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.
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.
" Bashing a company that nobody outside that company knows anything about is off topic, as well as 100% incorrect!"
you seem to know a lot about this company, since nobody outside the company knows anything about it I think you just admitted you are from that company. Maybe you should go post on your own board
lol and my sources at Raytheon say your "sources" don't know what they are talking about....sorry can't reveal my sources....you know....Like all good journalists, I protect my sources!
ok got it...You can name who you say never heard of TMMI, but when asked about as you put "a lame demo", you stated that info came from deep within Raytheon.....now your saying it's from the same person? I don't want to twist your words around, so I'm asking....is this what you are saying now?
DD is also more than calling one person at a billion dollar company many months ago, but you still post that tired story.....do some more DD on the agreement between TMMI and Raytheon and see what you come up with. lol you'll be surprised
if we threw out the management who would you replace them with?
you are so right Rein. They'll tell you it's "researchable facts" and then try to back that up with " It comes from inside Raytheon". lol
So 95% of what he knows comes right from the 10,000 pages filed at a court in Las Vegas ( come to Vegas and read lol) what about the other 5% you ask? I think it comes from the weekly "how do we try to spin this truth?" meeting with the boys
I'm not misquoting you.... "EVERYTHING I post is backed up with researchable facts" ....your quote, cut and pasted from your post. (ask your boys about cut and paste...they used it when filing their counter claim)...just saying "it comes from inside Raytheon" (your words) is not A RESEARCHABLE FACT. I would like to back up your statement. Whom did you speak with that informed you that "And I additionally found out all tmm did was some lame demo" (again, cut and pasted from one of your 100's of posts)? or did you just post another fun fract instead of a true fact?
that's the guy you spoke to several months ago? once? the guy who now does know who TMMI is?
you stated EVERYTHING you post is backed up with researchable facts!!!! where are the researchable facts you are stating? sorry if I don't believe everything you post but after you posted that you read a merger that never took place, EVERYTHING you post is subject to proof. So yes, I want to do some homework. from inside Raytheon you say? From Whom? and when did you discover this so called fact? tell me where you got this info from so I can check your fun facts lol
excellent!!!!!since "EVERYTHING I post is backed up with researchable facts " where are the researchable facts for this gem you stated? "And I additionally found out all tmm did was some lame demo "
lol Raytheon has no idea who TMMI is....lol brilliant statement!!! 100% 100% of the time...lol
lol always Sept. with you....you said they would probably be BK last Sept. now it's this Sept. a few more months you'll probably post at same thing again about Sept. 2016 100% misinformation 100% of the time. at least you are consistant
since you ONLY post 100% of the truth 100% of the time, can you tell us how those two cases you mentioned turned out? (Joe Bob Smith, bit by an unleashed Chihuahua; and Wendy Jacks, who spilt hot coffee at IHop on herself!)
Any documentation? or just another fracy story of so called facts that you made up?
yes yes and you are a share holder that bashes the company because of your ethics...call the people running the company you hold stock in crooks and thieves...yet when this case is completed, and the stock takes off, you stand to make some money. making money from crooks and thieves doesn't some like someone who has high ethics...but then again, from previous posts, you also want us to believe that the Court system of the Great state of Nevada is based in corruption and incompetence. but keep posting not much facts but somewhat outrageous, ludicrous, and entertaining
what is it with you and Sept.? last June you were also claiming TMMI didn't have enough resources to make it past Sept. (of last year)
"That's if HP can even find the old Iterated records." Already setting up an excuse for when TMMI wins this case? I think those old records are with the merger papers
you didn't answer the question. If dfi didn't have anything then why merge with dfmi?..and what was merged? they had nothing according to you.... just a way to scam the stockholders
wow...where did I say I printed anything out you posted and shared with the Judge? find the post where I said that and you will probably also find that nasty little merger paper that doesn't exist that you told everyone you read
well that's not true....4retire stated himself that there were probably 1000's of pages he didn't read. Looking over a few pages is not reading the case.
