Developments
3.7 IBM
3.7.1 Company Profile
3.7.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.7.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.7.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.7.5 Recent Developments
3.8 Schneider Electric
3.8.1 Company Profile
3.8.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.8.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.8.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.8.5 Recent Developments
3.9 Siemens
3.9.1 Company Profile
3.9.2 Main Business/Business Overview
3.9.3 Products, Services and Solutions
3.9.4 Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Revenue (Value) (2012-2017)
3.9.5 Recent Developments

………..CONTINUED

For more information or any query mail at sales@wiseguyreports.com

Buy 1-User PDF @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/checkout?currency=one_user-USD&report_id=1137630

Source URL: http://marketersmedia.com/virtual-power-plant-vpp-market-2017-global-key-players-dong-energyduke-energyalstom-gridbosc-ibm-analysis-and-forecast-to-2022/181969

For more information, please visit https://www.wiseguyreports.com

Source: MarketersMedia

Release ID: 181969

Global Flooring Coating Market 2017 Share,Trend,Segmentation and Forecast to 2022

WiseGuyReports.Com Publish a New Market Research Report On – “Global Flooring Coating Market 2017 Share,Trend,Segmentation and Forecast to 2022”.

Pune, India – March 30, 2017 /MarketersMedia/ —

In this report, the global Flooring Coating market is valued at USD XX million in 2016 and is expected to reach USD XX million by the end of 2022, growing at a CAGR of XX% between 2016 and 2022.

Geographically, this report is segmented into several key Regions, with production, consumption, revenue (million USD), market share and growth rate of Flooring Coating in these regions, from 2012 to 2022 (forecast), covering
North America
Europe
China
Japan
Southeast Asia
India

Get a Sample Report @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/sample-request/1138573-global-flooring-coating-market-research-report-2017

For more information or any query mail at sales@wiseguyreports.com

Global Flooring Coating market competition by top manufacturers, with production, price, revenue (value) and market share for each manufacturer; the top players including
PPG
Sherwin-Williams
Akzo-Nobel
Nipponpaint-holding
Valspar PaintBasf Coating
Asia Paints Group
Sika
Hankel
Dulux Group
Jotun

On the basis of product, this report displays the production, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, primarily split into
Water-based Flooring Coating
Solvent-based Flooring Coating

On the basis on the end users/applications, this report focuses on the status and outlook for major applications/end users, consumption (sales), market share and growth rate of Flooring Coating for each application, including
Residential Building
Commercial Building
Factory
Public Infrastructure
Other

Report Details @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/reports/1138573-global-flooring-coating-market-research-report-2017

Table Of Contents – Major Key Points

Global Flooring Coating Market Research Report 2017
1 Flooring Coating Market Overview
1.1 Product Overview and Scope of Flooring Coating
1.2 Flooring Coating Segment by Type (Product Category)
1.2.1 Global Flooring Coating Production and CAGR (%) Comparison by Type (Product Category) (2012-2022)
1.2.2 Global Flooring Coating Production Market Share by Type (Product Category) in 2016
1.2.3 Water-based Flooring Coating
1.2.4 Solvent-based Flooring Coating
1.3 Global Flooring Coating Segment by Application
1.3.1 Flooring Coating Consumption (Sales) Comparison by Application (2012-2022)
1.3.2 Residential Building
1.3.3 Commercial Building
1.3.4 Factory
1.3.5 Public Infrastructure
1.3.6 Other
1.4 Global Flooring Coating Market by Region (2012-2022)
1.4.1 Global Flooring Coating Market Size (Value) and CAGR (%) Comparison by Region (2012-2022)
1.4.2 North America Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.3 Europe Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.4 China Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.5 Japan Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.6 Southeast Asia Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.4.7 India Status and Prospect (2012-2022)
1.5 Global Market Size (Value) of Flooring Coating (2012-2022)
1.5.1 Global Flooring Coating Revenue Status and Outlook (2012-2022)
1.5.2 Global Flooring Coating Capacity, Production Status and Outlook (2012-2022)

