Athena Bitcoin Global - Annual Report: 2009 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

x

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2009

p

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from ____________ to _____________

COMMISSION FILE NUMBER     000-27435

GAMEPLAN, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (775) 815-4752

Securities registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act:

Common Stock, par value $.001

 (Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.   Yes o   No ý

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act.   Yes o   No ý

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports); and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.   Yes ý   No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes ¨  No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.   ý

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company.  See definition of “accelerated filer,” “large accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.  (Check one)

Large accelerated filer  o         Accelerated filer  o         Non-accelerated filer  o         Smaller reporting company  ý

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).   Yes  ý  No  o

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant on June 30, 2009, based on the closing sales price of the registrant’s common stock on that date, was approximately $316,400. Shares of common stock held by each current executive officer and director and by each person known by the registrant to own 5% or more of the outstanding common stock have been excluded from this computation in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates.

The number of shares of the registrant’s common stock, $0.001 par value, outstanding as of March 29, 2010 was 15,225,000.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

From time to time, our representatives or we have made or may make forward-looking statements, orally or in writing. Such forward-looking statements may be included in, but not limited to, press releases, oral statements made with the approval of an authorized executive officer or in various filings made by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Words or phrases "will likely result", "are expected to", "will continue", "is anticipated", "estimate", "project or projected", or similar expressions are intended to identify "forward-looking statements". Such statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to and are accompanied by the above discussion of certain important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking statements.

Management is currently unaware of any trends or conditions other than those mentioned in this management's discussion and analysis that could have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, future results of operations, or liquidity. However, investors should also be aware of factors that could have a negative impact on the Company's prospects and the consistency of progress in the areas of revenue generation, liquidity, and generation of capital resources. These include: (i) variations in revenue, (ii) possible inability to attract investors for its equity securities or otherwise raise adequate funds from any source should the Company seek to do so, (iii) increased state, federal and gaming laws and regulations, (iv) increased competition, (v) unfavorable outcomes to litigation involving the Company or to which the Company may become a party in the future and, (vi) a very competitive and rapidly changing operating environment.

The risks identified here are not all inclusive. New risk factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for management to predict all of such risk factors, nor can it assess the impact of all such risk factors on the Company's business or the extent to which any factor or combination of factors may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as a prediction of actual results.

The financial information set forth in the following discussion should be read with the financial statements of GamePlan, Inc. included elsewhere herein.

PART I

Item 1.

Business

For the last several years GamePlan Inc. (“Company”) attempted to bring to market through mergers or acquisitions comprehensive business plans described in the Company’s previous Annual Reports. After many years of focused efforts to do so, we have not been able to gain traction for these plans. The game plan did not work and had to change.

The difficult but obvious conclusion is that the best interest of our shareholders dictates a change from those business plans back to the business plan that the Company originally employed and in which we have considerable expertise. That plan, summarized in the Company History that follows, is to acquire, develop, manage and/or consult gaming opportunities and gaming related opportunities throughout the world, (“New Plan”).

Summary of Company history

The Company (Cusip # 36465 c 10 5, Tax I.D. # 870493596, publicly traded under the symbol GPLA.OB) was incorporated in Utah on August 26, 1981 under the name Sunbeam Solar, Inc. On April 27, 1984, common stock was sold publicly. During the latter part of 1991, Robert G. Berry purchased ninety percent (90%) of the Company’s stock. On December 23, 1991 the Company merged with GamePlan, Inc., a Nevada public corporation. From 1992 to 1995 GamePlan actively sought gaming opportunities both in Indian and non-Indian venues and had gaming consulting contracts with the Menominee Tribe in Wisconsin and the San Carlos Apache Tribe in Arizona. From 1996 until the present time the Company has been a public shell and is current in all regulatory filings required of bulletin board companies. Of the 50 million shares authorized there are 15,225,000 shares outstanding with no appreciable market value. As of December 31, 2009, the Company is indebted to its controlling shareholders in the approximate amount of $935,378.

4

Summary of the New Plan

The New Plan of the Company is to focus on owning, operating, managing and/or consulting on gaming and gaming related projects throughout the world. The Company plans to reorganize its Board of Directors and Officers, hire employees as needed and focus on acquiring existing profitable traditional gaming properties and ancillary gaming development opportunities together with seeking opportunities for development, management and consulting services with American Indian Gaming Tribes. The Company will also closely monitor emerging gaming jurisdiction in and out of the United States and make appropriate acquisitions and/or participate in joint ventures.  Each of these acquisitions/property development projects will be in separate entities that will be owned in whole or by a majority of the stock ownership in the Company.  Each subsidiary will be responsible for operating not more than one gaming facility.  As of the date of this Report, the Company has not identified any suitable merger or acquisition candidates and their can be no assurance that we will be successful in this regard.   

Regulation

Gaming regulation generally

If we are able to merge with or acquire an existing gaming property, we will become subject to extensive federal, state, provincial, tribal and/or local laws, regulations and ordinances, which are administered by the appropriate regulatory agency or agencies in each jurisdiction (the “Regulatory Authorities”), and which govern the ownership, management, and operation of gaming facilities. These laws, rules, regulations and ordinances vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction; however, each are directed to the responsibility, financial stability and character of the owners and managers of gaming operations as well as persons financially interested or involved in gaming operations.

Neither the Company nor any subsidiary of the Company will own, manage, operate or consult relative to a gaming facility or gaming related facility unless proper licenses, permits and approvals are obtained. An application for a license, permit or approval may be denied for any cause. Most Regulatory Authorities also have the right to license, investigate, and determine the suitability of any person who has a significant relationship with the Company or any of its subsidiaries, including officers, directors, employees, and security holders of the Company or its subsidiaries. In the event a Regulatory Authority were to find a security holder to be unsuitable, the Company could be sanctioned and may lose its licenses and approvals if the Company recognizes any rights in any entity with such unsuitable person in connection with such securities. The Company will be required to repurchase its securities at fair market value from security holders that the Regulatory Authorities deem unsuitable.

