Anything is possible, but it does raise a number of questions.
I would think that this reactor needing to run 3 times hotter than the other experimental fusion reactors are running at could be a difficult obstacle to overcome, and in several different ways.
I'm not saying it can't be done. However, I can't find any proof based on current science against the facts I posted.
Again, I'm open to learning more on the company's claims, but right now the science doesn't back it up.
While I'm not a fan of some of the naysayers, here. There does appear to be valid reasoning behind their claims.
In researching the company's claims, I found the following:
The term does NOT appear in any scientific source returned by search. There is no recognized reactor design formally called an “implausible aneutronic reactor.”
Nothing in the search results uses that phrase. • Not currently feasible • Not physically realistic with today’s technology • Aneutronic fusion that requires extreme temperatures or confinement beyond what we can achieve And that matches the science:
Aneutronic fusion requires much more extreme conditions than standard deuterium–tritium fusion. For example: • Proton–boron fusion needs temperatures around 600 million °C, far above what ITER or tokamaks can reach reliably. • Confinement methods like Polywell, Z-pinch, and dense plasma focus are still experimental.
Aneutronic reactor This is a real concept. An aneutronic fusion reactor is a fusion system designed to use fuels that produce very few neutrons, such as: • Proton–boron-11 (p–B11) fusion • Deuterium–helium-3 fusion
These reactions release energy mostly as charged particles, not neutrons. That makes them attractive because: • Less radioactive damage • Less shielding needed • Potential for direct electricity conversion
Implausible Since no reactor uses this phrase formally, “implausible” is almost certainly being used informally to mean: • Not currently feasible • Not physically realistic with today’s technology • Aneutronic fusion that requires extreme temperatures or confinement beyond what we can achieve
People use “implausible” when referring to: • Over-optimistic startup claims • Designs that violate known plasma physics • Concepts requiring impossible confinement or temperatures • Sci-fi-level reactors with no experimental support
🧭 Bottom line There is no official reactor type called an “implausible aneutronic reactor.”
JUST SAYING After all, it is penny land, trade accordingly.
Here's where this 10-year-old argument starts to fall apart for Mr. T. and the blow hole.
My most successful seven-figure investments were in companies bought out under circumstances similar to GRLT, even when they had incomplete financials or deeper issues—often worse than those Mr. T is highlighting here.
A play I enjoyed had more than a decade of lost records, which the new team was unable to recover. It took almost two-years and two CPA firms before the company could finally present FRINA with audited financial statements. All while the stock was publicly traded.
An important aspect to consider is the connection between the former CEO, whom Mr. T disfavors, and GRLT's financial performance. In most cases I have observed, shell companies were acquired with management transferring control and offering minimal further involvement.
That’s not the case here. If you’re skeptical, simply check the most recent Q filing to see how many common shares the former CEO currently holds and has for some time. Meaning he understands the importance of working with the current team with ALL financial records an prior legal sins to his financial success. A smart play by Johnney that's not discussed here.
A common error made in this community is relying solely on individuals who simply recite SEC regulations and assert that a particular action is not possible.
One aspect I admire in successful GP’sis their capacity to overcome challenges. They approach situations with a solution-oriented mindset, encouraging others not to focus on obstacles, but rather to identify ways to achieve the desired outcome. Meaning they walk into a meeting with a; Don't tell me it can't be done, tell me how to get it done!
As a GP who has developed and managed commercial projects for over 40-years I have a hands-on knowledge of what Johnney and his team is pulling together and I'm not selling stock here to chase some other shinny OTC that is being pumped. Which is some of what we are currently seeing here.
You will never see a ticker change. Get it through your primitive skull.
I've reviewed the claims made by Mr. T. Experience tells me otherwise.
For starters, the CEO has legal and accounting working on this review. Secondly, it was no small step getting the platform up and running.
From where I stand, I'm going to go out on a limb and say what the company has pulled off is above your pay grade. As well as the gentle who has a friend who owns real estate. LMAO
In penny land, the most common scenario is a company that issues stocks but fails to deliver shareholders a functional platform. All while management and insiders get rich with their printing press or toxic financing. FUNNY! I haven't seen that here with Grillit, have you?