2 Global Flooring Coating Market Competition by Manufacturers
2.1 Global Flooring Coating Capacity, Production and Share by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.1.1 Global Flooring Coating Capacity and Share by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.1.2 Global Flooring Coating Production and Share by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.2 Global Flooring Coating Revenue and Share by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.3 Global Flooring Coating Average Price by Manufacturers (2012-2017)
2.4 Manufacturers Flooring Coating Manufacturing Base Distribution, Sales Area and Product Type
2.5 Flooring Coating Market Competitive Situation and Trends
2.5.1 Flooring Coating Market Concentration Rate
2.5.2 Flooring Coating Market Share of Top 3 and Top 5 Manufacturers
2.5.3 Mergers & Acquisitions, Expansion

……..

7 Global Flooring Coating Manufacturers Profiles/Analysis
7.1 PPG
7.1.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.1.2 Flooring Coating Product Category, Application and Specification
7.1.2.1 Product A
7.1.2.2 Product B
7.1.3 PPG Flooring Coating Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.1.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.2 Sherwin-Williams
7.2.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.2.2 Flooring Coating Product Category, Application and Specification
7.2.2.1 Product A
7.2.2.2 Product B
7.2.3 Sherwin-Williams Flooring Coating Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.2.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.3 Akzo-Nobel
7.3.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.3.2 Flooring Coating Product Category, Application and Specification
7.3.2.1 Product A
7.3.2.2 Product B
7.3.3 Akzo-Nobel Flooring Coating Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.3.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.4 Nipponpaint-holding
7.4.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.4.2 Flooring Coating Product Category, Application and Specification
7.4.2.1 Product A
7.4.2.2 Product B
7.4.3 Nipponpaint-holding Flooring Coating Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.4.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.5 Valspar PaintBasf Coating
7.5.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.5.2 Flooring Coating Product Category, Application and Specification
7.5.2.1 Product A
7.5.2.2 Product B
7.5.3 Valspar PaintBasf Coating Flooring Coating Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.5.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.6 Asia Paints Group
7.6.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.6.2 Flooring Coating Product Category, Application and Specification
7.6.2.1 Product A
7.6.2.2 Product B
7.6.3 Asia Paints Group Flooring Coating Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.6.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.7 Sika
7.7.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.7.2 Flooring Coating Product Category, Application and Specification
7.7.2.1 Product A
7.7.2.2 Product B
7.7.3 Sika Flooring Coating Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.7.4 Main Business/Business Overview
7.8 Hankel
7.8.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base, Sales Area and Its Competitors
7.8.2 Flooring Coating Product Category, Application and Specification
7.8.2.1 Product A
7.8.2.2 Product B
7.8.3 Hankel Flooring Coating Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017)
7.8.4 Main Business/Business Overview

………..CONTINUED

For more information or any query mail at sales@wiseguyreports.com

Buy 1-User PDF @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/checkout?currency=one_user-USD&report_id=1138573

Source URL: http://marketersmedia.com/global-flooring-coating-market-2017-sharetrendsegmentation-and-forecast-to-2022/181976

For more information, please visit https://www.wiseguyreports.com

Source: MarketersMedia

Release ID: 181976

SmoothRx Offers Multiple Guarantees For Best-Selling Scar Removal Cream

SmoothRx issued a statement today reminding customers that they offer both a satisfaction and price guarantee on every bottle of their scar removal cream that is sold.

Miami, FL, United States – March 30, 2017 /PressCable/ —

Over the past two years, the SmoothRx stretch mark and scar removal cream and become an Amazon.com best seller and customer favorite. Every tiny, four-once jar of cream is packed with vitamins, minerals and natural ingredients that combine to help heal the skin from various scars, stretch marks and other imperfections.

“Our scar removal cream may not be the lowest price cream on the market, but we are confident that it is the best price available,” explained SmoothRx spokesperson Ashley Royal. “Many companies are charging up to $30 for one ounce of their scar removal cream, many of which are filled with fillers and harmful chemicals. What customers have reported is that often these expensive scar creams do not show results.” Ms. Royal continued by adding that each four-ounce bottle of their premium scar removal cream sells for $19.95 on Amazon.com.

