InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
Subscribe Login/Register
S&P 500
5,263.44
(
-0.38%
)
US TECH 100
18,081.28
(
-0.24%
)
Dow Jones
38,514.33
(
-0.15%
)
Brent Oil
77.17
(
-1.24%
)
Bitcoin
70,076.00
(
1.85%
)
Post# of 157299
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

followinsnsr

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 2
Posts 599
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 12/14/2005

followinsnsr

Re: None

Tuesday, 10/16/2007 9:40:24 AM

Tuesday, October 16, 2007 9:40:24 AM

Post# of 157299
This whole situation is pathetic, I don't see how any of this is on behalf of its shareholders. If they wanted to do something on behalf of their shareholders over the last few years why didn't they accomplish just one thing.

Not suing Seth, Byron or Sands, I guess that wouldn't have been for the shareholders behalf, but Joe mainly because they didn't pay his separation agreement. On behalf of the shareholders why don't they explain why they didn't pay him?

For a company delisted from the Amex, with the SEC considering recommending to revoke the registration of Company's securities do they really need to draw more attention to this non performing company by suing Joe?
Now of all times they are doing something on behalf of the shareholders....what a joke.

"There is no great honor these days in being a long (very long).......
Not a lot of profit either it seems."

Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

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.

Sign Up