Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
As I've replied often, maybe Xeriant won't get stock. But you have yet to address, discuss, admit, and explain how XTI Aircraft's $5.4M liability to Xeriant fits into your 'Xeriant won't get any equity or stock' theory. Open ears. But every time, you don't answer, you evade it, you just pussyout.
Fact!
Maybe Blaine D. Holt will be stepping-in with a leadership role, like he and Duffy teased two years ago.
I think of Blaine D. Holt as perfect management personnel for the global construction materials industry. Perfect. Much better than anything he can do in the aerospace realm. Which is perfect now that Xeriant is a construction materials development company and no longer aerospace oriented or focussed.
Yeah, Blaine D. Holt, his leadership role with Duffy awol, should do it.
.
Maganut! Now you say you're helping me, after just yesterday stating that "I SCAMMED your simple ass and got you to stay in it."
Nut job!
You yesterday stated, as that also required an 8-K:
"The down payment was changed before the contract was even signed.
That is material and not a budget adjustment."
Material, yes, because it would be fraud, not material for any other reason. Changing a budget deposit or budget pay schedule is permitted under the JV agreement as first in agreement by the JV company's Management Committee.
We've hashed this too. You ignore it. You wait a few weeks, and then you raise the exact same issue again completely ignoring the facts which counter your arguments. yawn. That's a nut. A Maganut.
You're (or is it "your" as all the maganuts iike to write it) now saying that they agreed to a different deposit amount before they both afterwards signed a contract stating a different $1M deposit amount. You provide zero evidence to support your claim. And on its face, why?, and what for?, and to what end? Silly stuff.
You also presume the information as legitimate that you then after refute as showing a scam. But, if a scam why do you even argue the information as at all legitimate to counter argue to. That is stupid.
For example, you say "Also I have always said the redacted portions were hiding something"
To which several times here I have answered that, to which you leave unaddressed. Which leaves a gaping hole in your conclusion! That the redacted protion was never in fact not publicly available. In effect never in fact redacted at all! That, later I discovered within and via the XTI Aircraft SEC filings of the exact same full non-redacted JV Agreement. There was nothing relevant to hide.
After finding this full never-redacted 'redacted' portion, your claims fail, you know it, but you still harp on. Nut job.
You're a switcharoosey.
You state, "Would you have stayed in knowing that Duffy was pumping a $100 mil merger with XTI and couldn't even meet the $1 mil down payment nor any of the agreed upon budget requirements.".
Ah, we already knew the first payment was not the full $1M.
You state, "Didn't Duffy state that just a month before (SEPT) the merger PR came out he had already decided that XTI didn't have the potential he thought it had??????". No, he did not. Except much much later in his lawsuit. You believe that? You believe that?, so you rely on the later lawsuit-filed Dufy claim as legit? That bullshit lawsuit with maybe one legitimate claim.
Which info of your 'this whole thing is a scam' is the legit information that you rely upon to make your reactionary point of Duffy's countering claims? And which is the fake information? And if it all is fake, why are you asking?
You stated, "Didn't Duffy state that he continued to fund the JV after his revelation???????"
I stated this concept first.
And yet you challenge me as if didn't, that I have no clue, and that you came up with it.
Switcharoosey emotionally disbalanced thief 'nut job.'
.
Tried to help you but found it to be an exercise in futility. Still exposing the dumb BS here like the saying the DOWN payment that was due immediately to finalize an agreement is already changeable as part of the budget. Also I have always said the redacted portions were hiding something. (BUDGET REQUIREMENTS) Don't you think PPL were conned by Duffy's lack of transparency. Would you have stayed in knowing that Duffy was pumping a $100 mil merger with XTI and couldn't even meet the $1 mil down payment nor any of the agreed upon budget requirements.
Didn't Duffy state that just a month before (SEPT) the merger PR came out he had already decided that XTI didn't have the potential he thought it had??????
Didn't Duffy state that he continued to fund the JV after his revelation???????
I think Duffy packed his bags and moved to another country. Where are the updates? We haven't heard a thing since January! He's making it very hard to have any kind of faith.