The Company’s Articles of Incorporation will be amended to authorize the Company to redeem securities held by persons whose status as a security holder, in the opinion of the Company’s Board of Directors, jeopardizes gaming licenses or approvals of the Company or any of its subsidiaries. Once obtained, licenses, permits, and approvals must be periodically renewed in some jurisdictions and not in others and generally are not transferable. The Regulatory Authorities may at any time revoke, suspend, condition, limit, or restrict a license for any cause they, in their sole discretion, deem reasonable.

Fines for violations may be levied against the holder of a license, and in some jurisdictions, gaming operation revenues may be forfeited to the state. No assurance can be given that any licenses, permits, or approvals will be obtained by the Company or any of its subsidiaries or, if obtained, will be renewed or not revoked in the future. In addition, the rejection or termination of a license, permit, or approval of the Company or any of its employees or security holders in any jurisdiction may have adverse consequences in other jurisdictions. Certain jurisdictions require gaming operators licensed therein to seek approval from the state before conducting gaming in other jurisdictions. The Company and its subsidiaries may be required to submit detailed financial and operating reports to Regulatory Authorities.

The political and regulatory environment for gaming is dynamic and rapidly changing. The laws, regulations and procedures pertaining to gaming are subject to the interpretation of the Regulatory Authorities and may be amended. Any changes in such laws, regulations or their interpretations could have a material adverse effect on the Company if it is able to re-enter the gaming industry.

5

Indian gaming regulation generally

The terms and conditions of management contracts or management related contracts for the operation, and under certain circumstances consulting, of Indian-owned casinos, and of all gaming on Indian land in the United States, are subject to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Authority (“IGRA”). IGRA is administered by the National Indian Gaming Commission (“NIGC”). Certain contracts, such as pure development contracts without a management contract, are subject to the provisions of statutes relating to contracts with Indian tribes, which are administered by the Secretary of the Interior (the “Secretary”) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”) under USC section 81. The regulations and guidelines under which NIGC will administer the IGRA are evolving. The IGRA and those regulations and guidelines are subject to interpretation by the Secretary and NIGC and may be subject to judicial and legislative clarification or amendment.

The Company may need to provide the BIA or NIGC with background information on each of its directors and every shareholder who holds five percent or more of the Company issued and outstanding stock (“5% Shareholders”), including a complete financial statement, a description of such person’s business history and gaming experience as well as listing the jurisdictions in which such person holds gaming licenses. Background investigations of key employees also may be required. The Company’s Articles of Incorporation will be amended to contain provisions requiring directors and 5% Shareholders to provide such information.

The IGRA currently requires NIGC to approve management contracts and certain collateral agreements for Indian-owned casinos. The NIGC may review any of the Company’s management contracts and collateral agreements for compliance with the IGRA at any time in the future. The NIGC will not approve a management contract if a director or a 5% Shareholder of the management company (i) is an elected member of the Indian tribal government that owns the facility purchasing or leasing the games; (ii) has been or is convicted of a felony gaming offense; (iii) has knowingly and willfully provided materially false information to the NIGC or the tribe; (iv) has refused to respond to questions from the NIGC; or (v) is a person whose prior history, reputation and associations pose a threat to the public interest or to effective gaming regulation and control, or create or enhance the chance of unsuitable activities in gaming or the business and financial arrangements incidental thereto.

Additionally, the NIGC will not approve a management contract if the management company or any of its agents have attempted to unduly influence any decision or process of tribal government relating to gaming, or if the management company has materially breached the terms of the management contract or the tribe’s gaming ordinance, or a trustee exercising due diligence would not approve such management contract.

A management contract can be approved only after NIGC determines that the contract provides, among other things, for (i) adequate accounting procedures and verifiable financial reports, which must be furnished to the tribe; (ii) tribal access to the daily operations of the gaming enterprise, including the right to verify daily gross revenues and income; (iii) minimum guaranteed payments to the tribe, which must have priority over the retirement of development and construction costs; (iv) a ceiling on the repayment of such development and construction costs; and (v) a contract term not exceeding five years and a management fee not exceeding 30% of profits; provided that the NIGC may approve up to a seven-year term if NIGC is satisfied that the capital investment required, the risk exposure, and the income projections for the particular gaming activity justify the longer term.

The IGRA established three separate classes of tribal gaming — Class I, Class II, and Class III. Class I includes all traditional or social games played by a tribe in connection with celebrations or ceremonies. Class II gaming includes games such as bingo, pull-tabs, punch boards, instant bingo and card games in which the players bet against other players. Class III gaming includes casino-style gaming including table games such as blackjack, craps and roulette, as well as gaming machines such as slots, video poker, lotteries, and pari-mutuel wagering in which players bet against the gaming operation, otherwise referred to as “betting against the house.”

6

The IGRA prohibits substantially all forms of Class III gaming unless the tribe has entered into a written agreement with the state in which the casino is located specifically authorizing the types of commercial gaming the tribe may offer (a “tribal-state compact”). The IGRA requires states to negotiate in good faith with tribes that seek tribal-state compacts, and grants Indian tribes the right to seek a federal court order to compel such negotiations with default provisions if the state does not negotiate in good faith. Many states have refused to enter into such negotiations. Tribes in several states have sought federal court orders to compel such negotiations under the IGRA; however, the Supreme Court of the United States held in 1996 that the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution immunizes states from suit by Indian tribes in federal court without the states’ consent.

Because Indian tribes are currently unable to compel states to negotiate tribal-state compacts, the Company may not be able to develop and manage casinos in states that refuse to enter into or renew tribal-state compacts.

In addition to the IGRA, tribal-owned gaming facilities on Indian land are subject to a number of other federal statutes. The operation of gaming on Indian land is dependent upon whether the law of the state in which the casino is located permits gaming by non-Indian entities, which will change over time as more and more jurisdictions seek entry into the casino business so as to receive painless “sin taxes” rather than having their citizens travel to adjacent states to engage in gaming activities there. Any such changes will significantly increase competition with non-Indian gaming and that will have a material adverse effect on any casinos that the Company undertakes to manage in the future.

Title 25, Section 81 of the United States Code states that “no agreement shall be made by any person with any tribe of Indians, or individual Indians not citizens of the United States, for the payment or delivery of any money or other thing of value in consideration of services for said Indians relative to their lands unless such contract or agreement be executed and approved” by the Secretary or his or her designee. An agreement or contract for services relative to Indian lands that fails to conform with the requirements of Section 81 will be void and unenforceable. Any money or other thing of value paid to any person by any Indian or tribe for or on his or their behalf, on account of such services, in excess of any amount approved by the Secretary or his or her authorized representative will be subject to forfeiture.

