Nice to see this was resolved properly after all this time and strife. Been checking this board every few months. Thanks IPWatcher for keeping us up to date.
I suffered minor losses, and also remain the "proud" "owner" of 157 "free" shares from the big reverse split forever ago that would have cost me over $300 (iirc) to unrestrict. My only other memento, after decades of following this from when it was ISCR and touted by the "made" and "mayd" handles on Yahoo (two of which inadvertently outed themselves as the same person, despite the feint of stylistic differences, which I pointed out only to be disparaged and ignored), is this private message from Pluto after I questioned the invisibility of the "settlement' in the financials. I post it here simply as a relic for posterity:
Icon for plutoniumimplosion
plutoniumimplosion
Sunday, March 26, 2017 11:34:01 AM
So much time has been wasted discussing nonsense. So it can now be shown that management and the BOD didn't dupe or steal from or hide the settlement from shareholders (and people acting like shareholders who use message boards to fulfill a negative agenda).
So almost a year later what has been proven? NOTHING! Now one of the biggest critics of management and the BOD and the guy who raised the question in the first place in his attempt to put together enough facts to bring a class action lawsuit (because that's what he does), well ... this guy is now claiming credit for unwinding the enigma and finding -- NOTHING.
Isn't there a more important question in need of asking? Something like, why did management settle the lawsuit? And by settling in the matter that they did, wasn't there a plan in place by management?
And, you can get that answer by looking at the pharmatechdirect.com Web page.
How many will look? I predict, less than a handful.
As an aside, thanks to all of the stretching of word meanings in these communications, perhaps Keith should have come up with a scheme to sell quotation marks.
