RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Is there any chanceThe write-offs that led to the lawsuit they had to settle.
Surely you did some due dilligence and was aware of it?
Throughout entire company history they wrote off more revenue combined than they collected.
Please, don't call out people for lying just because you are ignorant about basic history of the company you are supposedly invested in.
Reliq being a reason for collections lagging: again, they wrote-off more revenue than they collected. Is your thesis that all clients just collectively decided not to pay and reliq wrote revenue off out of good heart?
Financials being delayed means the revenue reliq booked is questionable - that's the only logical explanation. If you have a different one, do share.
Evidence of reliq not meeting contractual obligations is clients refusing to pay and auditors already writing off significant portion of revenue and now taking over 70 days past the deadline to question revenue booked since then
Why would I be interested in things company said if everything they have said prior proved to be untrue or inaccurate? This company was literally set up by pump and dumpers, including the CEO being set up by them. Are you really suggesting that one should ignore actual evidence of lack of collections, actual write-offs, actual lawsuits, and rather focus on statements of company set up to be a pump and dump, as per currently ongoing lawsuit?