Much like the Judge, I haven't read the papers that have been filed. I did go to Vegas, but the lights, dice and shows were just too much more interesting than reading a bunch of papers that apparently no one else has read, including the person who will be ruling on this case. so, the real question still remains.....trying to piss off the judge? or just ignorant as to how justice is handed out in Nevada? Either way, as a defendant, even with as you say, a slam dunk win of a case, I'd be pretty nervous
Much like the Judge, I haven't read the papers that have been filed. I did go to Vegas, but the lights, dice and shows were just too much more interesting than reading a bunch of papers that apparently no one else has read, including the person who will be ruling on this case. so, the real question still remains.....trying to piss off the judge? or just ignorant as to how justice is handed out in Nevada? Either way, as a defendant, even with as you say, a slam dunk win of a case, I'd be pretty nervous
Actually loopy, based on Fraccy's own posts about how justice works in Nevada if I was one of the defendants I'd have some serious concerns about my defense team and strategy. He says that Judge's typically only read about 1% of the case before trial. (probably just enough to learn the names of the people involved)Therefore they don't read about 99% of the case pretrial. They like to rule on the case only based on the evidence presented at trial and on how it is presented, they don't want to go into the trail leaning one way or the other. According to Fraccy, this is common in Nevada, everyone knows that. And he only posts 100% of the truth ,as he will tell you.
He also says that motions to dismiss are almost never granted. Saying "almost" means that only in extreme cases, probably where the evidence is so overwhelming and lopsided that it is just too obvious to everyone that one side just can't win. (kind of what Fraccy says about this case) but that could only happen if the Judge actually read the case.
So the defense makes a motion to dismiss...(probably just to see if the judge deviated from the norm and actually read the case) Motion gets denied ....obvious proving that the judge didn't read the case. ....The defense files a second motion to dismiss. ( guess maybe they think they might have got the judge a lil curious about the case and she might have read it) the motion was dismissed (guess the judge still hasn't reviewed the case) I know at this point, if I were the Judge I would inform the defense that I am not pre reading the court papers, and that this case is going to trial, and will be judged based on what happens in my court room, just like any other case in the great state on Nevada. Then the defense files a third motion to dismiss? and a forth? and fifth? why? even someone who posts 12,000 on a penny stock board knows cases don't get dismissed Why would they do this? to piss off the judge? to prove the judge hasn't read 99% of the suit filed in her court? or because they just don't know how justice works in Nevada? At any rate, if I were a defendant, I'd be pretty nervous about my defense team and their knowledge of justice in Nevada.
correct you are loopy, the case doesn't bode well for the defendants....some peeps here will say TMMI has zero chance of winning this case, and then tell you to go Vegas and read it yourself and indicates that you will come to the same conclusion. They tell you the Judge probably read only 1% of the case they are presiding over! What a joke....if it was so simple as reading the case and coming to the same conclusion more than one person would be stating that. I know if I represented the defendants and came to that conclusion, and realized the Judge didn't read 99% of the case, I'd be making a big stink. Maybe the lawyers are incompetent as the judge?
LOL yes come to Vegas, one and all, read the papers filed at the court house and you too will see that TMMI has 0% chance of winning this case....Now if there was some way we could just get the Honorable Judge that is presiding over this case to read it. Maybe she read 1%? that's a 100% increase over the last Judge whom you stated probably didn't read any of the paperwork, although she read enough to ask where the merger paper work was. So are all the judges in Nevada incompetent or just the ones that get this case? How do you become a Judge in Nevada anyway? Do they pick from a pool of people that show they have no interest in their job? Maybe the defendants lawyers( if they aren't incompetent themselves) should tell the judge that if she just read the case she is presiding over she too will agree that it's a done deal. or....maybe, just maybe...and I know that it's a far fetched idea, but just MHO that this case actually has merit.