The SmoothRx stretch mark and scar removal cream has proven results and was recently announced to be the #1 selling scar removal cream on Amazon, the exclusive selling partner for the SmoothRx cream. The SmoothRx scar cream is made of all natural, highest quality ingredients, including mango butter, cocoa butter, grapefruit seed extract, organic olive oil, rose hip seed oil, and shea butter. The scar cream is fragrant, safe for sensitive skin, natural and shows results. “Many of our competitors have been known to use harsh chemicals in their scar creams, and that’s just something we refuse to do […] our scar cream is not only a great price per ounce, but we definitely use the best quality ingredients” added Ashley Royal. In addition to removing scars caused by injury, spider veins, stretch marks, acne and more, when using the SmoothRx stretch mark and scar removal cream, skin appears more youthful and healthy.

The SmoothRx acne scars removal cream is sold exclusively on Amazon.com and is priced at $19.95 for each four-ounce container. Orders over $49 are shipped for free. SmoothRx stands behind their product and offers a 100% satisfaction for their cream.

About SmoothRx: “SmoothRx makes premium scar creams for stretch mark removal, acne scar removal, fine line removal, spider vein removal, and general scar removal. Made in the United States, we only use premium natural ingredients such as orange oil, grapefruit seed extract, shea butter, cocoa butter, and more. We sell primarily on amazon.com and hope to improve the lives of those who are troubled with scars and other cosmetic hindrances.”

Contact Info:
Name: Ashley Royal
Email: orders@smoothrx.com
Organization: SmoothRx
Address: 123 S.E. 3rd Ave #427, Miami, FL 33131, United States
Phone: +1-469-233-5857

For more information, please visit https://www.amazon.com/Best-Scar-Cream-Stretch-Removal/dp/B00RSN5N8G

Source: PressCable

Release ID: 181914

GA Pressure Washers offer Residential and Commercial Pressure Washing in the Lake Oconee Area

Georgia Pressure Washers is a Family Owned and Operated Company serving the Greater Atlanta and Middle Georgia Areas with over 13 years of experience.

Lake Oconee, GA, United States – March 30, 2017 /MarketersMedia/ —

GA Pressure Washers offers pressure washing services in the Lake Oconee, GA area. The pressure washing company tailors their services to the residential and the commercial area’s schedule and needs. The services are a unique blend of personal services and professionalism.

The company promises quality workmanship with attention to detail and respect for the customer’s property, great customer service with a smile and a level of care that ensures a 100% satisfaction guarantee, fair pricing that is always upfront, competitive, and the company will never use high pressure sales tactics. With trained and certified employees, they are professional experts, fully insured and offer easy instant quotes.

Georgia Pressure Washers specializes in a soft wash method of washing that makes your home look like new, while totally eliminating unhealthy mold & algae growth. It will completely erase unsightly stains & discoloration and flush out dirt buildup, spider webs, & insect debris. The company will never use high pressure to clean your home. High pressure will cause damage and create problems, costing you money on expensive repairs. The only reason the company will use high pressure is when we clean concrete surfaces.

Professionalism through industry leading equipment, continuing education, and best cleaning methods is what the company builds on. GA Pressure Washers use professional grade high quality blended detergents to clean all types of exterior siding. A Complete House Wash Service includes cleaning entire home. The company will thoroughly clean the customer’s siding , trim, soffits, and fascia. They then rinse the home with a warm water rinse to ensure a clean and residue free surface.

