Replies to post #86993 on 8000 Incorporated (EIGH)

[mytigger]

LOL.. the difference is VERY relevant. And yes PROOF is relevant as well. And yes WILLFUL is quite subjective.

But let's say for example that they can PROVE they have $40M in cash at their disposal and then determinde after the announcement that they can not legally use it for a dividend. IMO that turns what you are calling a WILLFUL VIOLATION into a VIOLATION.

Furthermore, if papers were drawn up and meetings took place where the finalization of MONK's DEN acquisition was a mere formality - and then something unforeseen occurred (divi cancellation) that nixed the deal - then that is NOT a willful violation.

But the biggest of all, is proving that there was no selling by Monk or Insiders during the pps climb during the MD acquisition and divi announcement.

I'm sure one of the SEC's main concern is Monk using Monk's Den as a mechanism to orchestrate P&D's. I don't believe Monk sold his shares. But it's up to him to prove that to the SEC. I do believe if he can successfully prove that to the SEC that he did not sell his shares then he will more than likely have a slam dunk case to sue any person or entity that has made false, libelous and defamatory claims against him.