Saturday, September 12, 2015 6:38:57 PM
I say that the regular quarterly dividend they offered was by legal definition a "special" one but they choose not to and were within their rights to call it a regular quarterly one. Question being if they were required to label it as such when all the meant to do was let shareholders know it was 1 of 4 for the year.
The other one being a "one-off" one was called special for that reason. Legal term or not. That was because it was a 1 time only.
That is the trouble here is we are not lawyers and therfore have not enough tools to get to the bottom of the issue. All we can do is have fun in the search for the truth. And above all we are not the judges in this case either :)
I am just appalled that if this case is the same players as the SRGE fraud that some heads need to roll in the FINRA/SEC office.
HealthLynked Promotes Bill Crupi to Chief Operating Officer • HLYK • Jun 26, 2024 8:00 AM
Bantec's Howco Short Term Department of Defense Contract Wins Will Exceed $1,100,000 for the current Quarter • BANT • Jun 25, 2024 10:00 AM
ECGI Holdings Targets $9.7 Billion Equestrian Apparel Market with Allon Brand Launch • ECGI • Jun 25, 2024 8:36 AM
Avant Technologies Addresses Progress on AI Supercomputer-Driven Data Centers • AVAI • Jun 25, 2024 8:00 AM
Green Leaf Innovations, Inc. Expands International Presence with New Partnership in Dubai • GRLF • Jun 24, 2024 8:30 AM
Bemax Inc. Positions to Capitalize on Industry Growth with New Improved Quality of Mother's Touch® Disposable Diapers • BMXC • Jun 24, 2024 8:00 AM