Replies to post #15862 on CurAegis Technologies Inc (fka CRGS)

[allnumbers]

Is it correct to sum up your understanding...

that:

1) the "major development(s)" will be a commercialization event agreement.

2) the insider's inability to trade the stock is only the inability to buy more, not sell more.

How do you reconcile the fact that there are pending disclosed stock selling statements on file for the planned insider sales?

What is up with the new update on the Iso-torque for the FWD set up when the end result of the August one has not been disclosed favorably?

There are only three domestic auto makers. Why can't Torvec have been able to anticipate the three requests for Iso-Torques in the three manufacturer's FWD's and been ready to say that we anticipated that you might want to see how our technology works in your FWD, and then just hand it to them already done?

Should I go on?

Again, "major development(s)" does not automatically translate to "Commercialization event".

[blue heron]

There are two paragraphs given prominence

("I want to highlight a couple of very important points")
dealing with insiders not selling off, and in fact wishing they could add to their position. I cannot get over the impession that this message is a thinly veiled suggestion that the long-suffering shareholders consider adding to their position before the meeting. Despite the "safe harbor" clause about not controling the timing, I find this extraordinary.

It seems a huge risk to take just to attempt to do the right thing (maybe)for us fellow-travellors. JG would just not do that for a number of good reasons. Unless,...what?