Replies to post #46401 on Raadr Inc (RDAR)

[marcis]

I don’t post here anymore because JO’s posting same bull dung of RS

[Bubae]

I wouldn't say that the company has been "adamant" about the no reverse position. They rely on the press release comments on the subject which is now five months old which was easy to do at the time. The company very heavily front loaded the more than 3.6 billion shares added to the float since these Mexedia managers took control last October. Most of that had scheduled leak out conversion running to at least the beginning of May. I myself have been saying that they will not split the stock until what has been issued is in the market. You really believe they will sell that $1.5 million reg A priced at $0.001 without a spilt of this bloated 6.7 billion share structure? 🤔 How about the more than $1.2 million of the subject convertible note stripped out of the reg A . Details with links to the filings in the posts linked below. I wouldn't hang my hopes on anything promoted by the company. I can discredit nearly all their comments with either the filings or their contradictory previous comments.

Bubae
Tuesday, May 20, 2025 6:35:52 PM
Post# 44680 of 46410
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=176218571

The new Mexedia managers heavily front loaded the conversions shortly after they took control in October 2024. The notes they wrote had leak out conversions. A few are below. A list of all the notes in the original regulation A filing are linked below. It looks to me like the regulation A offering will wait until these conversions are sold out. Then they will likely split the stock to sell the offering or amend its price.

Bubae
Saturday, June 07, 2025 7:36:40 PM
Post# 45919 of 46410
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=176290209

Your comment about the Telvantis FAQ and the no reverse split comment isn't exactly complete. That FAQ page (linked below) answer refers to the February 11th press release now five months old. The statement was "...no plans to pursue a reverse stock split at this time or in the foreseeable future." Why not just say no reverse split for 2025 or something more definitive? Add foreseeable to any comment and gain instant plausible deniability.