Replies to post #89993 on Bots Inc (BTZI)

[MD-420]

I'd imagine they have an escape clause and was the first to state this. The problem is, if it is within county jurisdiction, it becomes another baited attempt by mcig. Sure they get out of the land deal, but they would be back to square one and further erosion of investor trust. There also could have been earnest money lost. You add the 3.5m paid for non revenue producing software to the mix and it appears mcig is a scam. And what if there is little to no q over q growth in q2. There is a lot of risk, even at these prices.

If course mcig remains silent. Why?

[BubbaInSC]

Biggest Point Is $2.5 Mil/month Goes Poof

MCIG should divulge the exact location of parcel/lot/address of the land (including the town/city).

PPS is likely to continue to go downward if they don't address in a PR

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=135719540

A few points to be made.
#1
Company announced an agreement to purchase.
No where has it been mentioned that they ‘closed’ on this transaction.

#2
Mcig and their attorneys had to know there was potential danger in the Kern County Board initially issuing a ban..
So if this property turns out to be within the Boards jurisdiction I would be shocked that it wasn’t addressed as an escape clause for Mcig..

#3
If all of the above turns out to be not true the property still remains a booked asset for MCIG.
It’s not as if we’re talking about a finished the facility here.

IMHO a great time to buy some discounted shares ..
Chico10