I believe bulls may have meant that potential clients would pay for the licensing or the opportunity to do business with ONEV if they actually thought there was anything of value or substance there to do business with. I don't speak for others with the zeal you seem to, but I doubt I would disagree with the actual premise he was conveying. Usually, once you have "interpreted" someone's meaning, it can end up being 180 degrees from what they originally intended to say. You already pulled that on me TWICE today in reference to my opinions on ONEV, lol.
Try and relax and have a nice weekend. Your "company" is free to start their third (and possibly final) wave of massive dilution and equity destruction and you have a big name "client" providing you with endless delays to keep the PRs flowing and the naive share buyers rolling in. All is right in One Voice Land. For another 2-3 years anyway.
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.