Replies to post #117099 on Good Vibrations Shoes Inc (GVSI)

[Hi_Lo]

he never once argued that they were issued fraudulently.

He demonstrated Calasse's history of fraud (and even Calasse's admission that fraud took place under his watch) in the original appeal.

And the onus was on Calasse to prove he paid for the shares. Something he failed to do TWICE!

You best buddy Calasse is about to lose his appeal and won't get a penny from Sharp...for ever!

[Yolo]

The shares were issued as part of an employment agreement. So they were validly issued at the beginning of the agreement.

He didn't earn the shares, issued them anyway, but that doesn't constitute fraud???

It wasn't a case where he "didn't earn the shares, issued them anyway." They were issued up front in exchange for signing the employment agreement.

Whether he satisfied the contract is a separate question from whether the shares were validly issued for consideration. They were validly issued, and proving that they were not validly issued requires proving extrinsic fraud.

For example, Sharp issued himself 5M preferred shares as payment for "CEO services." Those shares were worth $19M at time of issuance, and that is on the balance sheet for WNFT. Are his CEO services worth $19M, or roughly 2/3 of the current market cap for WNFT? Objectively no. But were the shares fraudulently issued? No. As he had complete voting control of WNFT at the time, he legally issued himself shares, even though his performance did not justify the amount of shares issued.

Same with GVSI. He issued himself 300k preferred shares, which can convert into 3B common shares, which is larger than the current OS. What consideration was given in return? He invested $100k. Is that a fair price? Objectively no. But we're the shares fraudulently issued? No. He had full voting control of GVSI so the shares were validly issued to himself.