Alan, please explain this:
NTGL has no officers or directors.
DaFoleyFelon claimed that NTEK does not have 'possession' of the 150 million shares that the TA confirms (and the NTEK letter of June 2015 admits) that the shares WERE ISSUED to NTEK. These shares CONstitute 70 percent of all ~OUTTstanding NTGL shares.
If, as DaFoleyFelon now claims, NTEK doesn't have possession and control of the ISSUED shares, then 70 percent of the NTGL common cannot vote, and thus the NTGL entity, if it still existed, could never elect any directors and thus cannot ever have new management.
So where did the 'new management at NTGL; that DaFoleyFelon claims exists come from? They could NOT have been elected with 70 percent of the ISSUED shares in the TA's book issued to NTEK butt unvotable, as election of directors requires a majority of the ~OUTTstanding shares, of which NTEK has 70 percent of per the TA.
Without directors, no management could have been hired.
So, please explain how DaFoleyFelon can both claim that the 70 percent of the NTGL ~OUTTstanding shares, issued to NTEK, can be not in the CONtrol of NTEK such that NTEK can't vote them and yett the sane CONvict claims there is 'new management' at a REVOKED corporation with no directors (and no way to elect them), no management, no place of business, no registered agent, and nobody to answer the phone and email addy that DaFoleyFelon directed shareholders to for CONtacting the imaginary "new management" which could not possibly have been hired by a board of directors that doesn't exist and cannot be elected?
Please 'splain.