The Indian Trader Licensing Act, Title 25, Section 261-64 of the United States Code (“ITLA”) states that “any person other than an Indian of the full blood who shall attempt to reside in the Indian country, or on any Indian reservation, as a trader, or to introduce goods, or to trade therein, without such license, shall forfeit all merchandise offered for sale to the Indians or found in his possession, and shall moreover be liable to a penalty of $500. . .” No such licenses have been issued to the Company to date. The applicability of the ITLA to Indian gaming management contracts is unclear. The Company believes that the ITLA would not be applicable to any management contracts that it may obtain in the future, under which the Company would be providing services rather than goods to Indian tribes. The Company further believes that the ITLA has been superseded by the IGRA.  

Indian tribes are sovereign nations with their own governmental systems which have primary regulatory authority over gaming on land within the tribe’s jurisdiction. Because of their sovereign status, Indian tribes possess immunity from lawsuits to which the tribes have not otherwise consented or otherwise waived their sovereign immunity defense. Therefore, no contractual obligations undertaken by tribes to the Company would be enforceable by the Company unless the tribe has expressly waived its sovereign immunity as to such obligations. Courts strictly construe such waivers. Additionally, persons engaged in gaming activities, including the Company, are subject to the provisions of tribal ordinances and regulations on gaming. These ordinances are subject to review by NIGC under certain standards established by the IGRA.

Non-gaming regulation generally

The Company and its subsidiaries to be formed are subject to certain federal, state, and local safety and health laws, regulations and ordinances that apply to non-gaming businesses generally, such as the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Resource Conservation Recovery Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. Coverage and attendant compliance costs associated with such laws, regulations and ordinances may result in future additional cost to our operations.

7

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

Not applicable to smaller reporting companies.

Item 1B.

Unresolved Staff Comments

Not applicable.

Item 2.

Properties

The Company has no real estate holdings.

Presently, the principal executive offices of the Company are the personal residence and telephone number of Robert G. Berry, currently the sole officer and one of two principal shareholders of the Company. That business address will change in the near future. The Company also has offices at 8655 East Via de Venturta, Ste: G-200, Scottsdale, AZ 85258, (480) 346-1177.  The Company only has an oral agreement for the Arizona office.

Patents, Service Marks, Domain Names and Licenses

Patents

None

Service Marks

None.  All previous service marks under the terminated plan have been abandoned.  

Domain Names

All domain names have been abandoned except for gameplan-usa.com

Licenses

None.

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

We may from time to time be a party to lawsuits incidental to our business.  As of March 29, 2010, we were not aware of any current, pending, or threatened litigation or proceedings that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.

Item 4.

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009, no matters were submitted to a vote by security holders.

PART II

Item 5.

Market For Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

The common stock is quoted on the over-the-counter market (OTC BB) under the symbol "GPLA" and quoted in the pink sheets published by the National Quotations Bureau.

8

Set forth below are the high and low closing bid prices for our common stock for each quarter of our two most recently completed fiscal years. These bid prices were obtained from Pink Sheets, LLC, formerly known as the “National Quotation Bureau, LLC,” All prices listed herein reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commissions and may not represent actual transactions.

Our common shares are designated as “penny stock”.  The SEC has adopted rules (Rules 15g-2 through l5g-6 of the Exchange Act), which regulate broker-dealer practices in connection with transactions in “penny stocks.”  Penny stocks generally are any non-NASDAQ equity securities with a price of less than $5.00, subject to certain exceptions.  The penny stock rules require a broker-­dealer to deliver a standardized risk disclosure document prepared by the SEC, to provide the customer with current bid and offer quotations for the penny stock, the compensation of the broker-dealer and its salesperson in the transaction, monthly account statements showing the market value of each penny stock held in the customer’s account, to make a special written determination that the penny stock is a suitable investment for the purchaser and receive the purchaser’s written agreement to the transaction.  These disclosure requirements may have the effect of reducing the level of trading activity, if any, in the secondary market for a stock that is subject to the penny stock rules.  Since our common shares are subject to the penny stock rules, persons holding or receiving such shares may find it more difficult to sell their shares.  The market liquidity for the shares could be severely and adversely affected by limiting the ability of broker-dealers to sell the shares and the ability of shareholders to sell their stock in any secondary market.

The trading volume in the Common Stock has been and is extremely limited. The limited nature of the trading market can create the potential for significant changes in the trading price for the Common Stock as a result of relatively minor changes in the supply and demand for Common Stock and perhaps without regard to our business activities. Because of the lack of specific transaction information and our belief that quotations during the period were particularly sensitive to actual or anticipated volume of supply and demand, we do not believe that such quotations during this period are reliable indicators of a trading market for the Common Stock.

The market price of our common stock may be subject to significant fluctuations in response to numerous factors, including: variations in our annual or quarterly financial results or those of our competitors; conditions in the economy in general; announcements of key developments by competitors; loss of key personnel; unfavorable publicity affecting our industry or us; adverse legal events affecting us; and sales of our common stock by existing stockholders.

As of March 29, 2010, there were approximately 90 holders of record of the Company's common stock. This number excludes the number of beneficial owners of shares, if any, held in street name.

We have not paid any dividends to date. We can make no assurance that our proposed operations will result in sufficient revenues to enable profitable operations or to generate positive cash flow. For the foreseeable future, we anticipate that we will use any funds available to finance the growth of our operations and that we will not pay cash dividends to stockholders. The payment of dividends, if any, in the future is within the discretion of the Board of Directors and will depend on our earnings, capital requirements, restrictions imposed by lenders and financial condition and other relevant factors.

