patchman, or better yet...
1) Did SPNG forget they were also RME? Simply a momentary lapse of dual forgetfullness?
2) If M&M forgot that SPNG also controlled RME, and were not the investors, is it not possible that RME actually put out the PR (falsely but deliberately) claiming SPNG were the investors and, in a state of complete confusion M&M decided to sue GFGU, incorrectly thinking that it was SPNG that loaned GFGU the money?
3) And finally, due to all this confusion, you'll notice that the agreement to drop the lawsuit was agreed to by both SPNG and RME! I submit that only one of those entities could have lent the money to GFGU. So which one was it? Huh? A dog can't chase his tail and a bowl of kibbles at the same time you know!
GFGU doesn't have to repay the $1.75M because M&M couldn't figure out exactly who lent them the money. Was it SPNG? Was it RME? Did you lend GFGU the money?
Boy, I'll say these guys have some explaining to do!
