Replies to post #186917 on Eternal Image Inc (fka ETNLQ)

[Basser1]

"Now, you still would have to deal with breach of contract, which the BINDING LOU is."
--A "letter or memorandum of understanding" is not a contract. It leads to a contract. With no monetary penalties outlined in the LOU, "binding" loses some of its punch, in my unschooled opinion.

The LOU is binding on the parties, but contemplates them entering into a more definitive contract in the future.

If the LOU is not a binding contract then how could the contract that is contemplated be A MORE DEFINITIVE CONTRACT. This sure sounds like both parties involved seem to think that the LOU is indeed a contract. The more defined contract will contain all the terms and conditions and will not be for the public to view. JMHO

Basser

[Sharkbite fka Lurker from Mars]

you are talking MATW PO, I am talking EI manufacturing PO

What Mathews BUYS from EI is sold

What Mathews manufactures for EI has not been

"I" know what I read and I know what I have discussed with IR/EI

I would suggest others do the same

This drowning over wording is old, stale and quite childish

I am here to trade and make money not argue clear wording

FYI: I was on the phone earlier with Tony and he stated that they never got to produce and sell the VLC line - only a few urns - mentioned early attempt at being a manufacturer that didn't work out

Interesting what the facts are vs what some post

[caseytrader]

Hi Don. Nice response and interesting point of view. I think the only thing I feel qualified enough to respond to after 1st reading is the issue of "contract vs. LOU." A lot has been made of this, so I did a lot of digging on the various iterations of LOU's, MOU's, etc, and the possible reasons for signing one. The information I've found supports EI's stated reason that it is put in place pending details of a signed contract.

Hypothetically: If EI and MATW had come to a verbal agreement alone, it would be legally enforceable even if difficult to prove. If they merely had records they met, it would bolster their claim. Throw in minutes from the meeting, and their claims in court increase significantly. EI chose to come away from their meetings with a signed LOU, which effectively is a written record of a verbal agreement. In short, it is worth more than the paper it is written on.

The argument that it is not a contract is irrelevant since it is still enforceable. I do agree, however, it's less weighty without monetary penalties outlined. Still, if EI can show a loss due to reasonable faith in the agreement--in my opinion, a fairly easy benchmark--they have a good chance in court.

THAT SAID, my goodness, they haven't even posted earnings yet & we're trying to posit ways in which EI can hold Matthews accountable! Lol! Maybe we're better served at this point having a little patience until we at least have some idea what September brings. After all, that is the month EI themselves have stated things will really get rolling. JMHO. My best to you.