Replies to post #101169 on Expo Holdings Inc. (EXPH)

[Santa Barbara Broker]

Really..No equipment?? and you know this how??

I won't speak for Acc, but since every single item he has ever posted over a year or more has turned out to be 100% correct, I have had ample opportunity to judge whether or not his observations on Expo Holdings, Inc. are to be trusted. And they most certainly are.

On the other hand I have had years and years to observe other certain information posted about Expo Holdings, Inc. and have found it to be incorrect 100% of the time as well occasionally disengenuous as well as purposefully constructed to deceive and mislead in the case of a non-valid cached website page...discovered incidently by Acc himself ;-). Commentary on those such observations concerning Expo Holdings speak for themselves.

Be that as it may, there is vetted, unbiased proof available that the assessed VALUE of D&D Display's equipment in the Shaver Street warehouse if not it's mere bulk in weight or volume, has been reduced by OVER 83% in the last year. That proof can be found at the link below. But first...why is it there is ALWAYS a request for a "link" as the sole acceptable form of proof concerning information on Expo Holdings, Inc. and now, when that link shows irrefutable proof, there is a sudden inference all information concerning Expo sourced from the internet is "entirely wrong". TIA, IMHO.

D&D Tax 2010: Bill 7592 Code 15642 Amnt: $ 2878.73 (penalties and interest have been since added to that amount due to non-payment...amount shown is initial principal due so as to keep comparisons "apples to apples")

D&D Tax 2011: Bill 7319 Code 15919 Amnt: $ 465.66

Difference 2011 over 2010: $ 2413.07 (83.824% reduction)

https://tax.wilkescounty.net/MSS/citizens/PersonalProperty/Default.aspx

Enter "owner Name" exactly as shown: D & D Displays
Then enter 2010 for confirmation of the amount from last year's assessment amount and 2011 for this year to compare.

[mahatmapaul]

check again..this time with a source not based on the internet

and who might this be?

Source Not Based On The Internet -- This source neglected to inform you of (1) theft of u.s. government money, (2) attachment of federal lien on all assets of exph, (3) lawsuit by exph's main supplier, and (4) lawsuit by the "vetting" bank.

Internet -- This source correctly revealed (1) theft of u.s. government money, (2) attachment of federal lien on all assets of exph, (3) lawsuit by exph's main supplier, and (4) lawsuit by the "vetting" bank.

Batting Averages:

Source Not Based On the Internet -- 0%
Internet -- 1000%

You do the math

lmao big time

[Acc441]

sorry veno..... my sources are indeed ENTIRELY correct. Double checked and verified.... I suggest you check YOUR source...this time with a source who does not have the initials JDB...or...GSH.