InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 19
Posts 1533
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/09/2006

Re: pokestake post# 79986

Tuesday, 07/10/2007 7:29:02 PM

Tuesday, July 10, 2007 7:29:02 PM

Post# of 157299
Please read the agreement again Poke.
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/67/67726/GlobeelAlvateragreement.pdf

1. I see no mention of a two month grace period.

2. The agreement called for Uli to build "UP TO" 250 units per month. Globetel has to provide materials for how ever many they want built. We don't know how many units Globetel has ordered or paid for so we don't know if Uli ever fell behind.

3. IF the suit is about test equipment, the agreement stated that Uli would have full use of it and that Globetel's permission "could not be unreasonably withheld." If Globetel wants it back now, its a sure sign the agreement is in default and you are most likely correct in assuming that Uli has quit delivering units.

4. Another reason Globetel might be fighting to get the equipment back is if Uli declared a default and properly served Globetel with a default notice. If such is the case, the agreement stated that Uli could hold as collateral any inventory or test equipment until the default is cured.

5. One thing bothers me about the suit is that both parties agreed that "all controversies, claims, and matters of difference" were to be subject to binding arbitration. It looks like someone has bypassed that step.


Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.