Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Kure Technologies Inc V.KUR.H

Alternate Symbol(s):  UBSBF

Kure Technologies, Inc. is a Canada-based company. The Company has no business activity. The Company's subsidiary is UBS Wireless Services Inc.


TSXV:KUR.H - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by gijane_on Feb 29, 2012 10:42pm
190 Views
Post# 19608786

RE: RE: RE: The Spectrum

RE: RE: RE: The Spectrum

You haven't, but I have read both the Look and UBS claims, and they do not cover the patents issue.
So what? Does that mean that a different claim can't address that and other issues?

//Hmm, you claim the patents were illegitimately transferred to UBS Ltd; yet you seem not to prefer to have such a pivotally important claim included as part of the overall claim which had been filed with the court on behalf of UBS Inc shareholders.//
On exactly what, other than your own twisted thoughts, do you base such nonsense about my preferences? You sound more and more like that other bastion of muddled thinking: inda$.

//As pertains to the patents in question and should your assertions be in fact correct, one would clearly be compelled to suggest that Gerald T. McGoey stood there and outright lied to shareholders when answering questions dealing with “material company assets and business. //
It wouldn't be the first time.  
He was clearly caught outright lying when McCutcheon grilled him about the restructuring payments at the AGM that took place at the TSX, and McLiar said the information he was being confronted on appeared in the documetation sent to shareholders. It did not.  And what about that NR talking about a share price of about 40 cents?
So if someone were to sue over the patent misrepresentation or about umpteen other misrepresentations not covered in the current claims, who would be the plaintiff(s)? Who the defendant(s)? McLiar? UBS private?  UBS public?

//At this particular juncture, you’ll have to excuse one for clearly understanding that yet another legal fight is about to be thrown, if you will. It is, after all, the modus operandi which was is and will forever be associated with these kinds of coalescing segments of … //
Quite frankly, I can say without reservations that he current Board is the best UBS has ever had. Your comment associating them with the old scum is totally unwarranted.
I wonder: what is stopping you, as a shareholder allegedly injured by the misrepresentations by Mc-Liar et al, from starting a class action suit against McLiar et al?

You claim to be CANADIAN, but seems all you are is a CHRONIC COMPLAINER. Keep it up, and I won't bother with you any longer.

Bullboard Posts