Replies to post #32049 on Xeriant Inc (XERI)

[Smartypants2]

You may think Exhibit D is irrelevant, but your legal analysis (as usual) is WRONG! And, as the Complaint clearly cited, the recipient (XTI) of the "secret" $300,000 payment was never revealed in any public filing.

[StockItOut]

You're 'so good' at analyzing facts. Why do you in general ignore so many other facts that 'happen' to counter your conclusions? Oh, my question seems to answer itself. You're afraid to undermine or challenge your own conclusions.


As to recent items you raise:

"Duffy makes this offer just 14 days before the JVs 2 year end date."

I expect XTI to focus on this.
Of course, Xeriant may have done so having just discovered XTI's breach.

"Since I established the JV connection"

LOL! You mean Xeriant and XTI had a JV Agreement together, and its somehow related to their dispute, and you discovered this, and then announced it here? Wow! Thank you!

"Duffy knew he would not win Arbitration..."

So? XTI did not request or demand arbitration. Your focus mute.

"...which could have been started but he used the extension to go back to Auctus 2 more times..."

Yeah, the "2 more times" because Xeriant was in default and terms required Xeriant do so, not...

"...so they could get their share."

Stupid conspiracy minded garbage logic.

.