HUMBL Inc (HMBL)

[Cinnyricinclus]

It sounds like you're trying to make a point, but I don't know what point you're trying to make. You seem to be trying to defend George Sharp and say he didn't make much money off of Humbl, which seems important to you.

Before you go too far in George Sharp's defense, keep in mind that Sharp was intimately involved in the one reverse split which HMBL did, which you said was an agreement which Sharp violated. Sharp was even the one who decided not to tell investors about the RS ahead of time because he said if shareholders knew, they would have sold off Humbl shares at $1 so he wanted to "save investors from themselves."

That one agreement where Sharp was paid to 'work' was to uplist Humbl to the NASDAQ for the payment of $360,000 plus 7.5 million shares, with full payment even if NASDAQ didn't happen. Since Humbl is not on the NASDAQ, you can decide as a shareholder whether it was worth it. https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/0001119190/000149315221030031/forms-1.htm

You can also see how George Sharp had a lot of shares in the other filings.

I don't understand why you're trying to downplay George Sharp's compensation. Can you explain the goal of your argument?