9

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

Options Granted October 17, 2008

The Board adopted an Incentive Stock Option Plan and, pursuant to that Plan, adopted the following Incentive Stock Option Plan for each Director: Each Director was given the option to purchase 100,000 Rule 144 shares of the common voting stock of GamePlan Inc. yearly for a period of 5 years at the strike price of twenty cents (.20 cents) per share through all option periods. Each option exercise period shall be for a term of three (3) years from the date of the option grant. The first option period commences on the date of this meeting (Oct. 17, 2008). Subsequent options shall be granted on Oct. 17, 2010, Oct. 17, 2011, Oct. 17, 2012 and the final stock option grant on Oct. 17, 2013 on condition that the Directors are Directors at the time of the subsequent option grants.  The Company determined that all 2,500,000 were technically granted on October 17, 2008 based on the guidance in ASC 718.  The Company and the Directors have a mutual understanding of the key terms and conditions of the award.  The Directors are immediately affected by changes in the Company’s share price. The Company is obligated to issue the options if the director satisfies the performance requirement. Finally, all necessary approvals were obtained.  In all events, GamePlan Inc. shall have the right of first refusal to meet the sale price of the stock.

A summary of the status of the Company’s option plans as of December 31, 2009, is presented below:

During 2008, an option holder informed the Company they were exercising 100,000.  As of December 31, 2009, though, the Company has not received payment for the shares and has not issued shares for the options.  The Company plans to honor the option agreement upon receipt of the exercise funds.  As of December 31, 2009, the Company reports the options as outstanding and exercisable.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

The Company has not sold any unregistered securities during the past three years.

Purchases of Equity Securities by Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

None; not applicable.

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data

Not applicable.

10

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Operating Results - Overview

Our fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 resulted in a net loss of $112,522. The Company's net loss decreased $110,353 from the previous fiscal year ended December 31, 2008. The Company's net loss for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 was $222,875.  The Basic Loss per Share for fiscal year 2009 was $0.01 compared to a loss per share of $0.01 for fiscal year ended 2008.  Details of changes in revenues and expenses can be found below.

Revenues

Revenues for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were $0.  

Cost of Sales

No sales and consequently no costs were incurred for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008.

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2009, decreased by $127,257 to $37,505 as compared to $164,762 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease was attributable to an oral employment and compensation agreement that was subsequently settled for $25,000 in 2008. In addition, we incurred $95,745 in stock based compensation expenses for the fair value of options granted to our new directors in 2008. Stock based compensation expenses were only $15,958 in 2009, which represents the fair value of options that vested during the year.

Interest Expense

Interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2009, increased to $75,017 as compared to $58,113 for the prior year period, due to interest incurred on larger loan balances due to our shareholders.

Liquidity

As of December 31, 2009, the Company had a total current asset balance of $115 and total current liability balance of $14,520. In addition, the Company is indebted to two shareholders in the amount of $935,378.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We had no off-balance sheet arrangements or guarantees of third party obligations at December 31, 2009.

Inflation

We believe that inflation has not had a significant impact on our operations since inception.

11

Plan of Operation

The New Plan of the Company is to focus on owning, operating, managing and/or consulting on gaming and gaming related projects throughout the world. The Company plans to reorganize its Board of Directors and Officers, hire employees as needed and focus on acquiring existing profitable traditional gaming properties and ancillary gaming development opportunities together with seeking opportunities for development, management and consulting services with American Indian Gaming Tribes. The Company will also closely monitor emerging gaming jurisdictions in and out of the United States and make appropriate acquisitions and/or participate in joint ventures.  As of the date of this Report, the Company has not identified any suitable merger or acquisition candidates. We intend that any such acquisitions/property development projects will be in separate entities that will be owned in whole or by a majority of the stock ownership in the Company. Each subsidiary will be responsible for operating not more than one gaming facility.   

The Company plans to assemble a strong team of gaming industry experts that have superior expertise and successful track-records in all aspects of casino development, construction and management. Further, the Company has access to individual specialists mirroring each of the functional areas found in a casino project. The functional areas include design, construction & development, gaming operations, hospitality, finance/accounting, legal/regulatory, security systems, information technology, retail, marketing, entertainment and human resources.

The Company believes this team when developed will represent a valuable asset that will provide a competitive advantage in creating and enhancing relationships with Indian tribes in the Indian casino business and in the pursuit of non-Indian casino opportunities.

There have been no material developments towards implementation, funding, or development of the New Plan.  No elements of the New Plan have been implemented and the Company has no revenues from business operations. Accordingly, there are substantial risks and uncertainties associated with investment in the Company, and we can provide no assurance that we will be able to pursue the New Plan with any degree of success whatsoever.

There may be market or other barriers to entry or unforeseen factors, which could render the New Plan to be not feasible.  Accordingly, the Company may refine, rewrite, or abandon some or all elements of the New Plan, which might benefit the Company and its shareholders.  

Apart from any cash requirements necessary to implement the New Plan, the Company will continue to incur expenses relating to maintenance of the Company in good standing, filing required reports with the SEC and other regulatory agencies, and investigating potential business ventures.  The Company believes that such additional maintenance expenses will be advanced by management or principal stockholders as loans to the Company. However, there can be no assurance that the management or stockholders will continue to advance operating funds to the Company.

Item 7A.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

We are a smaller reporting company as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and are not required to provide the information under this item.

12

Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

The Board of Directors and Shareholders

GamePlan, Inc.

We have audited the balance sheets of GamePlan, Inc. [a development stage company] as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related statements of operations, stockholders' deficit, and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the period from inception [April 27, 1984] through December 31, 2009.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.  The financial statements of GamePlan, Inc. for the period from inception [April 27, 1984] through December 31, 1992, were audited by other auditors whose report dated March 31, 1993, expressed an unqualified opinion on those statements.  We have previously audited the financial statements of GamePlan, Inc., since 1993, and expressed unqualified opinions on those statements in our reports.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  The Company has determined that it is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting.  Our audit included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we express no such opinion.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of GamePlan, Inc. [a development stage company] as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the results of operations and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, and for the period from inception [April 27, 1984] through December 31, 2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that GamePlan, Inc. will continue as a going concern.  As discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements, the Company has experienced recurring losses from operations since its inception and has a net working capital deficiency which raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.  Management’s plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 3.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

\s\ Mantyla McReynolds, LLC

Mantyla McReynolds, LLC

Salt Lake City, Utah

March 31, 2010

13

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

14

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

15

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

16

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

17

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

18

GAMEPLAN, INC.