I’ve had the chance to uncover various scams and worked with the FBI to put more than one CEO and CFO in orange jumpsuits. I’ve also exposed GPs attempting to raise capital to fuel their Ponzi schemes.
Scams, oh, I have a great nose for spotting them. Right now, the only scam I see is the one you're trying to pull off.
If I had a dollar for every penny stock that used a name change to hype its value, the world would be a much better place.
For the record, a name change is nothing more than a company cleaning up its business plan. Anyone buying a penny stock with hopes that it was going to support a stock price is only a fool IMO. Given what this company has done to get its platform up and running only shows me that the team clearly understands what its going to take to clean up the company records to obtain its approval.
What the company just pulled off with the platform just trumped your "FINRA approval".
Showing shareholders, a working platform is the path that supports this stocks REAL value going forward. Anyone sitting here watching the day to day stock price is not the real story. Until the company starts showing that the investors "in real time" are stepping up to fill the offerings, this stock is going to get pushed around. But you already know that.
Having the platform in place and cleared to start taking funds is huge. What folks are watching in real time is a sub penny building a business model that has gone from a "what if" to "it's now making bank".
As I’ve been saying since October, they now need to prove they can deliver on the offering. Once that happens, shareholders will start to see how the platform can move from just an idea to a real money-maker.
Old "Blow Hole" is working overtime to try and move the stock down in order to reload. The problem is, he's working overtime and its beginning to show just how desperate he has become.
You really should stay in your lane, Mr. I have a friend in the real estate business.
The key issue: How sustainable is it? If the underlying properties don’t generate enough rental income, the “distribution” could be subsidized by new investor money — a red flag.
So now you’re an expert on what we in the real estate business call a Ponzi scheme.
While Ponzi schemes are well known in the industry, this investment is tied to just one asset, which the investor will hold under a legal ownership structure. Plus, there’s the oversight of having it regulated under the watchful eye of the SEC. But you already knew that.
Wait, did you just reload and are now ready to "pump" this loser?
The first marketing promo is out on X. Looks very professional.
If you took the time to dig into this business plan instead of spending all day sharing your opinion, you might discover there’s a lot more to GRLT than meets the eye.
What this team has accomplished over the past few years doesn’t back up the scam claims that have been repeated here daily. I should know, given the number of scams I’ve encountered in my 45+ years in this game.
Next week, US accreditation verification goes live. This is critical because up until now, US investors have been locked out. Once accreditation is in place, the platform shifts into high gear. And when I say high gear, I mean Allen has explicitly stated that the marketing campaign is about to massively ramp up. The Marketing Blitz That Hasn't Even Started Yet. Look at the numbers I posted above. Through X alone: 2.4 million impressions. Total media impressions: 103 million.
Here's the fun part. The market doesn't have a clue what is coming here.
If your information isn't coming from the company, its simply speculation.
Allen @ Primior — Yesterday at 7:37 AM Yup I’ve been sharing the impression data. We have ads live on meta as well Doesn’t matter the hype if our payment processing isn’t working because of KYC AML and accredited investor verification. I’m gonna turn up the marketing once it’s truly ready to go live
Let’s not forget that when this hiccup occurred on the 1st, management thought it would take 3 to 4 weeks to fix. Spoiler alert: the team pulled it off in just 9 days!
For those keeping score, they are getting the job done in REAL time.
Can’t wait to see how the old man tries to spin this one.
Going from the OTC to a real trading platform is no small thing. One of those rare moments where a company actually completes a RS, lands a 1:33 common stock loan for $6.3M with only ONE product and is somehow trading at $8.00 and change.
It would tend to demonstrate that there is still hope for Break.
On the flip side, ITSY was correct about GEVI having ties to Breaks patent. Otherwise, you wouldn't have seen them step up and make and offer to purchase it.
This so-called GEVI scam offers shareholders here a great example of the positive outcome of a RS. IMO, should Break produce a real PO, we should see this company run.
