InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 4
Posts 269
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 06/01/2009

Re: Arpvrp post# 207626

Tuesday, 01/26/2010 10:43:40 AM

Tuesday, January 26, 2010 10:43:40 AM

Post# of 326354
Arp's response below is the very reason why shareholders have leverage, when it comes to the possible class action suit. A class action suit that could win the patents as our own (patents that really belong to us in the first place)

WHEN THE PPS WAS @.02 - .03 -.04 100/200/300% RETURNS WEREN'T GOOD ENOUGH FOR THEM. No, they had to go and convert below par for higher returns and convert in excess of their 4.99% restricted limited... Both illegal activities BUT THEY DID IT.

Knowing those details, and a review of all other financing deals with YA, just might get us shareholders an injunction from this latest BS to actually go through.

I don't recall EVER voting to give YA rights to prevent US from seeking financing from someone OTHER than YA. I would never have voted for giving them CONTROL over company financing.

I don't recall EVER voting to give YA Global 52% of voting control over our entire company for a temporary amount of time.

I don't recall EVER voting to include reverse splits, reduction of pars, or an increase in AS.

Our management agreed to all of these terms, and it basically was a pact with the devil.... and our 'shareholder souls' were given in exchange for the money.

I don't recall EVER voting to give YA Global permission to conduct illegal activities in their converting below par and going above their 4.99% limit? I don't recall that illegal practices are sometimes acceptable!

Iain gets paid big bucks... and secret pocket change (in the millions) throughout all of this. The same goes for the BODs.