I think everyone can see the sick puppy you are.
As I've replied often, maybe Xeriant won't get stock. But you have yet to address, discuss, admit, and explain how XTI Aircraft's $5.4M liability to Xeriant fits into your 'Xeriant won't get any equity or stock' theory. Open ears. But every time, you don't answer, you evade it, you just pussyout.
Fact!
That's your case that you're here to help people?
But you kittycatted-out. You could discuss, but you choose to evade addressing issue. But why discuss to suggest you may he incorrect, you're too stupid.... wait boneheaded... to discuss the issue raised to counter your claim, but you resort to personal insult. So you get it dished back, just to make the point.
The contract wasn't modified, the budget agreement under terms of the contract was modified. Clearly!
That's the issue.
You really are delusional, Been saying since the end of 2021 XERI was a SCAM and NEVER EVER EVER would get any XTI stock. Remember how I SCAMMED your simple ass and got you to stay in it. So easily manipulated.
But you kittycatted-out. You could discuss, but you choose to evade addressing issue. But why discuss to suggest you may he incorrect, you're too stupid.... wait boneheaded... to discuss the issue raised to counter your claim, but you resort to personal insult. So you get it dished back, just to make the point.
The contract wasn't modified, the budget agreement under terms of the contract was modified. Clearly!
That's the issue.
Waiting for your explanation...
You disappointedly yet hesitantly agree. LOL.
See, like a stupid magadem all it is is about you winning. I am in fact the first to post here that Duffy's Xeriant lawsuit is garbage and distraction cover. But here.... again (lame azz)... you imply I have claimed the opposite. Lame man, lame.
All to try to come off like you're saying anything. classic maganut
What ever you say CS
Oh... try JohnDoe2024 for the richard sucking you're looking for. Try him, he likes cry babies. You're perfect.
You want me to reply to your same old same Xeriant argument that I've responded to often already, that then you leave no response too, with issue I raise to contrast yours continually left unaddressed.
Classic, stupid, arrogant magadem.
.
Again with your end all. We'll see soon enough and I can't wait. What no BS about the reason Duffy didn't go with arbitration with such a clear cut case.
The down payment was changed before the contract was even signed. That is material and not a budget adjustment.
The contract wasn't modified, the budget agreement under terms of the contract was modified. Clearly! No other reason XTI Aircraft would take initial payment under $1M, and then ongoing continue to take Xeriant's funds through the JV, and then eventually multiple times announce to the SEC of its $5.4M liability to Xeriant. (yeah, that $5.4M XTI Aircraft liability you deny even exists).
Guess you're too stupid, wait... boneheaded... to be reasonable and to reasonably conclude.
No 8-K is required for the JV company to change its budget.
You incorrectly think its Xeriant.
Even if it was, no 8-K would be needed.
As the JV LLC company, definitely no 8-K was required.
Too dumb... wait... or it is bone-headed... to even contemplate. much less admit your error.
Does that provide you a good sounding board to feel justfied and motivated to be a cry baby and get negative? LOL LOL LOLOLLY LOLOLLY!
.
What's your point. XERI entered into a JV with XTI in order to complete the Preliminary Design Review. This was done keeping under the projected budget of $10 million. In XERI's own words they accomplished the SOLE purpose of the JV meaning that the terms of the JV were completed with only $5+ mil. You're one of the others here that claim the XTI JV contract was modified. Why was there no 8-K describing these changes.
Why is XERI claiming they already own XTIA stock when they DON"T?????
2.??????????????Purpose, Term and Objectives.
2.1.???????????Purpose. The sole purpose of the JV shall be to advance the design and development of the Aircraft, more specifically to complete the preliminary design of the Aircraft, as described in this Agreement (the “Purpose”).
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1638850/000110465922078856/tm2219481d1_ex6-20.htm
Xeriant, Inc. - XTI Aircraft
Xeriant
https://www.xeriant.com › about › xti-aircraft
XTI completed Preliminary Design Review (PDR) of the TriFan 600 aircraft in early 2022, made several improvements and performance enhancements to the aircraft ...
