InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 29
Posts 2139
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 08/03/2014

Re: Nabbbss post# 48571

Tuesday, 10/07/2014 2:38:03 PM

Tuesday, October 07, 2014 2:38:03 PM

Post# of 59584
I'm not sure the 125M were rule 144 shares, if they were you are correct. You are correct, the shareholder who held the 125M, their shares were noted rule 144.

In the settlement notes they are not noted as rule 144 shares, but of course the replacement shares were to be rule 144 shares.

From the information we both have, do you believe it dispels the notion of dumping by Mr. Pierce, lenders and other insiders?

I do better in French.