Replies to post #42457 on Tauriga Sciences Inc (fka TAUG)

[diannedawn]

Well, gee...WHAT PROOF DO YOU HAVE?

I? would bet that you have NO idea what you are talking about regarding the net settlement, legal fees or anything else is except what is public information. I? don’t know why some of this is confidential and don’t care right now. What I? do know is your statements cannot be supported with any proof. Do you know what the legal fees are or how they will be settled?

Oh...wait...you "don't know"???

You are just a PAID "consultant" who is spreading STORIES about how "maybe" there is something we "don't know" because the entire settlement agreement is "confidential"...
Trying to make it sound like there is a share buy back or SOMETHING more...

Just a PUMP by the PAID "consultant"...just like the "20 million or MORE" BULLSHIT.
MAYBE the only reason the doc is confidential is because there are parts about the puppet website which TAUG and the "consultant" have both claimed they are not part of???
Will we see the puppet website disappear???
(spelling definitely seems to be a problem...."© 2016 Cowan Conteski Malpractice.com")

Any chance that the same person is responsible for maintaining TAUG's website???
There are spelling errors there too.

BTW...now that the lawsuit is done with, I am sure the New Jersey Attorney General and Board of Accountancy will be pursuing those sanctions, and according to you maybe even criminal charges...

Make sure you link them up here when it happens, eh?
ROTFLMAO

Ya...sure...you betcha!

[rawman]

Do you know what the legal fees are or how they will be settled?

COLD HARD CASH! Real law firms don't settle for shares from high risk "pinkies"!

It is interesting that this question comes from Seth Shaw's BFF, who a few months ago had no clue that Paul Silverberg had ultimately agreed to proceed based up a "partial contingency"! This FACT was disclosed in a TAUG filing, but was apparently overlooked by the company's paid consultant! Per usual, the paid consultant, who is probably the company's least credible source of info, was a little short on actual DD?

Interestingly, there was NEVER any communication related compensating the high class second law firm. Regardless, if it is for actual services rendered or based up a contingency, IT WILL BE DONE IN CASH! And BTW...these transactions, although probably somewhat hidden, will be on the Balance Sheet!

[rawman]

HERE IS THE PRAGMATIC BOTTOM-LINE...

Trying the "lipstick on the pig" trick does not appear to have impressed the shareholders! It is very clear that the investment community is far less than impressed with the outcome of the Cowan litigation!

IMO, even after the share price took a significant "haircut" on Friday, it will continue to head further south!

BTW...the trading activity for the last few weeks has been a bit interesting! Just a guess...some folks got wind of an imminent settlement and jumped in for a quick windfall! Some of these "traders" may well have gotten "whacked", as a consequence of the settlement being magnitudes less than "promoted"! Were these folks "victims" of listening to TAUG's compensated consultant?