CRICKETS on a response to posts 31657 & 31659. Funny how you skipped right over them. Was the BS mediation clause just to give false comfort to the investor??? Must have had to get back to the protest maybe after that you'll give some BS answers. Oh wait I already know they both agreed to go to court and forego arbitration. LOLOLOL
Maybe Blaine D. Holt can step-in to take a leading role for Xeriant, as he suggested he might do, on that really special pre-recorded video presentation conference call. Now that Xeriant has become so specialized within the aerospace community.
Gosh, so nice of you, bye!. Now that you went positive and there is no need for your constant Xeriant bashing.
that's right, that's all-and-only what you contribute here.
Classic magadem gaslighter. You're the Xeriant board agitator, never wrong, even denying facts that counter your guesiimates.
Now aligned with a rocket scientist who believes Duffy is straight up.
cheap cheap said the canary
Q, 2 items the NEXBOARD is a success story, the XTIA suit is a win for XERI.
What do you base your expectation of him being correct????? Surely not his past predictions and BS.
Q, you point out alot of valid points, will they stand up to scrutiny? Until this case moves forward your concerns will float around in a pool of uncertainty. I hope your interpretation and concerns turn out to be false. If you're right alot of us srand to lose alot. On the other hand if SP is right we stand to make some serious prifits.
After all these changes were made and none of it was deemed material which would have included an 8-K to inform shareholders of these events. Good thing none of this had an effect/impact on the completion of, fulfillment of or execution of the said agreement or contract. LOLOLOL
What qualifies as a material change?
Material change means an event, occurrence, change in conditions or circumstances or other change which results in or could reasonably result in or may cause changes to the effect of having an effect/impact on the completion of, fulfillment of or execution of the said agreement or contract.Mar 10, 2023
https://www.fisdom.com/glossary/material-change/#:~:text=Material%20change%20means%20an%20event,the%20said%20agreement%20or%20contract.
Form 8-K is a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) periodic report that public companies file to disclose material changes. Unlike Form 10-K and Form 10-Q, which are filed annually and quarterly, respectively, a public company files a Form 8-K whenever a material event occurs.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/form_8-k#:~:text=Form%208%2DK%20is%20a,whenever%20a%20material%20event%20occurs.
Waaa was wahh little crybaby bitch
Some claim all the things I've pointed to in the signed contract were changed. Including the immediate $1 mil down payment. LOLOLOL The ASSumption is both agreed to make all these changes in order to protect XERI from their failures. All in order to make sure XERI got their share of XTI. Also it is a common belief this case is a shoe in.
So why did Duffy (PLAINTIFF) opt out of mediation and file a lawsuit in such a sure case????? We do see that there is a the non-binding part of mediation. After that there are clear steps taken that ultimately settle the dispute.
THE 2 Main reason I think of are-
1. NOT A SURE CASE
2. END QUICKER (drag time shorten for dilution.
3 NO APPEAL ( not sure on that.) LOSER PAYS EVERYTHING.
Here is another clause in the contract that was ignored. It would probably have been cheaper than a court case and settled quicker
8.3????????????Mediation and Arbitration.
Any Dispute that is not resolved through section 8.2 shall be, upon the demand of either Party, subject to a non-binding mediation proceeding before a mediator in accordance with the American Arbitration Association (AAA) Mediators Model Standards of Conduct with such mediator to be agreed upon by the Parties. If a mediator is not agreed upon or if mediation is not successful, the matter shall be settled exclusively by arbitration, conducted before a single arbitrator mutually selected by the parties, in the State of Delaware, in accordance with the rules of the AAA then in effect. If the Parties are unable to agree on a single arbitrator, each Party shall select an arbitrator and the two arbitrators selected by the Parties shall select a third arbitrator. If three arbitrators are selected, they shall act by majority vote. Judgment may be entered on the arbitrator’s award in any court having jurisdiction. Each Party shall bear their own costs and expenses of any such mediation or arbitration proceeding and shall split evenly any common costs; provided, however, that if the dispute concerns the issue of default as defined herein by one party, the non-prevailing Party (as determined by the arbitration) shall pay for all of the prevailing Party’s costs and expenses, including legal fees relating to such mediation or arbitration proceeding.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1638850/000110465922078856/tm2219481d1_ex6-20.htm
Just an agitator. He argues on all the other boards like he's the last word. Surprised he's posting here and not spending his time protesting on a college campus somewhere.
