SPOOZ Inc (SPZI)

[keegers]

Skunk I am confused how looking at it from an accounting standpoint makes it less clear? They do not own 7% of a product, they own 7% of net profits from trading. Not 7% of assets under management, not 7% of common stock. They were very explicit when they state 7% of net profits. They then go on to seperate the 120 million from that consideration by using the word "also". The way they use this word, websters defines it as "in addition; too; besides; as well". There is a clear seperation of the 2. Good lord. Read the PR. you obviously didn't. The were very explicit about what the 7% was from, and the 120 million was from. One is due to a licensing deal. One is not.