To get a free estimate for a house pressure washing or a commercial estimate visit: http://www.gapressurewashers.com/contact-us/

Contact Info:
Name: Joshua Heizer
Email: info@gapressurewashers.com
Organization: GA Pressure Washers
Address: 112 Cooper Rd Jackson, GA 30233
Phone: 678- 774-9144

Source URL: http://marketersmedia.com/ga-pressure-washers-offer-residential-and-commercial-pressure-washing-in-the-lake-oconee-area/181696

For more information, please visit http://www.gapressurewashers.com/

Source: MarketersMedia

Release ID: 181696

Final Deadline Reminder for Davita Inc. Shareholders – DVA

RADNOR, PA / ACCESSWIRE / March 30, 2017 / Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP reminds DaVita Inc. (NYSE: DVA) (“DaVita” or the “Company”) shareholders that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of purchasers of DaVita securities between August 5, 2015 and October 21, 2016, inclusive (the “Class Period”).

FINAL REMINDER: Shareholders who purchased DaVita securities during the Class Period may, no later than April 3, 2017, petition the Court to be appointed as a lead plaintiff representative of the class. For additional information or to learn how to participate in this action please visit https://www.ktmc.com/new-cases/davita-inc#join.

DaVita shareholders who wish to discuss their legal rights or interests with respect to this action are encouraged to contact Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check (Darren J. Check, Esq., D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq. or Adrienne O. Bell, Esq.) at (888) 299 – 7706 or (610) 667 – 7706, or via e-mail at info@ktmc.com.

DaVita provides kidney dialysis services for patients suffering from chronic kidney failure or end-stage renal disease. At relevant times, DaVita made contributions to the American Kidney Fund (“AKF”), a purported charitable foundation that provides financial assistance toward patients’ health insurance premiums.

The shareholder class action complaint alleges that DaVita and certain of its executive officers made a series of materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects to investors during the Class Period, including the following: (1) that the Company and its senior executives purposefully steered patients into unnecessary insurance plans in order to maximize profits; (2) that the Company was using AKF as a vehicle to facilitate these improper practices; (3) that, as a result, DaVita’s revenues and profits were illegally obtained; and (4) that DaVita lacked effective internal controls over financial reporting. The complaint further alleges that, as a result of the foregoing, the defendants’ statements about DaVita’s business, operations, and prospects were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On August 18, 2016, The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued a public request for information regarding the alleged steering of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries into other plans in order to earn higher reimbursement rates. Following this news, shares of the Company’s stock declined $3.17 per share, or 4.7%, to close on August 19, 2016 at $64.48 per share.

Then, on October 23, 2016, the St. Louis Post published an article entitled “DaVita encouraged some low-income patients to enroll in commercial plans” which directly accused DaVita of steering clients to private insurers and utilizing its own money to pay for health insurance premiums through the AKF. Following this news, shares of the Company’s stock declined an additional $2.86 per share, or 4.7%, to close on October 24, 2016 at $58.10 per share.

Subsequently, on January 6, 2017, The Wall Street Journal reported that investigators from the U.S. Department of Justice “are probing a controversial arrangement under which kidney-care companies support charitable efforts to help patients pay health-insurance premiums, according to disclosures from major dialysis providers.” Additionally, the article reported that the “Boston U.S. attorney’s office has subpoenaed DaVita Inc. …seeking ‘the production of information related to charitable premium assistance.'”

DaVita shareholders may, no later than April 3, 2017, petition the Court to be appointed as a lead plaintiff representative of the class through Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check or other counsel, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of all class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed as a lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class in the action. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision of whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. For additional information, or to learn how to participate in this action, please visit https://www.ktmc.com/new-cases/davita-inc#join.

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check prosecutes class actions in state and federal courts throughout the country. Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check is a driving force behind corporate governance reform, and has recovered billions of dollars on behalf of institutional and individual investors from the United States and around the world. The firm represents investors, consumers and whistleblowers (private citizens who report fraudulent practices against the government and share in the recovery of government dollars). The complaint in this action was not filed by Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check. For more information about Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, please visit www.ktmc.com.

CONTACT:

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
Darren J. Check, Esq.
D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq.
Adrienne O. Bell, Esq.
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
(888) 299-7706
(610) 667-7706
info@ktmc.com

SOURCE: Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP

ReleaseID: 454565

Markham Custom Closets Mudrooms Laundry Rooms Murphy Beds Launched

Markham Custom Closets, a Markham, Ontario company available at (647)-560-1585, announced a variety of updated services. The interior storage solutions company provides custom closets, mudrooms, laundry rooms, murphy beds, garage shelves and many other storage solutions.

