agreeing not to is different than considered taking enforcement action. "Agreeing not to" is part of any settlement, while what the negative posters are suggesting is that the IRS was considering taking enforcement action before the settlement was reached, and they have no evidence of that. Rather the favorable terms of the settlement with the IRS, given the amount of money involved and the max of $15K per month payments, evidence that it was LTNC that worked it out with the IRS before there was any collection action considered.
The only negative about LTNC is its high interest convertible debt. It not only consumes what would be some profit, it crimps expansion. That makes the stock risky. But there has never been a default or much stock issued in conversions, and all the other stuff - - the Company is not growing, the payroll tax arrangement with the IRS was a bad deal and frightens future clients - - all of that are calamity fantasies not based on fact.
Although personal comment about posters is a tos violation, I think it is just common sense for any reader to try to discern the motivation behind any post, and why the repetition. I'll see what the news and the trading is like before posting again - - to do otherwise is just like playing tennis with a machine.
