Replies to post #112296 on Good Vibrations Shoes Inc (GVSI)

[deadeyeon]

Agreed well stated

[HokieHead]

Absolutely spot on post. I can’t stop laughing how something positive is spun as a negative. Wait, I know why ;-)

This deserves a sticky.

[Bothshallrow1]

Top notch, excellent post******

Now let’s watch them to attempt to twist the obvious truth you have stated.

Thanks for outstanding explanation….

Bsr1

[DlarsMN]

FACTS

[stressfreeliving]

Excellent post. A must read.

[marcis]

Is GS’s attorney’s here for GVSI on the share cancellation, the same ones for WNFT?

I’m sure they must have reviewed all GOFF docs and the thinking of illegitimate issued shares.

They did name “defendant’s” this time in the motion.

95% of the people on WNFT social media, thought the NVSOS would toss Calasse appeal out in weeks.

GS has seen the issuing docs and evidently feels his attorneys can defend the position that shares were issued improperly or even fraudulently. I personally think he wouldn't have spent a penny on this filing unless he was highly certain he would win, and that is just common sense.

[Yolo]

GS has seen the issuing docs and evidently feels his attorneys can defend the position that shares were issued improperly or even fraudulently. I personally think he wouldn't have spent a penny on this filing unless he was highly certain he would win, and that is just common sense.

Careful now, I think you've made some assumptions.

I think GS wouldn't have filed this unless he was confident he would win, yes. That is why it only targeted 294M shares and not more, as he likely declined to include other shareholders that might contest.

Also, it is interesting that he tweeted that he now owns the pesky preferred share previously owned by one of the defendants. If he purchased it from him, I'm not sure why he didn't purchase the 240M shares as well. But my guess is GS doesn't expect him to contest the cancellation, so regardless of the other 7 defendants, the bulk of the cancellation (240 is 82% of the total) should proceed smoothly.

But I take issue with this statement:

feels his attorneys can defend the position that shares were issued improperly or even fraudulently.

The complaint gave no evidence whatsoever that they were issued fraudulently. He may not even have evidence that they were issued improperly. But he may still be confident he will win because he thinks that the defendants won't contest or force him to provide evidence that they were issued improperly.

[eliot]

LCliving, great read and thank you - gonna take awhile, thats ok by me, i aint goin nowhere cause my hand is seized up with a Killer Kung Fu Grip.
KILLER
squeezing water out of my share right now with a relaxed sphincter
( ho hum)

trust the self
btw
ever wonder why scandanavian women are so beautiful?
cause the vikings didnt bring the ugly ones back

[Hi_Lo]

Actual controversies is a legal term.

https://definitions.uslegal.com/a/actual-controversy/

Trading restriction legends have nothing to do with actual controversies that have arisen because Sharp wants to cancel certain GVSI shareholders' shares.