InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 5
Posts 183
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/19/2010

Re: HansJ post# 43158

Tuesday, 06/02/2015 10:26:06 PM

Tuesday, June 02, 2015 10:26:06 PM

Post# of 47790
Your assumption is that the deal should have gone through and then shareholders would be able to find relief after the deal was done. Questions were asked to Shaun about the deal but the answers given were vague or went unanswered. Once the genie was of the bottle, it could never been put back. The new CEO was appointed by only who knows. No votes according to sec rules followed to show how he was appointed and with what authority. This is not a prviate company where the owner can do as they please. You say 10000's of dollars are needed to have a vote. Where did the company find the money to file lawsuits and pay servers to subpoena shareholders that were only trying to find out information from the company, which wouldn't diclose anything. There has been a lot of hyperbole about how great this deal would have been to shareholders but without any real assurances. Yes, we would still have shares in Exobox but if the company is de-listed, we may just use them for wallpaper. Some people stood to make a lot of money but it wasn't Exobox or the shareholders. A TX judge put a restraining order to block this deal for shareholders. This was not some nefarious scheme to disrupt commerce as the federal suit claims. This was done through the legal system and not some conspiracy. Exobox had the opportunity to present to the court at that time this was a good deal but apparently they couldn't present their case convincingly and the court didn't see it that way.
They only thing shareholders wanted was to be able have information honestly presented and and an option to vote on it.
AIMO