"There's no way someone paid $135k and 450k shares again for 1 interview."
I didn't say they did and neither did the poster I was asking. What he said was "Obviously this promo was done with the interview to keep up investor’s interest." The words "with" and "for" implying different things.
I was asking for his response and his source of the proposition that it was a new and unique promotion. Please post again if you can tell me what he was thinking or what he knew when he posted. Or if you can link me to anything that would confirm whether the old and/or new 450,000 shares (if there were 2 issuances) were sold.