Markham, Canada – March 30, 2017 /PressCable/ —

Markham Custom Closets, a Markham, Ontario company specializing in interior storage solutions, launched a wide range of services aimed at providing Markham clients with custom closets, mudrooms, laundry rooms, murphy beds and a variety of other products.

More information can be found at http://markhamcustomclosets.com.

Walk-in rooms, mudrooms and interior storage spaces often contribute to increased comfort when adequately built, as well as increasing the resale value of the property. On the other hand, houses without proper indoor storage room lose both market value and cause a variety of inconveniences for many homeowners.

Markham Custom Closets launched a wide range of custom services for clients looking for closets, mudrooms, laundry rooms, garage storage and many others.

The company provides a variety of custom walk-in closets, from small single-user models to larger closets more appropriate for large families. Markham Custom Closets works with professional technicians to create designs that are adequate for each individual client, assessing the client’s needs in designing and installing professional, state-of-the-art walk-in closets. For smaller spaces, the company provides a variety of space-maximization methods that will allow additional storage room.

Markham Custom Closets also designs and installs a variety of mudroom solutions. The company provides custom cabinets and drawers made from reliable materials to ensure increased resistance against humidity and dust, as well as striving to create esthetically-pleasing spaces that contribute to the overall atmosphere of the house.

Murphy beds have grown in popularity in recent years, as more and more people need to use actively the considerable space occupied by a traditional bed. Markham Custom Closets provides custom Murphy beds in a variety of styles, sizes and designs.

The Markham company also offers a variety of other interior storage solutions, including laundry beds, family and media rooms, garage shelves and cabinets and many others.

Interested parties can find more information by visiting the above-mentioned website.

Contact Info:
Name: Matt Callaway
Email: markhamcustom@gmail.com
Organization: Markham Custom Closets
Address: 10-9275 Markham Road, Suite 303, ON L6E 0H9, Canada

For more information, please visit http://www.markhamcustomclosets.com

Source: PressCable

Release ID: 181940

Final Deadline Reminder for Roadrunner Transportation Systems, Inc. Shareholders – RRTS

RADNOR, PA / ACCESSWIRE / March 30, 2017 / Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP reminds Roadrunner Transportation Systems, Inc. (NYSE: RRTS) (“Roadrunner” or the “Company”) shareholders that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of purchasers of Roadrunner securities between May 8, 2014 and January 30, 2017, inclusive (the “Class Period”).

FINAL REMINDER: Shareholders who purchased Roadrunner securities during the Class Period may, no later than April 3, 2017, petition the Court to be appointed as a lead plaintiff representative of the class. For additional information or to learn how to participate in this action please visit https://www.ktmc.com/new-cases/roadrunner-transportation-systems-inc#join.

Roadrunner shareholders who wish to discuss their legal rights or interests with respect to this action are encouraged to contact Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check (Darren J. Check, Esq., D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq. or Adrienne O. Bell, Esq.) at (888) 299 – 7706 or (610) 667 – 7706, or via e-mail at info@ktmc.com.

Roadrunner offers truck freight transportation services. The Company operates through three segments: Truckload Logistics, Less-than-Truckload, and Global Solutions.

The shareholder class action complaint alleges that Roadrunner and certain of its executive officers made a series of materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects to investors during the Class Period. Specifically, the defendants are alleged to have made false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company lacked effective internal controls over financial reporting; (2) the Company’s financial statements dating back to the beginning of 2014 overstated the estimated results of operations; (3) the Company’s financial statements contained errors relating to unrecorded expenses from unreconciled balance sheet accounts including cash, driver and other receivables, and linehaul and other driver payables; and (4) the Company’s financial statements dating back to the beginning of 2014 were not reliable.

