Replies to post #3914 on H Quotient, Inc. (fka HQNT)

[Sec 10]

It wasn't inaccurate, Chinditone, just not from public sources. And as far as the Our-Street articles being "speculative," feel free to point out an error of fact.

For example, did DC claim trade credits from a defunct company as an asset? Yes, or no?

[Sonyboy]

Chinditone, you wrote:

Glad you enjoyed SEC10's inaccurate bashing. I do not really think that DC really cares whether or nor you apologise to him - why do you think you or your views are so important? Come clean and enlighten us!! Perhaps you represent someone getting sued for representing the info you posted.

First, you misunderstood my comments about SEC10. I never said that I enjoyed seeing bashing where the basher couldn’t substantiate his claims with publicly available documents. When a basher does make an unsubstantiated claim then the Longs have every right to try to discredit him and reveal the weakness of his position. I was just pointing out that you did indeed swarm all over him and I contrasted this with the fact that no one has been able to contradict my evidence that Doug knowingly misstated the value of the SGD trade credits on the last quarterly report that he filed.

Second, I have never been sued by Doug, nor am I a lawyer representing someone being sued by Doug. I am, however, disgusted by Doug’s abuse of the legal system to apparently try to suppress those who have questioned his business dealings.
Third, why do you consider your questions about my motives and the motives of other “bashers” to be legitimate, whereas my questions about your motives and the motives of other HQNT supporters would be considered a personal attack? I am very curious why Financeguy would be so passionate about defending someone who is so indefensible. The HQNT defenders are always asserting that the critics must be shorts or must be paid by shorts. How would my speculation that Financeguy must be paid by HQNT or Cohn to take the stance he has taken be any different?

And if there was evidence that the CEO of the company was using intimidation tactics to pressure a poster into changing his posts, then shouldn’t that be a valid topic of conversation? Surely, if any such evidence existed about the CEO then it seems to me that it would be a valid topic of conversation on a chat board about to the company. Yet, if I posted evidence here from another board that Reserectorman apparently changed his tune after Doug threatened him, then resectorman would regard it as a personal attack and my post would disappear so fast it would make your head spin. Indeed, I bet my raising this point as an example of the double standard used to censor this board will end up getting this post deleted.

Fourth, even if you consider Our-Street to be a speculative source, the facts remain:

1) According to the New York State Corporate Records, SGD International had gone out of business.
2) Our-Street prominently mentioned the NYS Corporate Records in its SEC complaint of September 8, 2003. And Our Street mentioned this complaint in a press release they issued on September 9.
3) Cohn issued a press release on September 9 bragging about how he got the disseminating press organization to pull the press release of an entity that claimed to file a complaint about HQNT. Though he didn’t mention Our-Street by name, it was obvious that Cohn was referring to the Our-Street press release of September 9th.
4) Since Doug knew about the Our-Street press release then he must have gone to their web site to read their complaint against HQNT. And if he did this then he would have known that SGD was no longer in business according to the New York State Corporate Records.
5) Yet despite the knowledge that the New York State Corporate Records listed SGD as being defunct, Doug valued their trade credits as being worth $2.6 million on the quarterly report he filed with the SEC on November 20, 2003.


You can badmouth Our-Street all you want for all I care. And even if they did have an axe to grind with Doug, the fact remains—Doug had to have known based on the New York State Corporate Records that SGD was out of business. Our-Street was only the messenger. It was New York State Corporate Records that should have tipped Doug off. Now, are you going to call the NYSCR a speculative source?

Of course, you could say that NYSCR was mistaken, or that NYSCR was referring to a different company named SGD International. If that is the case then why haven’t we seen a press release from HQNT clarifying the situation? Why hasn’t Cohn, or Bulldog, or Marc Nathan posted a clarification on this board? Why would they prefer to let these rumors of impropriety persist if they could demonstrate that the rumors were based on a faulty assumption?