Earlier in the week I posted a copy and paste including paragraphs from the Oct. 20th 8-K pointing to things you're now discussing.
My original impression was that the Shield note was not going to be a problem as its disposition was not to be further negotiated by interested parties. I see now that I was wrong. And I'm thinking Hermann was, as well. And that has me thinking that Jaspers misled Hermann.
My concern now has to do with internal issues as in:
Jaspers is the majority shareholder. I do not believe that he is about to sit idly by as his shares are effectively reduced to nothing of value. Something wrong here unless he's prepared to dismiss $98,000 without a whimper. I sure wouldn't
Hermann has been quiet. I believe that he is restraining himself so as to avoid incurring the wrath of the court by attempting to sway shareholders. At the same time, we shareholders are in a bit of crisis mode in that he is our sole contact from within. That leaves us nowhere.
I'm positive he knows this, he must. So I'm wondering what he's got up his sleeve?
Hermann is listed as one of the defendants. This means his personal estate may be subject to vultures if the plaintiffs prove the merits of their case. I think the fact that this is court-bound pending the dissolution of claims of shares owed---tells us that the matter of improperly brokered shares as Hopeful6 keeps bringing to our attention is possibly the hidden compromise key.
In plain English as I think I'm a bit confusing here:
When all is said and done, there may well be some degree of dissolution pending. However, if Hermann can prove the illegal brokering of those shares HELD BY THE PLAINTIFFS AND NOT OTHERS-then I think we may well find oppoirtunity for share-value recovery.
My thoughts, here. For Hermann's sake as well as ours, I hope there's some merit to the above.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
