Exactly what I was thinking and if true.....I find it disturbing to even think how many people got screwed over with Deans lies. Dean didn't mention anything about the 40% of OS going to the lender until he maxed out the AS and now IMO Dean got nothing more than a convertible loan that he mislead shareholders into believing it was a Bridge loan......Big difference. If in fact it was a convertible loan I'm willing to say Dean committed fraud with false and misleading PRs. How could he put the follow in a PR if he had a convertible Loan "This should give shareholders confidence in knowing that our share structure will likely not change for the foreseeable future."