Patient Access Solutions Inc (PASO)

[Chuck_Norris]

Nope, still here.

Interesting... very interesting. I'd love to hear what makes you say this:

So it looks like Chuck Norris and his family have sold their paso stock

Now, if you want the reality of the situation, here it is: I don't have time to search for clever YouTube videos to remain relevant; I don't have time to "educate" people on the definition of bag-holding or "when" is the appropriate time to buy/sell a stock; I don't have time to blatantly waste on posting things like what "OTC scams have in common", and I certainly don't have time to repeat myself more than I already have... as if saying it over 100 times makes it more true. If I did that, I'd be labeled a pumper - something I'm not. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I've said my piece. If you missed it, it's pinned at the top of this board. They've been there for months.

I stand by my previous posts - there aren't many, but most have value, merit (facts), and context. I've never wavered. Me and my "family" are well positioned here - not a single share sold. Could I have flipped this several times already? Of course. But, that's not why I'm here.

Is the DA signed? I haven't seen it. Have you?

Is the LOI terminated? I haven't seen proof of this. Have you?

No? Ok, well then I'm still here and am not going anywhere until I'm either island shopping in the next 18 months, or licking my wounds - wounds that I will gladly bear because the DD that I conducted was (and still is), solid.

"But but but the LOI is non-binding". Oh, come off it. There have been plenty of instances where a "non-binding" LOI BECAME binding. It all depends on what's happening behind the scenes and at what time these happenings occur. I'm not saying that I "know" that our LOI has since become "binding", but that possibility does exist - not something anyone here has yet to vocalize in the midst of all this relentless drama. Yes, a revised LOI would have been well received, but I'm not going to use the lack of one as a reason to extrapolate that the deal must be off. Don't be so naïve. It very well may not be a common thing (to not have a revised LOI after the increases were executed) but it's also not common to get pulled over after doubling the speed limit only to be let go with a warning (guilty). Entirely different arenas, but the concept remains parallel. Important to address ONCE, as it's important to have the totality of circumstances for your decision making process, but to beat the horse after it's been passed through a meat grinder... why? I think it's become pretty clear.

Additionally, I'm of the opinion that CLX would want to distance themselves from PASO as quickly as possible if they were moving in a different direction, as in, releasing a statement on social media. "But the CLX social media account has been shut down".. well, hang on a second.. They are "reconfiguring" their social media efforts. The CLX twitter account still exists, and they could post anything at any time. I believe, something of this magnitude (in order to avoid the dumpster fire that WILL undoubtedly occur with legal action towards PASO) would prompt CLX to quickly address the change of direction so they can say "we notified the public as soon as we knew... not our legal responsibility to do so of course, but as a company preparing to work with organizations that have hundreds of billions of dollars in collective valuation while looking to address issues related to a global pandemic, we're happy to do so if that means getting a target off our back - further strengthening our image as a new entity". So, obviously they wouldn't say it just like that, but that's what they would be thinking when releasing whatever it is they would release.

"HAHA! Legal action? You think anyone will get anywhere in court over this?" Maybe not... but that's likely not going to stop people from pursuing legal action. Sometimes people just do things because they have the means to do something, even if it falls on deaf ears and leads to exactly zero anything. Is there enough here for a lawsuit to get traction? Perhaps. To be clear, I'm here to see a signed DA and the subsequent rise in PPS. I just know there are "some" here that were going to try and jump down my throat because I said that CLX would want to avoid legal action by letting the public know they are moving in a different direction. It just makes sense. They would be deemed "no longer complicit" if they were to come out and clear the air within what a judge or jury would consider a "reasonable time". PLUS, at that point there wouldn't be a single non-disclose agreement worth a damn, so anyone could say anything... including JG (Who is JG? Read the stickies).

"Looks like" I'm still here.