[A Development Stage Company]

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

December 31, 2009

(Unaudited)

NOTE 1 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

(A)  Organization

The Company was originally incorporated under the laws of the State of Utah on August 26, 1981, as Sunbeam Solar, Inc.  The Company was dormant until April 27, 1984, at which time common stock was issued.  On December 23, 1991, the Company entered into a plan of merger with GamePlan, Inc., a Nevada corporation.  GamePlan, Inc. was the surviving corporation.  The transaction was accounted for as a “reverse” acquisition on a purchase basis.

The Company is considered to be in the development stage as defined in Accounting Standards Codification Topic 915.  It has yet to commence full-scale operations and it continues to develop its planned principal operations. During 1997, and in prior years, the Company earned revenues primarily from consulting fees.

On September 22, 1999, the Company created a wholly-owned subsidiary, in the State of Nevada, under the name "Gameplaninc.com". The Company had resolved that it would transfer, assign, or convey all assets, liabilities and operations to the subsidiary at an appropriate time.  In 2008, the Company dissolved the subsidiary prior to any conveyance taking place.  The Company no longer maintains a subsidiary.  

The following summarizes the more significant of such policies:  

(B)  Cash

Cash consists of cash on deposit in commercial banks.  As of December 31, 2009, the Company had $115 in cash deposits.

(C)  Loss per Share

Basic loss per common share is based on the weighted-average number of shares outstanding. Diluted income or loss per share is computed using weighted average number of common shares plus dilutive common share equivalents outstanding during the period using the treasury stock method. There are outstanding options for the purchase of common stock as of December 31, 2009 but as the Company has an operating loss, a loss per share calculation including these options would be anti-dilutive and is not presented.  The total potential dilutive common stock equivalents outstanding at December 31, 2009 were 2,600,000.

(D)  Use of Estimates in Preparation of Financial Statements

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U. S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.  Actual results could differ from those estimates.

19

GAMEPLAN, INC.

[A Development Stage Company]

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

December 31, 2009

(Unaudited)

NOTE 1 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (continued)

(E) Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenues in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) number 104, Revenue Recognition. SAB 104 clarifies application of U. S. generally accepted accounting principles to revenue transactions.  Revenue is recognized when (1) there is persuasive evidence of an agreement (2) delivery has occurred or services rendered (3) price is fixed or determined and (4) collectability is reasonably assured. The Company had no revenues during the years ending December 31, 2009 or 2008.

(F) Impact of New Accounting Standards

Effective July 1, 2009, the Company adopted the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 105-10, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles – Overall (“ASC 105-10”), which was formerly known as SFAS 168.  ASC 105-10 establishes the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (the “Codification”) as the source of authoritative accounting principles recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities in the preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP.  Rules and interpretive releases of the SEC under authority of federal securities laws are also sources of authoritative U.S. GAAP for SEC registrants.  All guidance contained in the Codification carries an equal level of authority.  The Codification superseded all existing non-SEC accounting and reporting standards and all other non-grandfathered, non-SEC accounting literature not included in the Positions or Emerging Issues Task Force Abstracts.  Instead, it will issue Accounting Standards Updates (“ASUs”).  The FASB will not consider ASUs as authoritative in their own right. ASUs will serve only to update the Codification, provide background information about the guidance and provide the bases of conclusions on the change(s) in the Codification.  References made to FASB guidance throughout this document have been updated for the Codification.

In March 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133 (“SFAS 161”), which was primarily codified into Topic 815 “Derivatives and Hedging” in the ASC. SFAS 161 requires enhanced disclosures about an entity’s derivative instruments and hedging activities including: (1) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments; (2) how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted for under SFAS 133 and its related interpretations; and (3) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance and cash flows. SFAS 161 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with earlier application encouraged. The Company adopted SFAS No. 161 on January 1, 2009. Implementation of SFAS No. 161 had no impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

20

GAMEPLAN, INC.

[A Development Stage Company]

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

December 31, 2009

(Unaudited)

NOTE 1 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (continued)

In October 2009, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2009-13 for Revenue Recognition – Multiple Deliverable Revenue Arrangements (Subtopic 605-25) “Subtopic”. This accounting standard update establishes the accounting and reporting guidance for arrangements under which the vendor will perform multiple revenue – generating activities. Vendors often provide multiple products or services to their customers. Those deliverables often are provided at different points in time or over different time periods. Specifically, this Subtopic addresses how to separate deliverables and how to measure and allocate arrangement consideration to one or more units of accounting.  The amendments in this guidance will affect the accounting and reporting for all vendors that enter into multiple-deliverable arrangements with their customers when those arrangements are within the scope of this Subtopic.  This Statement is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010. Earlier adoption is permitted. If a vendor elects early adoption and the period of adoption is not the beginning of the entity’s fiscal year, the entity will apply the amendments under this Subtopic retrospectively from the beginning of the entity’s fiscal year.  The presentation and disclosure requirements shall be applied retrospectively for all periods presented. Currently, Management believes this Statement will have no impact on the financial statements of the Company once adopted.

The Company has reviewed all other recently issued, but not yet adopted, accounting standards in order to determine their effects, if any, on its results of operation, financial position or cash flows.  Based on that review, the Company believes that none of these pronouncements will have a significant effect on its financial statements

NOTE 2 - RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

The amount payable to shareholders includes unsecured balances due to two shareholders of the Company, for amounts loaned or advanced to the Company, plus accrued interest on those loans. The loans bear interest at 9% per annum.  Each loan has been evidenced by a note.  The original notes have been superseded to provide for compounding of interest and extending maturity dates.  Principal and interest are due at maturity with no penalty for prepayment.  Below is a summary of the outstanding balance due as of December 31, 2009.

The first note is payable to the Company’s president.  On February 17, 1996, the Company issued notes totaling $695,500, which extended the maturity date on a prior loan.  On October 7, 1996, the Company issued 3,500,000 shares of $.001 par value common stock in satisfaction of $350,000 of the note payable and paid a principal reduction of $260,890 in cash.  The Company paid an additional principal reduction of $20,000 on October 16, 1996.  During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the president loaned additional funds of $1,600 and $12,373, respectively.  During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company accrued interest on this loan of $59,362 and $46,048, respectively.

