Replies to post #106871 on Paychest Inc (PYCT)

[adanac]

I'm sorry,
the previous posting should have read "PILLAY" not "PINO"

It should read
"You are wrong about Who got the 'note" (it was a golden handshake for Pillay), therefore, he is no longer in control, and could no longer get a lawyer to take off the restrictions.
Why do you think it was not disclosed until AFTER PILLAY RESIGNED, even though it was "dated" Feb. It was a "safety net" for the NEW MANAGEMENT to ensure EVERYTHING WAS HANDED OVER and NO MORE SURPRISES (like to 4M lawsuit)."

[Trum]

adanac... educated DD proves my point...you should do some real digging and you to will figure out what many here already have.

You claim that it is only opinion but you are about to be see why it is a fact and not opinion:

Insiders dumping is fact otherwise they would be holding billions of shares...yet they don't....proven fact.

Proven Fact - Rich Capital was opened and run by John Banks...the very John Banks that runs pyct.... for the sole purpose to sign a deal for BILLIONS of shares at UNDER .0001.... undeniable.... and verifiable ... if you wish I can post the data once again....the same data that you requested be sent to the SEC 2=+months before they got DTC Chilled.
Yep...it just can't be covered up anymore... I suppose you believe that there are TWO companies that are Rich Capital Enterprises Ltd...both associated with payjest(pyct) and both run by pyct management LMAO...good one if you think any lawyer would buy that silly story.. But pyct has to try and cover even if it is plain silly....Now add to the fact that Rich Capital not only was run by Banks, but their little secretary too...who is also the pyct patent holder just like Banks...Hmmmmm that really seems like it can't be possible but it is...and the only way that it would make sense is that pyct/ Johnny Banks were structuring shares for dumping.

PROVEN Fact ... lots of volume at .0001 and UNDER (and none of it is short). Hard to comprehend huh? not really...when folks dump out it happens like this.

I have proven that the shorts can't be doing it because there are no FTDs which are a required component of shorting...if you don't record a shorted trade then that trade can't be covered ...ever.