Correct, it doesn't take much to connect the dots here.
Will BKTH sell only AF31
From this PR and the previous release, we know the company and what GEVI does—and spoiler alert, it’s not diapers! We also learn that the same group received the mutual release right as the uplisting was being finalized. Their uplisting wrapped up at the exact time Break was announcing the Mutual release to the world. So, in my opinion, the sale only relates to their fire product, something ITSY has been hyping his favorite poster about for years. This might also have something to do with the request for ITSY to lay low while Break was setting up their attack.
BREAKTHROUGH CHEMISTRY INC BKTH is pleased to announce that the same group which recently requested the removal of our prior posts has now extended a formal offer to acquire select BKTH technology IPs. BKTH has determined the proposal aligns with our strategic objectives and is preparing to close the transaction this month. This agreement underscores the market demand for BKTH’s proprietary innovations and represents a meaningful step forward in delivering value to our shareholders. #BKTH#StrategicPartnerships#FireSafety
From my experience, it seemed like ITSY was right on target but was tipping Break's hand by putting out too much information on the GEVI chat room. But that’s just my take on it.
The bigger question on my mind is why sell a potential revenue stream now? While the leverage and timing seem reasonable, I think the only reason Break would agree to sell the patent and raise capital at this moment is because they see a bigger opportunity in having cash on hand. Now that I know GEVI was in the middle of their uplisting, it’s clear Break had more leverage than I initially gave them credit for. This ONE fact would tend to support they "need" the cash for the next phase of operation.
FYI: Closing a sale like this in just a few weeks is challenging enough. Now try doing it in December, when all the attorneys and accountants take the last week off.
Now for the rest of the story. This was posted back in August over on the GEVI site and now lines up with the recent PRs posted by Break.
So I was doing some DD on GEVI and If by chance they would face a Prior Art challenge to their MFB31 patents from another company that has manufactured and sold a similar blend (AF31) for 15 years.
Fast forward. GEVI just completed an uplisting after going through a 1:6 RS back in August.
Possible GEVI concerns: Impact on Uplisting and Investor Confidence - Valuation Risk: Patents often underpin a company’s valuation, especially in tech, biotech, or pharma. If key patents are disputed, investors may reassess the company’s future revenue potential. - Market Reaction: News of a patent dispute can cause stock volatility. OTC markets are already sensitive to news; NYSE investors may be even more reactive. - Due Diligence Red Flags:NYSE uplisting requires rigorous financial and legal vetting.A pending patent dispute could delay or derail the process if it’s deemed material.
I now have a better understanding as to why Break received an offer to purchase its patent.
When Break announced that the company had entered into a "Mutual Hold Harmless" agreement, it happened right as GEVI was in the middle of uplisting to the AMEX. The timing of that announcement must have been an “OH SHIT” moment for GEVI’s management, which explains the unusually quick closing date in Breaks recent announcement. Something we don't normally see.
For those who lack an understanding of how the game of chess is played. This was what we call a "check" move in the business world.
IMO, Break played this card at JUST the right moment in time. Now we have to wait and see what they do with these newly found funds.
I II Be Back what affect will be on the BKTH stock price with this agreement.
SO! This is tied to GEVI. Interesting, this just up listed to AMEX from the OTC.
I thought this sounded familiar, this is the company that ITYS claimed had stolen Break's technology. Sounds like his posts had some merit here.
Given this will likely not be an ongoing revenue (royalty) stream, under a company (GEVI) with a lack of any real revenue to show to date, it will not create any value to shareholders, beyond a "one time" purchase. The REAL value is what they do with their new found pay day.
Your assessment of the Hub is spot on. You will find it much more productive and profitable by focusing on your DD related to tokenization than trying to convince Mr. T he is living in the past.
In my world developers are waking up to the value of tokenization and how the USA is NOW setting up the framework to make this a reality for the first time.
