blue horseshoe, i am baffled by your response from tim keating and my response from tim keating, which i received this evening. i'm not exactly questioning the authenticity of your posted response; although, tim keating's final statement in the response that i received does not completely coincide with your response. on the other hand, if i look at the compositional styles of each of the responses, it is noted that each response employs a parenthetical statement, which would not be normal for so few sentences, and also correctly employs commas after introductory adverb and prepositional clauses. please, blue horseshoe, do not misinterpret my concern for authenticity as being categorically incredulous.
by the way, why would tim keating offer a blanket statement that keating investments, antik, and, especially, mjet have no further comment at this time? why is he speaking on behalf of mjet and antik? also, if he has not "spoken to a single person," then why would, or how could, he be speaking on behalf of keating, antik, and mjet?
your response from tim keating:
As I am sure you can appreciate, we can only point interested parties to
the 8-K filed by MJET with the SEC on March 24, 2005 which describes the
Letter of Intent entered into between Antik Denim, LLC and Marine Jet
Technology Corp. Neither MJET, Antik Denim, LLC nor Keating
Investments, LLC (or any of its affiliates) has any further comment at
this time.
my response from tim keating:
From : Keating, Tim <tk@KeatingInvestments.com>
Sent : Tuesday, April 12, 2005 2:27 AM
To : "XXXXX XXXXX" <goosemeister@hotmail.com>
Subject : RE: MJET Shareholder Question
Kevin Keating (my father) is the President of MJET and the sole
authorized spokesman for the company. His direct telephone number is
(772) 231-7544. For the record, I have not spoken to a single person.
goosemeister@hotmail.com
