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.
Use the money to buy some GDSI shares…double profit:)
Abel promoted to COO and Director….
Yep. The 3:50pm seller strikes again lol smh
The notorious seller 10min before the bell strikes again lol smh
Peak PerformanceTeam acquired by PCF. PPT is one of our IGEN’s national distributors…read the article! :) https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/ma/pcf-insurance-acquires-peak-performance-team-421184.aspx
Those collection experts get a % so I am sure they are motivated. Also, I believe Parabellum already did their DD before putting up millions in litigation funding…just sayin’
I disagree. He wouldn’t tell shareholders either way. I think they resubmitted the patent to cover autonomous driving tech which was probably recommended by the company doing the valuation. And, it has been submitted…strengthens the patent/portfolio…This is tech that is going to be NEEDED by the big dogs imo
Yep. It actually gives me hope that Chan isn’t pumping this thing like all the other garbage OTC CEOs. Why? Because he knows what he has. I wish he was more transparent, but he isn’t and we already know that. This has always been the Chan train…hop on and go for the ride or get off ;)
Just listened to the oral arguments recording…this is going to be huge for GDSI!
Slap that .009 ask…
“A defendant's unclean hands can also be claimed and proven by the plaintiff to claim other equitable remedies and to prevent that defendant from asserting equitable affirmative defenses. In other words, 'unclean hands' can be used offensively by the plaintiff as well as defensively by the defendant.”
In what context? Sounds like good news to me Cor!
Yeah buddy! Time to start stairstepping…
I believe that they will support trial court’s judgement
Fantastic. And, appellate judges probably don’t overturn decisions made by their trial court colleagues for ‘bad people’ (to use your words). Your input is always valued and appreciated
What are you thinking EQ?
Tomorrow from Wed which is today? Or are you saying tomorrow as tomorrow Friday?
RB, any updates on the transcripts yet? Gracias amigo
I figured they would probably have the transcript up in a day or so…Hopefully, we’ll see it tomorrow
EQ, read my previous post ‘Conditions Precedent’ copied right from one of their filings
Place your bets!!!
I cannot imagine the judges overturning a default judgement, due to the fact that the defendants chose not to participate in the trial. If they are appealing the damages, Rontan had requests from the court to turn over financial documents so the damages could be better assessed, and they chose not to. The argument for waiving the conditions precedent, which BSF said GDSI never did, was never brought up by Rontan until after the default judgement was granted...makes it void. Rontan also has the warranty where they claimed that all incurred debts have been paid at the time of closing, which was of course false etc etc
Where is the link to the appeal?
Jacksonville
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT: This objection improperly argues a liability issue—the rights of GDSI under the SPA—rather than an issue of damages. That said, the objection is predicated on an absurd reading of the SPA. Defendants argue that because “Rontan did not satisfy the conditions precedent of Section 3 of the SPA,” GDSI is limited to “either waive the non-conformity or terminate the SPA.” Not surprisingly, Defendants fail to cite any law to support their position. There is none. Were Defendants’ correct, the SPA would have been meaningless. They would have been free to breach any representation and, if their misfeasance was detected, they could simply walk away. That is not how the law of contracts operates. The SPA provides that Defendants wererequired to satisfy the condition that their representations and warranties be “true, complete and Case 9:18-cv-80106-DMM Document 271 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/07/2021 Page 4 of 12
5 correct in all material respects as of the Closing date.” (SPA at § 3.1.4.) While GDSI had the right to waive that condition, it never did. The result is not, as Defendants seem to suggest, that GDSI had the Hobbesian choice of accepting Defendants’ breach of their contractual obligation and acquire Rontan subject to the undisclosed taxes or walk away from the contract they worked hard to strike with Defendants. That is not the law and it is not what the SPA provides. Contrary to the Defendants’ wrongheaded view, GDSI has the right to enforce that contract according to its terms. The Court has already found that Defendants’ breach of the SPA entitles GDSI to the remedy of specific performance and incidental damages. (DE 205.)
10-4 eq. Your opinion and analysis provide a lot of valuable insight. Like you previously noted, we should get a decent feel for what the judges are thinking once the transcript is published for the oral arguments
Sorry, I wasn’t trying to elude that GDSIs argument was based on Rontan’s inability to provide court requested info/docs, but cited cases where waiving the conditions precedent did not mean that they could not pursue damages…Rontan failed to provide court requested documents and pretty much take part in the initial trial at all…advantage GDSI imho
Specific Performance (Rontan's Company) and 194M + legal fees were awarded
I believe GDSI had a pretty solid argument for waiving conditions precedent and collecting damages due to Rontan withholding their financial situation and failing to provide requested court documents etc. BSF had a fantastic argument supported by cited prior judgements from other cases etc…that’s if I remember correctly; it’s been a while since I read it…
Nah…no worries. We are all just waiting on significant news…not vague tweets or form 7s, but an actual PR about installs/deals/contracts etc. Until then, the shenanigans will continue
IGEN Directors voted to increase share count by 300M to 2.2B total. I am not sure if this is old news as the voted on it 8/31
Just saw that and retweeted…Let’s gooooo! It’s time for news to start flowing!
Someone sold at 350PM to knock the price back down…the shenanigans with this stock are absolutely ridiculous. Every day someone/thing paints it down… so we continue to wait lol smh
Sharp made an interesting point to me recently; this company has a lot going for it and doesn’t deserve its current mkt cap…therefore, the longer the shenanigans last, the more gonzo this thing goes when we actually get a solid PR…made me feel better lol
Someone dumping at the close…
Interesting point Sharpei…it is getting some attention from larger FinTwit investors. I hope they are getting ready to release a PR with some meat on it
I think it is exactly the same as July’s…Anything significant is going to come via PR. Let’s hope we get some contract news soon