InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

TRUISM

01/02/24 10:34 PM

#270656 RE: jealmc79 #270650

That's one reason Kings Group took down their mass media sites and when they returned, there was...

NO MENTION OF KBLB WHATSOEVER TO BE FOUND...

The "market" read it as "Kings wasn't too pleased, after the fiasco ; practically vouching for KBLB."

They were right, unfortunately.


I’d rather hear this coming from King’s than trusting anything KBLB says. KBLB’s track record speaks for itself.






TRUISM
icon url

igotthemojo

01/03/24 12:11 AM

#270657 RE: jealmc79 #270650

" I’d rather hear this coming from King’s than trusting anything KBLB says."

maybe theres a very good reason why you havent heard from kings, kblb or anyone else with knowledge, that the contract has been dissolved...

like say.......because it hasnt been...

"Plus, last I checked, KBLB is a publicly traded company making $0 in revenue. I’d think that putting a $40 million contract on the back burner for several years would warrant an 8k. Have you seen one saying so?"

you keep making up stuff like things got put "on the back burner" so you can claim an 8k is required...maybe no action was taken at all...maybe its all just being chalked up to a delay...

first of all, it isnt just about a contract between the kings group and kblb...kblb, the kings group and M joined together in a joint venture partnership called Spydasilk...kblb was to provide the fiber/material, M would design the clothing line and kings would do the rest...

kblb has yet to mass produce the fiber necessary for the others to do their thing...is there anyone that doesnt know that kblb has not yet mass produced DS?...everyone is already well aware...why do you feel an 8k is required?...you think maybe kblb HAS mass produced and just didnt tell anyone?...

i think by now it should be clear that this isnt just a simple property purchase agreement...there is much more invloved and whatever expertise you want to claim to have, is woefully inadequate...