Pros and Cons Tokenization isn’t the right solution for everyone just yet. What will eventually turn investors away is when sponsors present opportunities they fail to execute on due to poor management. The biggest concern most investors have when it comes to buying real estate opportunities isn’t a lack of capital or interest—it’s one question: who will manage it? The average investor not only lacks knowledge but also has no desire to deal with tenants or discover that current laws often favor tenants over landlords. Don’t even get me started!
On the flip side, the sole key to obtaining a good ROI isn't just maintaining or improving the property. It will be how well the on-going management team is in dealing with the day-to-day.
One of the roles I took on was analyzing commercial projects offered by other GPs. Clients would often come to me as a CCIM to review their forecasts. More than half the time, the projected ROI was overly optimistic. On top of that, many of these deals faced various external challenges that most investors didn’t even know they should be asking about.
Bottom line, a lot can happen here without needing to worry about the history of GRLT that Mr. T likes to live OVER and OVER.
One of the biggest challenges Gaia will face isn’t finding projects for the platform, but identifying those that deliver consistent performance over time. The market is full of opportunities, with no shortage of developers or sponsors ready to step in once they’ve proven themselves. The real test will be managing and sustaining that growth. That said, their revenue model and high profit margins should give them a healthy learning curve.
Based on my background I'm going to take my best guess on what happened here.
Citro Tech either came very close to Break’s technology or, in the worst case, was trying to capitalize on Break’s actual product without their approval. Break found out about the product and threatened a lawsuit. The attorneys then warned Citro about the ongoing legal costs and the years it could take to resolve, with the risk of having it hang over a company whose only product is its fire protection. In other words, a court ruling in Break’s favor could put Citro out of business.
On the other hand, Break would likely face over $1M in legal fees and a lengthy 2-to-3-year court battle just to prove their claim. Coming up with that kind of money would be tough, and the process would drain significant time and energy from the company, especially when they might have more productive ways to generate revenue. IE. Winner should they still be in play at this hour.
We will have a better understanding of just how valuable the buy out of the fire protection was and why Break is closing this so quickly.
Someone kindly forwarded the link to my X account. The company that Breakthrough had posted was Citro Tech that was "asked" to take it down from X. I was right, it is related to the fire protection that Breakthrough was taking legal action on. If you look at the example, it appears there is more to this story than meets the eye.
CitroTech® Tabletop Burn Demonstration. Our tabletop burn test shows the power of CitroTech® fire-defense chemistry in a simple, undeniable way. This side-by-side demonstration proves how CitroTech® helps protect from fire spread and ember attack .Real tests. Real results.… pic.twitter.com/0NAc77NBLl
BKTH is pleased to announce that the same group which recently requested the removal of our prior posts has now extended a formal offer to acquire select BKTH technology IPs. BKTH has determined the proposal aligns with our strategic objectives and is preparing to close the transaction this month. This agreement underscores the market demand for BKTH’s proprietary innovations and represents a meaningful step forward in delivering value to our shareholders.
This PR suggests that BKTH is agreeing to sell its Fire Technology, which would not only allow the company to focus on its other offerings but also likely provide much-needed capital for other projects, like Winner. It will be interesting to see if the offer is an outright purchase, or if it allows the company an on-going revenue stream like royalties. Just a thought.
Interesting how the PR generated an increase in the ask volume. 😎
BREAKTHROUGH CHEMISTRY INC BKTH is pleased to announce that the same group which recently requested the removal of our prior posts has now extended a formal offer to acquire select BKTH technology IPs. BKTH has determined the proposal aligns with our strategic objectives and is preparing to close the transaction this month. This agreement underscores the market demand for BKTH’s proprietary innovations and represents a meaningful step forward in delivering value to our shareholders. #BKTH#StrategicPartnerships#FireSafety
My gut says this must have been some offer to close it so quickly.
If your information isn't coming from the company, its simply speculation.
Allen @ Primior — 6:09 PM Accredited Investor Verification as well Can’t promise when but it’s goanna happen. Contracts are paid, codes are in but not fully live yet.Rollout will happen soon. Thanks for being patient. For those that watched today’s SEC meeting you know exactly why we have to do this. By doing so we stay in compliance with the law and are in the clear to execute on the product we are offering.
