Replies to post #545 on Wastech fka WTCH

[RGrant26]

Willy, I don't post often but I'll make an exception.

IMO, CVIA needs to promote itself by showing growth, EPS and filing on time. That will get us moving in the right direction.

I'm all for exposing this company to the investment community, but what I see is possibly more dulition. That's a lot of shares you and others will be receiving. There better be some results forthcoming. I am hopeful but not the least optimistic.

IMO, you spend too much time on the web "defending" YOURSELF. I can't believe a true businessman would generate as many useless and defensive posts as you have this past week, almost answering every post. Can you be that successful, worrying about what every alias poster types?

In addition, airing your dispute over the agreement was completely unprofessional and a breech of good faith IMO. What on earth did you expect to accomplish on the message boards?

I hope your "reborn" faith (now that your pockets have been lined sufficently) provides you enough incentive to succesfully profile this company. You have your agreement, let's see what your company can do.

[rhlytle]

Willy......just some comments (some I tried to send earlier, but couldn't get them sent):

I perceive part of the problems you are currently having with some of the longs possibly due to your choice of wording.

1. If you feel you were 'kicked in the teeth by someone repreenting the company', I assume you are talking about the contract difficulties with the private shareholder who hird you (and the others). In many posts, you indicate that you were not hired by the company. If this is really true, please don't now imply that someone reprsenting the company kicked you........If the 2 items are unrelated, please explain, or don't mention to begin with--it's too confusing for us old guys.

2. IMHO, some problems were caused by your initial choice of words to us, when you indicated that you would continue to post and have 'fun'. A lot of us (active posters & readers) have been around CVIA since before the reverse split. Quite frankly, I've had about as much 'fun' as I can stand. Now I'm just a little 'touchy' when someone suggests that posting & reading about CVIA are 'fun'. Hopefully this will change in the next few months.

3. I do appreciate you many attempts to explain your position and the difficulties you have been having of late, but I always have questions as to when the dead horse has been beaten enough--------(sorry, this could be applied to both sides).

4. I do find it amusing that you have indicated in the past that if the contract were to fall through, you would not be interested in buying any CVIA, even though you would still be prepared to spread the good word on the company. Perhaps your choice of phrases culd be tempered to avoid problems in the future, unless of course, you only invest in companies you promote (which I doubt). However, to a lot of the folks on RB, and here, those appeared as fighting words..........By the way, I did notice that in one of your later posts, you did indicate that even if the contract fell through, you still might buy some shares of CVIA. If you would have taken this verbal position from the start, I think the response would not have been so loud.

All of course is just my opinion......OK slap away..;-)