InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 178
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/29/2008

Re: socalmd123 post# 3746

Thursday, 05/07/2009 1:33:54 PM

Thursday, May 07, 2009 1:33:54 PM

Post# of 30951
I'm not saying what part is right or wrong since I DON'T KNOW.

If Bob Reed/SW did not actually buy GLGT because the previous management did not really own a significant % of it then Bob Reed was duped/lied to from the start. It sounds like the debt would be easily hidden if fraud were involved against him. It is made to sound like he pulled out of the deal to screw us over but earlier it was said he couldn't actually buy it because the sellers did not own it.

How convoluted is this. Was he up front with the debt finally uncovered when negotiating with the potential new company???? Sounds like he was.

I don't know what to think about it but this appeared doomed before it started. I have/had the impression that Bob Reed/SW had a sincere effort in this thing. I have heard too much spin on every detail much of which was incorrect.

However, good find SoCal doc on the Norman Reed paperwork. That has been a debate since the beginning. We were led to believe Norman had no part or a small part in this thing.

Still don't know what to think, glad to hear the deal is still being considered. (But how can it be sold to them by Reed if it wasn't sold to Reed??)???

Again, all just mho, GLTA