InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 604
Posts 29841
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 01/30/2012

Re: Grifter post# 26349

Thursday, 07/24/2014 4:04:30 PM

Thursday, July 24, 2014 4:04:30 PM

Post# of 39469
The court case can be some very nice leverage against ING. If ING have admitted that they have issued series FF bonds and redeemed them as well, and that PFNO's bonds have already been examined by La Porte to the standard of a forensic examination, it's not a leap of faith to believe that ING is just allowing themselves to be gently nudged into redeeming the bonds to avoid another costly and highly embarassing court case to join the long list against them. I can see things starting to move with ING sooner rather than later for those reasons.

No doubt Lionsgate have conducted the same extensive independent forensic examination of the PFNO bonds and come to the same conclusion - that they are real, and issued by ING. Just because ING was doing some creative accounting back in the day and included them on their own balance sheet but sold them!

The truth is that to print these type of things with such intricate designs and overlatys of multiuple inks, you need a very specialised printing press worth millions of dollars. There really aren't a lot of places capable of printing that kind of quality of work without someone knowing that something hinky was up in out of hours prinitng!

So come on ING spare us the egg on your face - there's enough to make an omlette big enough to feed this whole board with!

Please note, the above post is neither a recommendation to buy or sell the stock. Everyone thinking of investing in a company should always conduct their own due diligence, to satisfy themselves, according to their own investment criteria that each compan