RCC Holdings Corp fka RCCH

[frogdreaming]

Missing the point again? Is that a coincidence or a pattern?

We agree on the “increasing the volatility proportionally.” The reasons behind the increased volatility is where we have a difference of opinion. I do not see equitable restrictions on the buying and selling of RCCH shares. You seem to selectively ignore the unbalanced restrictions between buy and sell transactions. Buy transactions appear to be more heavily “severely (your word)” restricted than less restricted sell transactions.

In the supply and demand aspects of the discussion 'buys' and 'sells' are the same. It is only the participants themselves who see a difference in a 'buy' transaction vs a 'sell' transaction. For the sake of the supply/demand discussion the transactions are identical. Each transaction has both elements someone who obtains the shares and someone who accepts renumeration for those shares.

The increase in volatility is not restricted to one side of the transaction or the other, it is a result of the balance between the number of shares available and the number of transactions taking place.

Please expand on what selective logic lead you to the conclusion that Case CV-00053 is “case closed.”

I didn't say that case CV-00053 was closed. I said the conclusion that Gendarme bought 2.1 billion discounted shares was proven and that 'case was closed'. As I pointed out the bizarre contrivance of the faithful that Gendarme didn't buy those shares from RCCH, was not any part of case CV-00053, as evidenced by the complete lack of mention by either party in the court case.
Your attempt to continue to refer to them as the same thing say more about your level of understanding of the case than it does of the premise itself.