News Focus
News Focus
Followers 7
Posts 814
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/23/2007

Re: sunbits post# 17015

Monday, 08/22/2011 7:21:30 PM

Monday, August 22, 2011 7:21:30 PM

Post# of 23361
If the revenue stream is less for the prototype, then why would SLMU be forced to pay retail for it? It's no better and possibly worse if Sunlogics was dumping an under-performing asset on the SLMU Shareholders and conversely benefiting Sunlogics shareholders simply because it could. Don't you agree?

What it also means is that MM violated the terms of the agreement which clearly states that the projects would be sold into SLMU at a fair market price based upon independent appraisals.

So Sass... Mr Director... it's time to do your job. This requires investigation and disclosure. Did MM violate the terms of the agreement? Did he dump an under performing asset on SLMU shareholders at the value of a full performing one? Is this what we are paying him $200k a year to do for SLMU shareholders.

This looks very much like a class action suit in the making if either is true.

Discover What Traders Are Watching

Explore small cap ideas before they hit the headlines.

Join Today