Simpson sworn? and he has copies? wow wonderful.....now if he only filed it....tisk tisk
They could have checked all that or they could have checked to see if there was a merger on file
none the less.... for a company that some stated would be bankrupt by the end of Sept....all in all.... we are still moving forward
Please refresh my memory.....how did TMMI rip off HP?
yes I believe the defendants have tried to get this case tossed several times, and it hasn't happened. so the defendants are annoying her with yet another motion to dismiss. lol Good luck with that...I wonder how many times they will request to get it dismissed before they really piss off the Judge
I'm sure my guarantee will pan out better than your guarantee that this case would get thrown out of court....how long ago did you state that? before you proclaimed the court system was corrupt and incompetent. In this country ( and that includes Nevada) you are innocent until proven guilty. They use a little thing they call evidence. Facts if you will. For example, you can say Mr. A told everyone there was a merger, he even backed up his statement with emails and letters, Mr. B even backed up Mr. A's statement by saying companies merged. If they could only show evidence of when and where they filed the merger papers, it would be a done deal. But they can't prove it so their words means squat. A good lawyer might even be able to show that since they lied about the merger, what else are they lying about? Once shown that they lied in papers they submitted to the court, nothing they say will be accepted, including any counter claims.And being that TMMI was able to complete the merger, that is proof that there was no previous merger.
Good luck with your court proceedings. lol
They didn't commit any of that, and that I will guarantee that. They have been accused, this is true, by a bunch of thieves who are now trying any act of desperation to try to save themselves. And news for you, a cut and paste counter claim ain't gonna get it done...lollll
"Time to forget about the RTN deal, there is none!"
is that another one of your guarantees?
well you got the Raytheon part correct.....pretty sure dimension isn't as reputable as you think. unlike the fantasy you report of TMMI running and hiding from process servers, them being served is a standard operating procedure. I'm sure the peeps named knew this was going to happen eventually, and I'm sure they are well prepared. Nothing to get excited about unless you hang your dreams on a hope that the present case will get thrown out at some point. It won't. Tmmi actually has a pretty solid case and the "reputable" (ha) company like Dimension is probably near the end. Some might say them countersuing is an act of desperation...actually it is not....it's just standard operating procedure, nothing to get excited about...kinda like let's throw this against the wall and see if it sticks
Being one of the biggest defense contractors around, they don't go out and post random info just to please share holders of a penny stock company, especially when working to develop cutting edge tech. it's just not good business practice to let your competition know what your up to, but to put yourself at ease, give them another call, they are working together and as a TMMI share holder as you are, you should be very happy to hear that
your information is outdated the facts are that Raytheon (the company) does know who TMMI is and are very happy to be working with them. I guarantee it. maybe you need to up date your info
bassist, but on a board where facts are an option....
I think the reason the defendants first lead attorney couldn't get the job done was because he actually cares more about his reputation and morals, then he did about money and lying in court for weasles
ok so you are not stating that it's a fact the Raytheon the company does not know who TMMI is, even though you continue to post it.
you also say 2. "tmm claims it is using VDK 1.0-1.4 in its "trudef" product. The Iterated lawyers have already confirmed in writing that tmm has no rights to any Iterated tech, including the VDK 1.0-1.4. Read about it on the Dimension site court papers."
Do the current lawyers know about this? If so, why didn't they state that in their response that is posted on Demensions website? Page 6 paragraph 16 TMMI states they wholly own outright vdk 1.0-1.4 and defendants answer on page 3 paragraph 16 agreeing with them..... maybe you should tell them your stories.
As it is now....in court papers filed in 2014, both parties agree that TMMI owns vdk 1.0-1.4 wholly.
Maybe they missed that one? or maybe you missed that one? but if you only state facts, you can refer to any old papers from anyone, but everyone in this case (BOTH SIDES) agree TMMI owns vdk1.0-1.4
SO you are guaranteeing that Raytheon (the company) does not know who TMMI is? Are you saying that this is a fact? Raytheon (the company) does not know who TMMI is? guaranteed? you posted prior that you only post facts. so that is a fact?
and what about TMMI owning nothing? you say nothing means nothing....is that a fact? guaranteed?
No...actually it is doors opening wide to a new beginning for TMMI. Not sure why one or two people here have so much excitement for a standard operating procedure that already appears to be a dead fish.