21

GAMEPLAN, INC.

[A Development Stage Company]

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

December 31, 2009

(Unaudited)

NOTE 2 - RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS (continued)

The second note is payable to another shareholder.  This was originally an unsecured note payable to two other individuals.  Principal of $245,000, along with accrued interest, were due to be paid on or before October 1, 1994.  During November, 1994, the Company paid principal of $45,000 along with $19,600 accrued interest, and renewed the remaining principal balance of $200,000.  On October 7, 1996, the Company issued 1,000,000 shares of $.001 par value common stock in satisfaction of $100,000 of the note payable and paid an additional $89,110 in cash.  The Company issued a new promissory note for the remaining principal plus interest.  In February, 1999, this note plus the right to receive all accrued interest was assigned to two shareholders of the Company.  A series of new notes have been written naming those individuals and compounded interest through March 1, 2011.  The Company has recorded accrued interest on this note through December 31, 2009. During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the shareholder loaned additional funds of $20,624 and $35,000, respectively.  During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company accrued interest on this loan of $15,655 and $12,065, respectively.

A shareholder provides office space for the Company.  The Company has determined that the value of the office space is nominal.

NOTE 3 – GOING CONCERN

The Company has incurred losses from inception amounting to $1,804,277 and has no operating revenue source as of December 31, 2009.  Financing the Company’s activities to date has primarily been the result of borrowing from shareholders and others.  The Company’s ability to achieve a level of profitable operations and/or additional financing may impact the Company’s ability to continue as it is presently organized.  Management plans to focus on owning, operating, managing and/or consulting on gaming and gaming related projects throughout the world.  If management is unsuccessful in these efforts, discontinuance of operations is possible.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

The Company is open to other potential business activities including mergers and acquisitions outside of its current business plan.

NOTE 4 – CONCENTRATIONS

The Company depends significantly on funding from the Company’s President and a shareholder to meet its obligations and maintain its filing status. If funds from the Company’s President or the shareholder were no longer available, the Company may experience significant adverse affects including the need to cease operations.

22

GAMEPLAN, INC.

[A Development Stage Company]

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

December 31, 2009

(Unaudited)

NOTE 5 – STOCK BASED COMPENSATION

 On October 17, 2008 the Board adopted an Incentive Stock Option Plan and, pursuant to that Plan, adopted the following Incentive Stock Option Plan for each Director: Each Director (5) was given the option to purchase 100,000 Rule 144 shares of the common voting stock of GamePlan Inc. yearly for a period of 5 years at the strike price of twenty cents (.20 cents) per share through all option periods. Each option exercise period shall be for a term of three (3) years from the date of the option grant. The first option period commenced on the date of this meeting (Oct. 17, 2008). Subsequent options shall be granted on Oct. 17, 2010, Oct. 17, 2011, Oct. 17, 2012 and the final stock option grant on Oct. 17, 2013 on condition that the Directors are Directors at the time of the subsequent option grants. The Company determined that all 2,500,000 were technically granted on October 17, 2008 based on the guidance in FASB ASC 798.  The Company and the Directors have a mutual understanding of the key terms and conditions of the award.  The Directors are immediately affected by changes in the Company’s share price.  The Company is obligated to issue the options if the director satisfies the performance requirement.  Finally, all necessary approvals were obtained.  In all events, GamePlan Inc. shall have the right of first refusal to meet the sale price of the stock.

The following assumptions were used for valuing the options utilizing the Black-Scholes model:

The “fair market value” at the date of grant for stock options granted using the formula relied upon for calculating the exercise price is as follows:

23

GAMEPLAN, INC.

[A Development Stage Company]

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

December 31, 2009

(Unaudited)

NOTE 5 – STOCK BASED COMPENSATION (continued)

A summary of the status of the Company’s option plans as of December 31, 2009, is presented below:

The Company recognized $95,745 in stock-based compensation for all option awards that immediately vested and $15,958 for the options that vested during the year ended December 31, 2009.  The remaining $366,797 will be recognized ratably over the requisite service period of five years for all unvested options.

NOTE 6 – ACCOUNTING FOR INCOME TAXES

Any deferred tax benefits arising from operating losses carried forward would be offset entirely by a valuation allowance since it is not likely that the Company will be sufficiently profitable in the future to take advantage of the losses carried forward.  Net operating loss carry forward amounts expire at various times through 2029.  

The tax effects of temporary differences that give rise to significant portions of the deferred tax asset at December 31, 2009 are summarized below:

24

GAMEPLAN, INC.

[A Development Stage Company]

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

December 31, 2009

(Unaudited)

NOTE 6 – ACCOUNTING FOR INCOME TAXES (continued)

This valuation allowance has decreased $ 65,773 from $473,752 during the period ending December 31, 2009 due to the expiration of net operating loss carryforwards.

Reconciliation between expected taxes and the actual income tax provision for continuing operations follows:

A list of the Company’s Net Operating Losses with the year of expiration is as follows:

Uncertain Tax Positions

The Company has not identified any material uncertain tax positions of the Company on returns that have been filed or that will be filed.  The Company has not had operations and is carrying a large Net Operating Loss as disclosed above.  Since it is not thought that this Net Operating Loss will ever produce a tax benefit, even if examined by taxing authorities and disallowed entirely, there would be no effect on the financial statements.

The Company has filed income tax returns in the US. All years prior to 2006 are closed by expiration of the statute of limitations.  The tax year ended December 31, 2006, will close by expiration of the statute of limitations on about April 15, 2010.  The years ended December 31, 2007, 2008, and 2009 are open for examination.

NOTE 7 – COMMON STOCK

The Company has 50,000,000 authorized shares of common stock.  There are 40,000,000 shares of common voting stock with a par value of one mill ($0.001) per share; and 10,000,000 shares of Class A non-voting common stock with a par value of one mill ($0.001) per share.

25

NOTE 8 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

The Company has evaluated subsequent events through March 31, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and has concluded that no recognized or non-recognized subsequent events have occurred since the quarter ended December 31, 2009.

26

Item 9.

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

Not applicable

Item 9A(T)

Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information we are required to disclose in the reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), such as this Annual Report on Form 10-K, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified by SEC rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information we are required to disclose in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.  

