I attempted to answer each question (if I could), my

I attempted to answer each question (if I could), my responses are in red.

It can be a lot of things Rob. Remember that we are now not current as before, we have a "yield sign" meaning that we can't rely on any information about the share structure till the new verified information comes out.

I think people get caught up on the OTC statuses.  They are an attempt to give investors in OTC companies a better understanding of how transparent the company is and provide some legitimacy.  The issue with BCAP becoming limited status, "yield sign", is due to the company not paying the required fee to the OTC Markets to stay current.  This is a minor problem that can obviously be looked at 2 ways (maybe more for the speculative folks).  First, they failed to pay the fee before the required deadline to renew the current status because they have no capital to do so.  Second, they did not pay the fee since they are planning to uplist in the (hopefully) near future.  At this point, since they did not pay the fee, they are now required to pay the fee and submit a current attorney letter.  The attorney letter will cost additional money along with the fee.  I feel the second reason is justifiable and reasonable since these same fees will have to be paid in a month or two to uplist.  If they end up not uplisting, I would definitely find myself questioning the status change in a negative light.  I am optimistic this is a business decision (i.e. to save money from having to pay similar market fees and attorney fees in such a short period of time).  I am sure if you emailed Dwyer on this issue he would give you a similar reason to what I have described in the second option.

I read there are notes due to be paid to Matt that can be converted to shares.

I will have to look this one up since I don't know off the top of my head.  This requires a lot of reading, which is why I can understand folks just asking the board.  This information is always laid out in company filings.  I would first look through the 2011 annual report and see what shares are owned by who and when they convert.  If the information is not there, then it will be in the corporate bylaws as the conversion rates, timeframes, etc..  Like I said, this requires a lot of reading, which I can do sometime soon, but if you want to verify yourself before I get around to this go through the aforementioned filings.  Also, contacted Dwyer might get a quicker response.  Just a side note, I know where you read this information as I did too, but that post had no context and the author didn't even give cite where they were getting that information, which would make verifying their claims that much easier to confirm or deny.  This information is out there in the filings and will require some reading.

There are people who are helping Matt selling preferred's-is this service rendered for free just for the love of the company?

I have no idea.  I hope they are just helping Dwyer, but I have no idea if they are getting compensated for this service.  Believe what you want on this one, since your guess is as good as mine.

If the people who attended the CC signed an NDA not to sell for 30 days- wouldn't it be more logical to sign not to buy instead because they have insider information. Not to sell can be explained that nothing will not be happen before 30 day!! How can selling at this disasterous price considered a privilage for insider information??

This was answered by other posters.  The requirement is not to "trade" BCAP for 30 days.  This is standard practice, since anyone with inside information has an advantage over the regular investor as much information about the progress of the company (much of which has not been released to the public) would have been discussed.  No buying or selling can be done if one participated in the CC and signed the NDA.

I can go on but people get angry here from any kind of a discussion.

This is fine.  Often times this reading is laborious and contains business/legal language that can be confusing so I can understand people asking questions about this stuff.  Like the convertible shares to pay off debts.

Why he let his company go to "yield"-to save 8K ?

$8,000 is a lot of money.  This same amount (plus more) will be paid again if the company can uplist, as planned, in the coming months.  It won't help the shareholders in the meanwhile since OTC investors rely heavily on these statuses, but it will help us longterm as the company is saving expenses.  Obviously everyone wants the current status, but at our current pps levels, I don't see the status change being a major issue, unless of course the company never uplists and the status gets further downgraded.  This will require investors following the moves of the company to determine if they are on track to completing the uplist.

Why did he release a ballot stuff if he is not going to follow up?-doesn't he know that this stuff hurts his credibility in the market and affect all of us?if he is going to delay or change plans, we should know.

I did not like this move by him.  The fact is the company doesn't need our votes, per the corporate bylaws.  This may ruin his credibility, but the PR does say the mailings would be completed (my interpretation is mailed out by the end of the month) by the end of June, which would mean waiting a few days/weeks depending on the mailing service they used.  Additionally, some shareholders may not get ballots, because the company has to look up the investors on the NOBO list, contact the brokers, who would have to disclose the individual investors address.  When you opened a brokerage account you were probably asked if you would allow your information to be made available to the companies you invested in.  Some probably clicked yes and some no, this will complicate the process of contacting shareholders.  I would give this some time to wait and see how things turn out.  If you do not receive a ballot (as I have not), contact Dwyer with your concerns and see what he says.  I do not know what is being done with this, but I have an idea it is not a simple process to get all shareholders info from the NOBO list alone.

What we are in is not due to anyone other than the inconsistency of performance and this needs to be changed immediately because this lull is what hurts the price!!

The only inconsistency is the timelines that Dwyer sets forth.  The business plan has not changed.  Steps along the way, such as the TA software remaining inactive until the brokerage firm is bought, is open to interpretation on whether you feel it was an inconsistency or a change in plans due to the progress of the company.  Investors will interpret things along the way according to their investing timelines, trading philosophies, etc..  What seems like an inconsistency to one person may not be so to another.  Keep that in mind.  If you have specific inconsistencies, throw it out on the board and see what others feel about it.