On January 30, 2017, Roadrunner disclosed that, as a result of “information obtained to date in connection with an ongoing investigation” into the Company’s accounting, certain of Roadrunner’s previously issued financial statements should no longer be relied upon due to misstatements. Additionally, the Company reported that “Roadrunner has identified various accounting errors that it currently estimates will require prior period adjustments to Roadrunner’s results of operations of between $20 million and $25 million.” Further, Roadrunner reported that it would need to record a goodwill impairment charge, estimated “in the range of $175 million to $200 million,” in its upcoming quarterly financial report.

On this news, shares of the Company’s stock fell $3.62 per share, or over 31%, to close on January 31, 2017 at $7.92 per share, on unusually heavy trading volume.

Roadrunner shareholders may, no later than April 3, 2017, petition the Court to be appointed as a lead plaintiff representative of the class through Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check or other counsel, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of all class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed as a lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class in the action. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision of whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. For additional information, or to learn how to participate in this action, please visit https://www.ktmc.com/new-cases/roadrunner-transportation-systems-inc#join.

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check prosecutes class actions in state and federal courts throughout the country. Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check is a driving force behind corporate governance reform, and has recovered billions of dollars on behalf of institutional and individual investors from the United States and around the world. The firm represents investors, consumers, and whistleblowers (private citizens who report fraudulent practices against the government and share in the recovery of government dollars). The complaint in this action was not filed by Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check. For more information about Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, please visit www.ktmc.com.

CONTACT:

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
Darren J. Check, Esq.
D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq.
Adrienne O. Bell, Esq.
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
(888) 299-7706
(610) 667-7706
info@ktmc.com

SOURCE: Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP

ReleaseID: 454172

Argo Gold Acquires the Mishi Lake Gold Project

TORONTO, ON / ACCESSWIRE / March 30, 2017 / Argo Gold Inc. (CSE: ARQ) (OTC PINK: ARBTF) (“Argo Gold” or the “Company”) has entered into a mining claim acquisition agreement with 2362516 Ontario Inc. pursuant to which Argo Gold can acquire a 100% interest in certain mineral claims located in the Mishibishu Lake Area and St. Germain Township of the Sault St. Marie Mining District in exchange for an aggregate of 250,000 common shares of the Company. The acquisition of the mineral claims is subject to receipt of regulatory approval and the common shares issuable thereunder will be subject to a statutory hold period of four months and one day from the date of issuance.

The Mishi Lake Gold Project is comprised of 3 mineral claims, one is in the Mishibishu Lake Area and two are in St. Germain Township, covering 656 hectares located on the eastern central portion of the Mishibishu Deformation Zone in the Mishibishu Lake Greenstone Belt. The Mishi Lake Gold Project is located 40 kilometres west of Wawa, Ontario, 10 kilometres east of Wesdome’s open pit Mishi Mine and 5 kilometres east of the past producing Magnacon Gold Mine.

In addition to the acquired claims, Argo Gold has also staked two small claims in the Mishibishu Lake Area adjacent to the acquired claims. The two additional claims have been staked to cover open portions of the Mishibushu Deformation Zone.

The newly acquired claims and staked claims are adjacent and east of the Wesdome Lease which contain several historical gold prospects (Discovery, Hollinger, Amichi, Northwest Prospects). The Mishibishu Deformation Zone extends onto the Argo Gold claims and is estimated to be 1.5 kilometres wide over a strike length of 2.5 kilometers on the Argo Gold property. In 2011, extensive stripping of the Mishi North gold occurrence indicated the presence of highly deformed and altered mafic metavolcanics containing foliation parallel quartz veins, as well as late fissure-filling quartz veins. Three grab samples indicated variable gold tenor (pyritic argillite: 0.002 g/t Au; quartz-sericite-fuchsite-pyrite: 0.06 g/t Au; quartz-ankerite-pyrite vein: 75 g/t Au; source AFRI file: 20000006614 Ministry of Northern Development and Mines). No channel sampling has been completed on the vein system.

Argo Gold believes follow-up exploration activity is warranted at the Mishi Lake Gold Project.

