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.
Thanks again, I just got home and will read through them.
I have tried to access information from this case but could not. If you can, I would appreciate the help. The one thing that stands out to me is the attorney for the cross defendant is Williams'.
I was trying to make the point that lawyers, most of them will represent anyone if they are getting paid, so instead of Attila insert Goldilocks in my retort. I hope that clears up my reply.
No, we are talking about the same thing, if an attorney is getting paid they will defend Attila the Hun.
I think any attorney will work for a fee, since there will be no monetary settlement I seriously don't think they would work under contingency.
OK, so successfully brought charges.
Thank you, my sentiments exactly.
Do you have the ability to see the future and know how the court will rule, or is that your opinion?
I finally finished reading and analyzing posted documents and would like to give my gratitude to bacacha and elis coming for their technical savvy that allows me information that I use to form an opinion. My opinion comes in three parts. 1. If judge rules to reinstate Williams the BOD will be deadlocked again. 2. If judge rules to uphold committee firing of company officers on Dec. 12 that would make Diac settlement plus all company maneuvers thereafter null and void. 3. [My favorite] judge rules in company's favor and its back to business. There are two things that bother me about Pierce's declaration and Williams charges that financial records were abandoned in a Florida office. Who left them? Her testimony seems to backup the lack of progress in filing financials for SEC compliance. I already know the response, SHE LIED
What laws are you talking about? US laws, state laws, company laws, or your laws. I am not involved with Turrini and Pierce in any way whatsoever, just a shareholder who is trying to see a silver lining in this never ending litigation saga, yet I still remain positive.
Thanks, it appears the legal team was the same then as it is currently. I'm still not enlightened as to who initiated or financed it, but it probably does not matter.
Thank you Sir H. You are kind of like a folk hero on this board. I guess I will just wait for court ruling on the legality of the said firing, but will not hesitate to contact you on future interpretations of laws and bylaws of CLYW.
If i'm following your assertions correctly, Williams put up the monies himself to fund the litigation to keep Diac from selling the patent. I would like to know who the attorneys were and if you or someone else could direct me to official court documents, it would be appreciated.
It really does boil down to who was on so- called audit committee and if company rules and bylaws allow such action. Your opinion is duly noted.
Do you know who was on the audit committee that fired Turrini and Pierce? That would shed some light.
If he fought Diac, what was accomplished? I'm serious about these questions because you and some others I respect your input to sway my own opinions.
I've been invested in this stock for two years and if I could go back to look at comments made in this forum even before the last two years they would look a lot like they do now. We had more positive movement in the last three weeks than I seen since I first started following this message board. It should not matter if someone is related to a company officer if they have the qualifications. Once more I will ask "how will Williams proceed in moving this company forward?" I have given examples of how current management will proceed. I hope this is not considered slanderous. I need to hear more than he is saving the company from themselves, this stock is a scam and so on.
If one was Walsh and another being Williams, and not knowing the rest of committee's makeup that, I have to think this was a power play by Williams to try to not even have the vote for fear he might find out how shareholders really feel about him. I, if all other shareholders are willing to also, propose that we ask Williams to participate without challenge in another vote for his removal and to live or die with the results. I think it's a good way for the shareholders who did not vote the last time to show their support for him this time. I really wish this unlikely scenario would happen, then I could truly know if the majority believes like I, that he is the problem.
Who, and it must be more than one is on the audit committee? Do you know?
If Williams is reinstated by the judge and he rules that Turrini and Pierce were indeed removed on Dec.12, where does that leave us as pertaining to the Diac settlement? That would seem to invalidate what was filed on Dec. 30. I would also like to know what Dave's plan would be to move this company forward. I have heard what Turrini and Pierce plan to do from a person who talked to them and getting the financials filed and going after the infringers with attorneys that are working on contingency are the first and foremost things. If all four remain on the board, how are we ever going to compromise on anything? I still remain positive that they being shareholders with a lot to gain will work together. I can hope can I not?
I just got home and read all posts, my question is, how does an independent director have the authority to fire the CEO and the CFO by himself? I have not been invested long enough to know all this corporation's laws and bylaws. I will go ahead and say at this time that I am and was for the removal of Williams, but if you can give me reason to think otherwise I'm all ears.
Kyle Pierce told my source at Dec. 15 meeting that it would take six to eight weeks to get the financials filed to SEC to be back on track as far as getting off the grey sheets. Again, just repeating what was told to me. It seems that the financial statements were in limbo before she came on board.
Who is the [them] you are referring to?
Just another reason I think Diac will have trouble with patent infringements and getting deals done in foreign governments and their laws or lack of them. My opinion only.
Dang, he missed my message.
I did not mean to imply that you disrespected my views, only that I respected yours. Still friends? OK. I have been invested since 2009 so I'm like a sponge soaking it all up from ya'll, I mean you guys.
Thanks.
I have always been respectful of your views in this forum. I was reading them and sitting on the sideline way before I posted for the first time two weeks ago. The information I have put out is based on what my son in law, who was at the Dec. 15 meeting and talked to company officers and their attorneys told me. I think my insight is just as good if not better than most.
The settlement that everyone wants to see has already been seen. CLYW gets US patents and Diac gets foreign patents plus 28% of T Mobile settlement. HAPPY NEW YEAR
I think your viewpoint is spot on. Very good logic instead of jumping on it like a tiger on raw meat.
The felony charges that were dismissed are still important to me in determining Turrini's character. The case file did not reveal who or why charges were brought. I do want to know if I can be optimistic about the future of CLYW. I want to thank ATLAS 101 for the information that was provided. The reason I am pro current management at the present is because I thought they made two good hires to work for CLYW on a contingency basis, then the suit by Williams.
Thanks, so he was charged with a felony grand theft but it was dismissed. Not a convicted felon.
Thanks, so he was charged with a felony grand theft but it was dismissed. Not a convicted felon.
I'm just glad my financial future does not depend on my investment in CLYW.
Regardless of how the litigation turns out in Delaware, I am confident I voted the right way by voting my shares for Williams removal.
I will assume based on the lack of responses that it is not true about Turrini being a convicted felon and will continue to believe that Williams alone is the driving force behind CLYW not moving forward.
Can anyone validate the past statement that Turrini is a convicted felon? That would surely change my opinion of this company's direction.
I went back and looked at the notice. It said a Delaware Cooperation. My apologies.
I'm not trying to be on one side or the other, the address at present is Houston Tx.
This could be because of the interference. Do you know if the company moved to Houston?