FM11,
Why divert the topic away from the original comment?
Lets not muddy the water here, somebody may have to drink it soon.
The claim was made that Breitling Energy admitted to participating in a promotion, which is completely false.
In an apparent attempt to implicate Breitling in said pump and dump, the poster added that Breitling has been public for three years, which would fall into the time frame of the old Bering Exploration promotion that happened a year or so before went Breitling Energy became public.
It is important to establish when Breitling Energy became public.
Nobody ever claimed Breitling Oil and Gas went public, and posting the basic mechanics of a Reverse Merger isn't relevant.
You didn't provide anything to verify your false claim that Breitling has been public for "at least five years" and yet you discount my claim that it has only been two.
Why does the burden of proof fall on me when it doesn't seem to apply to others who brazenly and falsely post inaccurate information about the company?
Breitling Energy has not been public for three, or five years.
It has been two. You both are wrong.
If people want to see who is right, they can take the time to look it up.
IMO and FWIW.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