So you wrote to argue, complaining about me arguing, as you replied to a post replied to not to you yet to another in discussing Xeriant's lawyer and the lawsuit. I think your day job must be rocket scientist.
So you're saying you can't follow. OK, fair enough.
I'm very clear on my stance on Xeriant. You just need/expect it laid out for you .
I suggest you consider you having been taken by Duffy.
Clear as day.
You confuse me with your daily flip flopping. If you are actually invested in XERI it must be a very small amount. Otherwise you wouldn't be caring on like you have 13 diferent personalities. I get frustrated from time to time and have bashed Duffy. That passes when I check my holdings. All I want is this to move up on actual sustainable news.
It's a constant argument with you, regardless of your interpretation of the motions the outcome will eventually be. We can all argue it but without a crystal ball no one can predict the final ruling. FACT! if I seem positive, guilty as hell.
I'd think you'd have to be a good lawyer to even file and make a case with the garbage that Xeriant files as its lawsuits.
Deficiencies have been format or signatures issues. Very minor.
"it's black and white to me." LOL. Well of course, because you're a lay person, you're not an attorney, plus you don't read the court filings, and as a conservative you love being lied to in particular as long as your dominant lie narrative is reinforced.
XTI Aircraft admitted breach of contract? How?/When? Please cite.
You can't read it's a partial dismissal request?, therefore of only specific claims as part of the entire complaint.
That's funny considering XERI has used the same cheap ass lawyer that hasn't won a SINGLE case for XERI. Then again the only thing Duffy wants is to drag the cases out. The way XERI lawyer filed numerous deficiencies seemed to showed incompetence or a purposeful delay. Why would he continue to be used IF it was incompetent???? Maybe that explains thinking somehow XERI is owed $500 mil.
"***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS. Notice to Attorney Onyuwoma Williams Igbokwe to RE-FILE Document No. 4"
XTIA has effectively stopped XERI from cashing in on it's investment. XTIA is bobbing around 2 cents. Xeri could have sold at the high after the merger. Not that they would have but the opportunity was denied. The jury will award damages to XERI, it's black and white to me. XTIA is pooched!
It sounds like they're trying to limit their exposure to the hundreds of million$$$ in damages being claimed by XERI, otherwise they could lose everything if a jury rules against them.
They've already admitted they are in breach of contract. They're up agaist the wall.
XTIA is running out of motions too dismiss. Once this has a trial date that's when they'll settle out of court. If they're reckless and go with a trial by jury they're takeing a huge chance on a large monetary judgement against them.
Simple: XTIA has hired very high-priced lawyers in a desperate attempt delay this case going to trial -- probably hoping that XERI will run out of money and offer to settle for a fraction of the original $500 million in the original lawsuit. In response, XERI has amended its complaint to address XTI's "counterargument", which (in its most recent filing with the Court) now appears to be focused on the amount of damages rather than on the crux of the breach of contract complaint.
You don't think an easy win when what Xeriant would seek ($5.4M) is well evidenced by XTI Aircraft that XTI Aircraft owes Xeriant?
The other current cases have nothing to do with the $5.4M.
You're clearly still too stupid by your bullheadedness to see the obvious.
Exactly like SmartyPants2.
magadems. LOL
Really an easy win. LOLOLOL Then why the second complaint. Why has this case not settled YET.
"Warrants & options", huh? You just keep adding more irrelevance (your bullshit).
All this DD and explanation for JonnyDoeADeer2024, who feeling left out, and his regular hateful, will post to cry that others are.
Followers
|
101
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
33923
|
Created
|
12/26/12
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators SurgeGuy2.0 |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |