InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

causeimdaddydamnit

10/26/07 11:34 AM

#92957 RE: fonzzz #92955

I certainly think that if PNMS were intending to scam anyone, they would find a better way to do it than paying them 50 grand. There was a scam here alright, but not on the part of PNMS IMO. Pedro's reaction is very understandable as it deals with the privacy of the Foundation.
icon url

Mikefl

10/26/07 11:36 AM

#92958 RE: fonzzz #92955

I hope this is able to refresh everyone's memory...it's been quite some time since this issue came up:

Posted by: fonzzz
In reply to: None Date:7/12/2007 9:59:41 AM
Post #of 92956

NEW DD: PNMS vs desimplex...

In the last Q report, we can read that PNMS inversted 5.4 million dollars into desimplex and that they own 20% of desimplex.

The truth however is slightly different: today, desimplex hasn't received a single dollar from PNMS. They had an oral deal where PNMS was going to pay 240K USD per month to desimplex. PNMS has never paid however.
Now, PNMS is trying to convince desimplex to take shares instead (0.5 billion shares, in PDR).
People at desimplex are getting tired of not being paid. That is one of the reasons why no bugs are fixed on the PDRexchange.
Today, PNMS has still 0% of desimplex shares.
Also, desimplex still has all rights on the software. If the situation doesn't change soon, they may decide to take the PDRexchange software back.

I can not tell you who my source is, but this comms directly from desimplex's management. I know at least one poster here can confirm my source is reliable.

icon url

FillTheGap

10/26/07 12:26 PM

#92988 RE: fonzzz #92955

Fonzzz - sure they have money! They've been selling shares back into the US market. Let's see $50,000 @ .001 per share is only 50,000,000 shares. I'm sure more than that were sent in from members here alone