Please review my logic here:
Some suggest that the lawsuit filed by GTEM against ULI was because GTEM didn't make the bi-monthly payments which put them in breech of contract. However, given the clear terms of the agreement, which say test equipment can be kept by ULI in that precise situation, why would GTEM make such a seemingly futile move? I don't know the ins and outs of legal landscapes but it seems dumb on the face of it. Also, if they can't make the next payment, shouldn't they just give it up and go BK? (but they're not doing that)
If that is not the reason, then it would need to be because ULI did not deliver, no? If so, then since they are trying to take away his ability to ever deliver, they must have an alternative ready to go. As an aside if this last one is true, then the theory is disproven as put forward by some that assets are being transferred in some underhanded scheme.
Does any of this constitute a material event? The agreement did, so does breech of it by either party qualify also?
This action seems like it is at the root of the hornets' nest that has been riled up lately. The hornets seem to want to squeeze cash out of this cash strapped company. Could they be smelling a new infusion on the horizon? Maybe in the form of some meaningful financials or something else perhaps?
AI
