InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 2
Posts 91
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 06/06/2008

Re: liable post# 35979

Wednesday, 06/11/2008 3:43:04 PM

Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:43:04 PM

Post# of 49535
I have no doubt that there are cheerleaders, insiders and a whole raft of other players that have some advantage or are attempting to create an advantage.

The one thing that has me scratching my head the most in this is simple. Thrush.

It would seem that they have said nothing. Zero.

Why is that? It would seem that they would have something to lose by being associated with IAHL if it's not on the level. Or do they? That's the question.

If there was never a deal, wouldn't it be in Thrush's best interest to say that?

If there is/was a deal, it would make sense for them to neither admit to nor deny it.

It comes down to that in my mind. IF IAHL and PVD are nothing but smoke and mirrors, Thrush would have (should have at least) seen that and killed the deal and said as much through their own due diligence in the deal. It only hurts Thrush to be persistently linked to something less than reputable or to make a deal with a party that hasn't a prayer in completing the deal. They apparently aren't denying association with IAHL. So that means, at least on the surface, that the two are somehow connected. If one questions the legitimacy of IAHL, then one must also question Thrush.