The Company has not yet completed the work necessary to verify the past exploration results and since some of these results are historical in nature and some results predate National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) standards. In addition, a qualified person has not completed sufficient work to verify these historical results. The technical information in this news release has been prepared in accordance with the Canadian regulatory requirements set out in NI 43-101 and reviewed and approved by Delio Tortosa, P.Eng., a “Qualified Person” as defined by NI 43-101 and a Technical Advisor for Argo Gold.

In addition, Argo Gold has also granted an aggregate of 400,000 options to purchase common shares of the Company exercisable at a price of $0.18 per share and expiring on March 30, 2020 to consultants of the Corporation. The common shares issuable upon exercise of the options are subject to a four-month hold period from the original date of grant.

About Argo Gold Inc.

Argo Gold is listed on the Canadian Securities Exchange under the ticker ARQ. Argo Gold is focused on gold exploration projects central and northwestern Ontario. All of Argo Gold’s projects are 100% owned and have indications of economic viability. Argo Gold’s website is www.argogold.ca.

For more information, please contact:

Judy Baker
President
(416) 786-7860
judybakertoronto@gmail.com

NEITHER THE CANADIAN SECURITIES EXCHANGE NOR ITS REGULATIONS SERVICES PROVIDER HAVE REVIEWED OR ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.

Forward-Looking Information Cautionary Statement

Except for statements of historic fact, this news release contains certain “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable securities law. Forward-looking information is frequently characterized by words such as “plan,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” and other similar words, or statements that certain events or conditions “may,” or “will” occur. Forward-looking statements are based on the opinions and estimates at the date the statements are made, and are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements including, but not limited to delays or uncertainties with regulatory approvals, including that of the CSE. There are uncertainties inherent in forward-looking information, including factors beyond the Company’s control. The Company undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking information if circumstances or management’s estimates or opinions should change except as required by law. The reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Additional information identifying risks and uncertainties that could affect financial results is contained in the Company’s filings with Canadian securities regulators, which filings are available at www.sedar.com.

SOURCE: Argo Gold Inc.

ReleaseID: 458578

DEADLINE MONDAY: Khang & Khang LLP Announces Securities Class Action Lawsuit against DaVita Inc. and Encourages Investors with Losses to Contact the Firm

IRVINE, CA / ACCESSWIRE / March 30, 2017 / Khang & Khang LLP (the “Firm”) announces a class action lawsuit against DaVita Inc. (“DaVita” or the “Company”) (NYSE: DVA). Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired shares between August 5, 2015 and October 21, 2016, inclusive (the “Class Period”), are encouraged to contact the Firm in advance of the April 3, 2017 lead plaintiff motion deadline.

If you purchased shares of DaVita during the Class Period, please contact Joon M. Khang, Esquire, of Khang & Khang, 18101 Von Karman Avenue, 3rd Floor, Irvine, CA 92612, by telephone: (949) 419-3834, or via e-mail at joon@khanglaw.com.

There has been no class certification in this case. Until certification occurs, you are not represented by an attorney. You may choose to take no action and remain a passive class member.

According to the Complaint, DaVita made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: that DaVita purposefully steered patients into unnecessary insurance plans in order to maximize profits; that DaVita was using the American Kidney Fund as a vehicle to facilitate these improper practices; that the Company’s revenues and profits were illegally obtained; that DaVita lacked effective internal controls over financial reporting; and that as a result of the above, the Company’s statements about its business, operations, and prospects were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. When this information reached the public, the stock price of DaVita fell.

If you wish to learn more about this lawsuit, or if you have questions concerning this notice or your rights, please contact Joon M. Khang, a prominent litigator for almost two decades, by telephone: (949) 419-3834, or via e-mail at joon@khanglaw.com.

This press release may constitute Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions.

Contacts

Joon M. Khang, Esq.
Telephone: 949-419-3834
Facsimile: 949-225-4474
joon@khanglaw.com

SOURCE: Khang & Khang LLP

ReleaseID: 458576