InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 12
Posts 3507
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 07/11/2022

Re: MrNormall post# 59731

Monday, 12/26/2022 11:50:42 AM

Monday, December 26, 2022 11:50:42 AM

Post# of 69311

After the lower courts approved the cancellation, the shares were cancelled from the TA. There was NO legal defect in any of that...



Erroneous. Clear jurisdictional defect, as you will learn soon.

George found that there was NO VALUE received for the shares from the TA. Hence why they were tossed.



George never provided any evidence of that. And it doesn't make logical sense, as the TA doesn't have access to that sort of information.

The only way to get the shares cancelled is to show that he received them for no value received which we believe we can do.



I don't remember ever seeing evidence showing this. Maybe you haven't read filings by other custodians, but they are very different and include thorough evidence to back up these claims. Night and day difference, makes Sharp look like an amateur.

If someone can't tell that a shell is a shell, can you trust anything else that they say?