Allen @ Primior — 6:14 PM It does ATS will launch separately. More compliance side work that needs to be done but is actively being built. The tech isn’t hard. The implementation of regulatory adherence is.
I’m waiting to hear what the bank finds out about whether he was transferring rent deposits to unauthorized accounts.
Club Fed has a spot for Park.
If so, this would be classified as theft which Pavicic would likely file claims against. As for any JPTE shareholder ever taking the time to go after Parks is not high on the radar. That said, I'm sure the FBI is likely going to bring this to the front burner should Pavicic take legal action.
Even if someone does bring legal action, it will likely be after the bank is done with its review and will take over 3+ years to see any kind of legal accounting. In the meantime, I prefer to invest in actual development companies that are focused on the next great money maker. aka; Tokenization.
🚨 BREAKING: The SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee is holding a meeting on Dec 4 to discuss tokenization of stocks, securitie, real estate and other RWA's.
I'm sure the group will be more than happy to let anyone here in. However, I've heard there is someone that was banded by the moderator. Not real sure what "old man" they would be talking about 🤣🤣🤣
This makes Parks claim of JPTE's ownership even more unbelievable.
What you have posted here only relates to the "loan".
Pavicic was the sole member of Borrower. Pavicic is also a guarantor of the commercial loan described more fully below (Guarantor and together with Borrower, individually and collectively,
It has been known for sometime that Parvicic was the ONLY one who signed the loan and the only one who was named as providing the personal guarantee. It is not uncommon for a general partner (GP) to be the developer and the party the bank turns too to provide the personal guarantee. Parks or any other legal entity can hold an ownership as LONG as the lender had approved it.
As I mentioned before, without a copy of the OA, there’s no legal way to know who might have a valid claim. That’s why the attorney named Park’s LLC right from the start. While Parks has plenty to answer for, I’d say this filing doesn’t back up what you’re hoping for.
Somewhat surprised that folks here are not getting their updates directly from the source.
Allen @ Primior — 11:06 AM To clarify—nothing was “withheld.” We communicated based on the information our compliance vendor provided at the time. What changed was their delivery timeline during final integration and testing. That’s on the vendor side, not the development or operations side.
That said, you’re right that transparency matters, especially in a regulated environment. So here’s the clear picture:
The KYC delay does not impact the asset, token economics, or long-term roadmap.
No investor funds are at risk.
We are pushing the vendor daily and expect resolution shortly.
Once KYC is live, onboarding and distributions proceed as planned.
The launch is not the finish line—it’s the foundation. We’re building something that has to work not just today but for years, and compliance is non-negotiable in that process.
I hear your frustration, and I’m here to make sure you stay informed going forward.
Information on Discord might not be as entertaining as what you find on IHub, but it’s definitely more relevant if you want to understand the direction of your stock’s value as opposed to a decade-long fraud claim.
Gee, an OTC stock where management is actually providing company information on a daily basis.
A CEO with vision and now a track record of success.
This is great video that backs up a ROI at 148% return. Yet Mr. T would have us believe that Johnney doesn't know what he is doing.
What I look for in a GP is; can he deliver?
While everyone remains focused on the minute-by-minute trading action, longs are looking for results. This video shows results that speak for themselves.
I was out today and came back to learn that the launch didn't go as planned, which in turn the flippers had a field day for a good reason.
Allen @ Primior — 1:33 PM Yes KYC rollout is required from launch. Working on it now. All I can say is can’t disagree with any of you. Unfortunately I do not make the final decision even when I had brought this up weeks prior. I’m not worried. Once it’s done, money will flow in. We have a case study and then GPs can be confident in our platform. We don’t really need to raise money because we use most of our own equity. We just want a proof of concept before charging GPs. I’m sure @Olyboi147 understands as a developer
This wasn't about the "chart", this was about the launch not going as planned. Period!
Does it mean its a scam? NO! So, try to hold back your joy Mr. T. It shows the group is working through the issues.
Everyone needs to take a deep breath and understand what Murphy's law is all about.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
