InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 104
Posts 43476
Boards Moderated 4
Alias Born 02/13/2010

Re: fAtnhapy post# 18792

Wednesday, 09/08/2010 12:57:48 PM

Wednesday, September 08, 2010 12:57:48 PM

Post# of 23619
Hopefully you will not find that he was paying himself or diverting money while he was letting our company be voided in Delaware. That would mean we would have to go after him personally to recover our damages. One thing to not have the money to make payments. Another to have it but put it in your pocket instead of paying necessary bills to maintain the company.

Do you know how much it cost the company to buy back the 10M shares or so in 2006/2007 from Barnett (At least that is one amount he PRs about. No idea how many other shares he also bought back.) Remember, that is when he had to issue himself the free preferred super voting shares so he could protect us from Lanza after he lost the majority because of buying back his shares.

Who says this company has been better off with Barnett instead of Lanza anyway? Is this a lesser of two evils kind of thing? Why couldn't the shareholders vote in somebody who was good at running the company? That's rhetorical, because the obvious (IMO) answer is that way Barnett couldn't manipulate this company to his personal needs.

I have no humble opinions, but I do have opinions and those are what I express in my posts. BUT...I have been wrong before and likely will be wrong again so do your own research and don't blame me if you are too lazy to do so.