RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Is there any chanceNow just to recap, you were claiming that collections were a problem because it was likely Reliq didn't meet it's contract terms, then I asked you to share your evidence with the class. So, here we are:
- You state there were massive write offs. Please point them out to the class. If you can't do so, then you just made it up, right? Or were lazy? Or lying perhaps? Now, even if you could provide such evidence (and I doubt you can), it wouldn't mean Reliq wasn't meeting its contract obligations, but let's continue on anyway.
- You state collections have lagged. (We all know that, or at least that was the case back in March.) I've asked you to provide the reason why you think it was Reliq not meeting its contract terms. You have not done so.
- You state audited financials were delayed. (We all know that too.) Once again, that is not an explanation of why you think Reliq didn't meet its contract obligations.
- You mentioned constant dilution. (Do I have to say again we all know that?) Once again, you don't provide any evidence relating to Reliq not meeting its contract obligations.
- You mentioned the private placement. Ok, this is starting to get a little tiresome. If you have evidence that Reliq didn't meet its contract obligations, now would be a good time to produce it.
Or, you could just continue with the obfuscation...
Or, you could just make up more stuff...
Now, if you're interested in some things the company said, here's some from memory (which admittedly is imperfect):
- They started getting serious about and dedicating resources to collections in January.
- Companies have agree to payment terms regarding amounts overdue.
- Collections have been improving throughout the calendar year.
Now, if you or anyone were to point out to me that you/they don't rely on company statements and want to see actual results, then I've no problem at all with that approach. So, let's do that instead of just making stuff up!
kusio1 wrote: Of course! Evidence:
- previous write off of vast majority of revenues
- lack of collections of current revenues
- audited financials delayed by 65 days and counting
- constant dilution
- private placement for amount that is insignificant if in fact receivables were collected
You can argue that it is not beyond reasonable doubt, but this isn't court of law.
There is tons of evidence