Adia Nutrition, Inc. (ADIA)

[namtae]

So youre saying you are comfortable to provide shareholders/potential investors with LESS INFORMATION than required by lowly PINK SHEET companies?

so you would like it and me to be held to a higher standard when there is no obligation to disclose ANYTHING

Of note is your volunteering the bits & pieces of information here in a not so veiled attempt to prepare and firm up potential investors for whatever you have planned.

Surely you will admit long time investors still holding ADIA shares have been annihilated and the buck stops with you. So for their benefit, the ones you claim to care for so much, why not be as or more transparent than a pink sheet stock? It smacks of being disingenuous. Cant have it both ways.

New capital would come in to ADIA anyway if I were to agree to cram down and dilute everyone who holds Common stock today. That's not going to happen, and new capital will come in anyway but on terms and at a valuation that will not cause harmful dilution to the Common stockholders.

I'm not splitting hairs nor am I arguing about the definition of "dilution" when I point out that a restructuring which takes all the value away from the Common stockholders is "dilution" whereas the re-issuance of Common shares which were previously issued anyway but that I have successfully clawed back, coincident with the recapitalization of the company in return for re-issuing those shares, does not harm anyone.

I understand but those shares you anticipate clawing to mitigate diluting current shareholders should have never been issued in the first place. Therefore they cannot be considered outstanding. Reissuing them, as you call it, is still diluting common holders from what their true percentage ownership should be..

This is deception in my book. Akin to a dept store doubling the price of widgets then advertising a massive 50% off discount!

A simple solution is to provide all the agreements. They are from the past and hiding behind "will potentially attract attention to the company outside the context of this active discussion" is immaterial and very likely inaccurate. In the end, whether it attracts attention or not, nothing has been violated and the only intent of publishing the agreements is to clear the air.. or do you not want that to happen?