Replies to post #134957 on NeoMedia Technologies, Inc (NEOM)

[cabbie71]

Clawmann, I'm on board if action is taken against previous officers,directors or other third parties who have purposefully or without regard damaged our interests..

Please let me know.

[cjzak]

I don't oppose any action that will get some of my money back and I certainly respect your knowledge and experience in the legal field. I always look forward to your posts. I'm pretty sure I understand what you are trying to convey to all of us. I'm just not certain why this is being put out there right now? Without revealing info you want kept private, could you explain why this has become a matter to deal with now? With all respect to you, I'm not clear on that part. Seems that anything that shades a legal issue on NEOM right now(even though it isn't NEOM directly) would be taken as a negative in a market place crawling with competitors. Huge stakes that will be up for grabs until this space is organized better are at risk. I guess I don't see why it should be done now. TIA. Cj

[beam11]

Claw - Why don't you go direct - Sue two individuals and be done with it. We all know who is responsible for the $22, Mil loss with no floor on the sub deals, and we all know the financial advisor conflict of interest on retainer to NEOM for $20,000. per month, which further sunk CCs claws into NEOM, with NMPR and PUPs and the China deals.

So why waste money on a legal investigation? Go straight to the culprits.