News Focus
News Focus
Followers 153
Posts 12276
Boards Moderated 2
Alias Born 04/02/2007

Re: stocker11 post# 75204

Thursday, 11/04/2010 8:36:09 AM

Thursday, November 04, 2010 8:36:09 AM

Post# of 312101
Sometimes-- not always -- I suggest "appearances" can be deceiving. That is different than suggesting something is/was "improper."

Things that get "brushed off" about JBI-Delaware:

1. John's Delaware company is the "source" of the "IPO" shareholders. Those shareholders are at a "base" below the current share price and therefore should be considered as a contributor to the current selling pressure.

2. The "assets" were sold to JBI-Nevada, but the "contracts" are serviced through JBI-Delaware. When the "point" of John's salary is brought up, it blindly focuses on JBI-NV's "agreement" and "heralds" John for it (the act, contribution, noble deed, etc.). So until the "funds" (as worded in the 10K) from each contract start/end at JBI-NV, John may indeed be getting paid through JBI-DE. Nothing improper about it, but by not accounting for this, the posts about the $1 salary are "deceptively" promulgated IMO
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y