Checked with other trusted board member

Already have. SS is the same.

Naked shorting by cocky note holder that thinks they have a suit

Please answer the question.

Which would you prefer ?

The Lord has had mercy

13 branches with no toxic debt and cash flow positive going forward

or 30 or 300 branches at a running loss with strangling toxic debt.

Which Would you choose Mr. Gain.

Which would any rational ceo choose.

Please I beg of you just answer this question. That's it. Just this one.

Om

Because they see Ltnc rising from the ashes and greed is setting in.

Very simple reason.

Except the amendment to the note agreement that prevents conversion as long as payments made.

Perhaps now is the time for all parties to settle once and for all.

Wow. Excellent read. Thanks for making it clear.

Yes nacho. Ghost asks a good question This action proves that the note holders have no honor and are willing to ignore the forbearance agreements or sell to people that will ignore it.

What should our ceo do ? Allow these rogue conversions.

Agreed.

I agree with this.

I don't know but am
Confident Ryan will answer if served.

Negative. That was first. Then he will ask for the others.

I look at the current event.

They made claim this morning and demanded shares and threatened this negative PR. In effect black mailed Ryan, never served him or proved the owner of the note. In judging those actions. Being a Christian doesn't make me stupid

You do know he hasn't been served yet right ?

Not sure but still there now

I keep answering my own posts. I don't mean to

So if I call your house and insist I bought debt fur the people you Moshe your car payment to are you going to pay me before I prove that ?

No. I am a Christian man and do believe in second chances. I believe based on findings this guy is a repeat and not changed man. The way he handled this proves this

The first thing a judge will want to see is the trail from one to the other.

That comes first. Not after pr's and negotiations

You are certain?????

Oh boy. Do tell more

I agree. Perverts and criminals can sue legitimate companies in America today.

Perhaps but on the periscope he mentions that they could not prove conveyance.

What part of forbearance agreement don't you get. We know the original note was toxic. Why do you think we went to no bid with notes like this.

We don't know. They haven't proven they own the note or have rights to the shares. That is first Then the validity of the claim can be measured.

He never provided proof of conveyance on the note. They are bound by the forbearance agreements as well

So Ryan should send money to anyone that swears under penalty...,,

This wouldn't surprise me.

We shall see.

I have asked him point blank if we will be cash profitable once the debt is gone and the overhead is reduced to accommodate the lower revenue. He said absolutely

The scumbag is trying to pull a fast one and so is the seller of the note.

If I bought a note I'd have no trouble proving it.

Strong buy. Nice summary.

Please sticky.

The lawsuit does not mention forbearnce agreement.

They don't show what Ryan asked which is proof that they have claim. That makes it non existent.

Bring it. Orders in now

No. Crafty note holders selling to 3rd parties without disclosing forbearance agreements.

I wonder how much the counter suit will be for ?

You lucky bad:;);:46? Ffy

Why ? No merit.

Yes. Purchasing 3rd party debt does not forgo the previously negotiated forbearance agreements.

Good luck to this predator.