Our management evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2009, pursuant to paragraph (b) of Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15 under the Exchange Act. This evaluation included a review of the controls’ objectives and design, the operation of the controls, and the effect of the controls on the information presented in this Annual Report. Our management has concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) were not effective as of December 31, 2009.

Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

The Company’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

The Company’s sole officer and employee conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009. This evaluation was performed based on the framework in “Internal Control — Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). Based upon this evaluation the sole officer concluded the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting were effective.

This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal controls over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to the temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

27

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There was no change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting during the Company’s most recently completed fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

Item 9B.

Other Information

Not applicable

PART III

Item 10.

Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

Executive Officers and Directors

The following table sets forth information concerning our directors and the executive officer of GamePlan, Inc. and their age and positions. Each director holds office until the next annual stockholders' meeting and thereafter until the individual's successor is elected and qualified. Officers serve at the pleasure of the board of directors.

The following is a biographical summary of the business experience of our directors and executive officers:

Mr. Berry received a BA degree from the University of Nevada in 1961, and a JD degree from the University of Notre Dame law school in 1963. After spending four years in the District Attorney's office in Reno, Nevada, Mr. Berry joined the law firm of Laxalt and Berry in Carson City, Nevada.  Mr. Berry's areas of emphasis while in private practice were plaintiff's personal injury litigation and gaming regulatory work.  While practicing law, Mr. Berry entered into a number of business ventures, including shopping center and condominium development, restaurants, cattle feeding and breeding. Both during and after Mr. Berry left the active practice of law in 1977 he has owned and operated three gaming facilities, engaged in more than 50 business ventures and operations and built the town of Wendover, NV.  Presently, Mr. Berry is a part time Nevada Supreme Court Settlement Judge.

Jon T. Jenkins was a co-founder of GamePlan in 1991.  Mr. Jenkins has 30 years of gaming management experience with 20 of those years serving on the board of directors for several casinos.  Mr. Jenkins presently oversees the day to day operations of two casinos on the Salt River Indian Community adjacent to the metro Phoenix area.  Mr. Jenkins graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree from California State University.

Ray Brown has 24 years of experience in the gaming industry.  Currently, Mr. Brown is a consultant focusing on the identification, development, financing and construction of native and non-native gaming operations.  Mr. Brown graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Nevada-Reno.

L. Steven Haynes is currently leading Boulder Bay Resort, which is a mixed use development including hotel, retail, residential and casino on 18 acres in Lake Tahoe, Nevada.  Mr. Haynes has had several projects where he worked on the development and financing of both native and non-native gaming operations.  Mr. Haynes graduated from Wake Forest University with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

28

David W. Young is a personal financial manager at his own firm of D. W. Young, LLC in Las Vegas, Nevada.  Mr. Young has worked at several gaming companies including, Boyd Gaming, Fremont Hotel & Casino, and Sahara Resorts.  Mr. Young graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Nevada - Las Vegas.

During the last five years, no officers or directors have been involved in any legal proceedings, bankruptcy proceedings, criminal proceedings or violated any federal or state securities or commodities laws or engaged in any activity that would limit their involvement in any type of business, securities or banking activities.

Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires the Company's directors and executive officers, and persons who own more than 10% of the outstanding shares of the Company's Common Stock, to file initial reports of beneficial ownership and reports of changes in beneficial ownership of shares of Common Stock with the Commission. Such persons are required by Commission regulations to furnish the Company with copies of all Section 16(a) forms they file.

No person who, at any time during our past fiscal year, was a director, officer, or beneficial owner of more than 10% of any class of equity securities failed to file, on a timely basis, any report required by Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act during the most recent fiscal year.   

Audit Committee and Financial Expert

We do not have an Audit Committee. The Company's directors perform some of the same functions of an Audit Committee, such as; recommending a firm of independent certified public accountants to audit the financial statements; reviewing the auditors' independence, the financial statements and their audit report; and reviewing management's administration of the system of internal accounting controls. The Company does not currently have a written audit committee charter or similar document.

We have no audit committee financial expert. We believe the cost related to retaining a financial expert at this time is prohibitive. Further, because of our start-up operations, we believe the services of a financial expert are not warranted.

Code of Ethics

A code of ethics relates to written standards that are reasonably designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote:

1)

Honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships.

2)

Full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure in reports and documents that are filed with, or submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission and in other public communications made by the Company.

3)

Compliance with applicable government laws, rules and regulations.

4)

The prompt internal reporting of violations of the code to an appropriate person or persons identified in the code; and

5)

Accountability for adherence to the code.

29

We have not adopted a formal code of ethics statement. The board of directors evaluated the business of the Company and the number of employees and determined that since the business is operated by a small number of persons who are also the officers and directors and many of the persons employed by the Company are independent contractors general rules of fiduciary duty and federal and state criminal, business conduct and securities laws are adequate ethical guidelines.

Shareholder-Director Communication

We have neither a nominating committee for persons to be proposed as directors for election to the board of directors nor a formal method of communicating nominees from shareholders. We do not have any restrictions on shareholder nominations under our certificate of incorporation or by-laws. The only restrictions are those applicable generally under Nevada Corporate Law and the federal proxy rules. Currently the board of directors decides on nominees, on the recommendation of one or more members of the board. The board of directors will consider suggestions from individual shareholders, subject to evaluation of the person's merits. Stockholders may communicate nominee suggestions directly to any of the board members, accompanied by biographical details and a statement of support for the nominees. The suggested nominee must also provide a statement of consent to being considered for nomination. Although there are no formal criteria for nominees, the board of directors believes that persons should be actively engaged in business endeavors, have a financial background, and be familiar with acquisition strategies and money management.

Because the management and directors of the Company are the same persons, the board of directors has determined not to adopt a formal methodology for communications from shareholders on the belief that any communication would be brought to the boards' attention by virtue of the co-extensive employment.

The board of directors does not have a formal policy of attendance of directors at the annual meeting. It does encourage such attendance.

Family Relationships

There are no family relationships between any director, executive officer or person nominated to become such.

Directorships

None of the Company’s directors or nominees to become directors holds any directorship in any other company with a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) or subject to the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.

Item 11.

Executive Compensation

For several years, we have not paid any cash compensation to our executive officers. Cash compensation amounts will be determined in the future based on the services to be rendered and time devoted to our business and the availability of funds. Other elements of compensation, if any, will be determined at that time or at other times in the future.

30

Compensation of Directors

Options Granted October 17, 2008

The Board then adopted an Incentive Stock Option Plan and, pursuant to that Plan, adopted the following Incentive Stock Option Plan for each Director: Each Director was given the option to purchase 100,000 Rule 144 shares of the common voting stock of GamePlan Inc. yearly for a period of 5 years at the strike price of twenty cents (.20 cents) per share through all option periods. Each option exercise period shall be for a term of three (3) years from the date of the option grant. The first option period commences on the date of this meeting (Oct. 17, 2008). Subsequent options shall be granted on Oct. 17, 2010, Oct. 17, 2011, Oct. 17, 2012 and the final stock option grant on Oct. 17, 2013 on condition that the Directors are Directors at the time of the subsequent option grants. In all events, GamePlan Inc. shall have the right of first refusal to meet the sale price of the stock.

Other Compensation Arrangements

On October 17, 2008 the board approved director compensation for each board of director totaling $2,500 for each meeting attended in person and $1,000 for each meeting attended via telephone. The Board further agreed to defer payment until the Company has sufficient cash flow.  No meetings were held during 2009.

Item 12.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

The following table sets forth, as of March 29, 2010, the name and shareholdings of each person who owns of record, or was known by us to own beneficially,* 5% or more of the shares of the common stock currently issued and outstanding; the name and shareholdings, including options to acquire the common stock, of each director; and the shareholdings of all executive officers and directors as a group. Each of the persons in the table below has sole voting power and sole dispositive power as to all of the shares shown as beneficially owned by them, except as otherwise indicated.

*

Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities.  Shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options or warrants currently exercisable or convertible within 60 days, are deemed outstanding for computing the percentage ownership of the person holding such options or warrants but are not deemed outstanding for computing the percentage ownership of any other person. All percentages are calculated based upon a total number of shares issued and outstanding as of March 29, 2010, which number of shares are 15,225,000.

(1)

Mr. Berry’s address is 3701 Fairview Road, Reno, Nevada 89511.  The Robert G. Berry Trust owns the shares. Robert G. Berry is the sole trustee of the trust and has the sole power and authority to vote or dispose of the shares of Common Stock held by the trust.

(2)

Mr. Jenkins address is 5717 East Almeda Court, Cave Creek, AZ 85331. Jon T. Jenkins owns 5,640,500 shares in his individual capacity, and has the authority to vote or dispose of, as trustee, 390,000 shares held in trust for family members.

31

Item 13.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

Robert G. Berry Promissory Notes

On February 1, 1999, the Company entered into an amended and restated promissory note with Robert Berry, pursuant to which the Company agreed to pay Mr. Berry principal then owing to Mr. Berry of  $182,256, representing Mr. Berry's unreimbursed cash advances to the Company as of that date.  The Note was due February 1, 2001 and bore interest at the rate of prime plus 2%.  During 1999, Mr. Berry advanced the Company $17,600.  A new note was executed on February 1, 2000, which extended the maturity date to February 1, 2002. In 2000, Mr. Berry advanced $37,200 to the Company.  The Company executed a further amended and restated note with Mr. Berry on January 1, 2001, which note replaced and superseded all previous notes of the Company payable to Mr. Berry.  The new note was issued in the principal amount of $290,192, bore interest at the rate of prime plus 2%, and extends the maturity of the Company's obligations to Mr. Berry to February 1, 2003.  The entire unpaid principal and interest was due at maturity. Additionally, the Company executed a further amended and restated note with Mr. Berry on January 1, 2002, which note replaces and supersedes all previous notes of the Company payable to Mr. Berry.  The new note was issued in the principal amount of $327,408, bears interest at the rate of prime plus 2%, and maintained the maturity of the Company's obligations to Mr. Berry at February 1, 2003. Mr. Berry renewed this promissory note in the total amount of $484,626 after calculating additional advances to Jan. 1, 2006. As of December 31, 2009, the Company owes Berry $719,587. The entire unpaid principal and interest is due on or before March 1, 2011. The Robert G. Berry Trust owns approximately 39.6% of the issued and outstanding shares of the Company.

Jon Jenkins Promissory Notes

As of February 1, 2001, the Company entered into an amended and restated promissory note payable to Jon and April Jenkins in the principal amount of $74,054.  The note replaced and supersedes all previous notes of the Company payable to Jon or April Jenkins.  The note bears interest at the rate of prime plus 2%. All principal and interest is due and payable on February 1, 2003. Mr. Jenkins agreed to renew this note in the total amount of $100,500 after calculating interest to Jan. 1, 2006. The entire unpaid principal and interest is due on or before March 1, 2011. As of December 31, 2009, the Company owes Jenkins $215,791 Jon Jenkins is a director and the beneficial and indirect owner of approximately 39.6% of the issued and outstanding shares of the Company.

Director Independence

We undertook a review of the independence of our directors and, using the definitions and independence standards for directors provided in the rules of The Nasdaq Stock Market, although not required as the standard for the Company as it is traded on the Over-the-Counter Market considered whether any director has a material relationship with us that could interfere with his ability to exercise independent judgment in carrying out his responsibilities. As a result of this review, we determined that L. Steven Haynes is an "independent director" as defined under the rules of The Nasdaq Stock Market.

Item 14.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

Audit Fees

The Company had audit and financial statement review fees of $12,630 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009. It paid $15,202 in audit and financial statement review fees for the year ended December 31, 2008 to Mantyla McReynolds, our current independent accountants.

Audit-Related Fees

None

Tax Fees

The Company paid tax return preparation fees totaling $450 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 and $347 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008.

32

All Other Fees

None

Audit committee policies & procedures

The Company does not currently have a standing audit committee. The Company’s Board of Directors approved the above services.

PART IV

Item 15.

Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

a.  Exhibits

Exhibit Number

Name of Exhibit

31.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act, as enacted by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.(1)

31.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act, as enacted by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.(1)

32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to 18 United States Code Section 1350, as enacted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. (1)

______________________

(1)

Filed herewith

33

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

34