really?
" Did they first contact other companies to maybe have a coalition first and then THREATEN a lawsuit first before moving FORWARD ON THEIR OWN?"
Who do they CALL? the registered agent, which is the legal person one should call for something like this? DPBE (who is legally REQUIRED to have one, does NOT) The corporate headquarters? Nope, that's been shut too. the CEO, who is the head of the company? Nope, he left over a year ago, without an announcement EVER made by the company on this material fact. Who do they call? Check the website? Nope, unless you know the fact that it has a new site, if you check the one that was there it is now gone. WHO do they call? OH, I know. If they looked at IHUB, a little financial investment site, they could find a link to a different website than the normal one, and that website would have a phone number to someone who is not named, to a phone that does not answer often and does not have a voice mail. Yes, THAT must be how they would learn to call someone. Not the NORMAL channels of the LEGAL person in charge of calls like that, whether it be the non-existent CEO or the non-existent registered agent. How would they find who to call?
"Maybe it was just coincidental that the DR shut down all contractors during the same time period.
"
Or maybe it has to do with the new (At that time) minister being the DRE head of UNESCO. Much more likely. "The problem may have had a chance to be resolved rather quickly? NOT NOW!!" Not with THAT minister in place. Oh - and what DID they do Before they filed the lawsuit? Do you know? Nope. But you'll think you know the answers. Think it would have been solved. Remember that that company filed the suit LONG AFTER the minister already stopped giving out divisions. "anyone in their right mind wouldn’t think that couldn’t have some repercussions on future divisions and contractual percentage splits." Again, the auction happened AFTER they quit giving divisions. If events go A then B, you can't come back and say that B CAUSED A to happen.
We'll agree to disagree. You want to blame ANYONE OTHER than Wilf for this mess, even though in the past you wrote a tirade about it being Wilf's fault AND said that Wilf needed to sell off the artifacts to fund the company. Now it's like WIlf is your favorite person. But that's fine. You have your opinion. I have mine. We'll disagree. it happens. I wish you good luck with this company still, and your shares, and hope someday the company comes back to life. But I will not believe that the "Other company" is at fault for the way Wilf did things here. If the other company's lawsuit forces the government to give the divisions in SPITE of the minister siding with and being with UNESCO, then good for DPBE (too). But I still feel the other company was RIGHT to SELL what they found, and RIGHT to file the suit to FORCE the government to honor its contract. Still wish you a good day, but we'll not agree on that topic. Done talking about it.
