Delivery Technology Solutions, Inc. (DTSL)

[bustermac]

rule 144 restrictions are as follows:
For a non reporting pink sheet company...such as DTSL is now, and what UDS was before it became DTSL, the restriction was for 1 year. IF the company is deemed to be a shell company, then the restrictions can be two years. However, UDS is not a shell company as there is a legitimate business and some nominal revenues....so the restriction would be one year
IF UDS seperates itself and gets moved into a fully reporting bulletin board entity or vehicle, then the restrictions would be 6 months per SEC rule 144.
The likely scenario would be for them to seperate DTSL from UDS..as they have said, UDS is the operating entity and the revenue producing arm of the company. They would take UDS and put it in another trading entity or vehicle to begin trading. They would probably get a new symbol..something that would emulate Universal Delivery Solutions (UDS). Im fairly confident that the new entity or vehicle will have a certain amount of tradeable shares with it. A vast majority of those shares that are included in the new entity or vehicle would go to management, and to the investors who put up the money to purchase this new entity or vehicle for UDS to trade in. What is left over, whatever percentage that is, would go to the current DTSL holders. In that event, your new shares in the new entity or vehicle probably would NOT be restricted and would be freely tradelabe at anytime you desired. I belevie this to be the only fair course of action and the only thing DTSL can do at this point. Remember, there old entity or vehicle was bad....and they had to get a new one, which they did, and called it DTSL. They gave all the old UDS shareholders from the bad entity new shares in the DTSL but they were restricted for 1 year...so nobody could sell. One year passed almost to the day, and as of or close to that anniversary, there shares stopped trading and they made the famous announcement of restructuring again, and they are trying to do it again. It would be a terribel thing if those shareholders got stuck again for another year do to this next round of restructiing...and i would imagine the company would be met with tremendous resistance and lawsuits for trying to do that to its ivnestors again. Im sure that management, its advisors and attorneys are very cognicant of this, and for that reason and that reason alone, my opinion is that the new shares would not be restricted. Its just an opinion, and i hope im right, for everybodys sake!!