RE: RE: riskystoxs Risky you are a funny guy.
But please don't try to throw the mud toward me. My question was an easy one and the way you had formulated your post in july was meant to mean that people you know were underwater.
How in the world should we understand you were relating to 'inbox received'.
Come on Risky, there are no shame by stating that many that you know are underwater. What is the problem?
But please don't tell thereafter that you do not know anybody interested (or that were or will be interested ) in INT. That to me does not make sense. I am conviced that you do know more people that are INT shareholders that you mentionned and again i do not see any problem with that and honestly i don't care..
The only reason where you would separate yourself from ANY individual in regard of INT would be in a matter of being included into a bashing group for financial reasons (including a register broker) that would deliberately try to knock the price as low as possible to make so buying at the lowest possible price.
So unless you are under the impression that some court case will be coming against you, i do not see the relevance to mention that you do not know anybody owning or wanting to own INT shares.
Does that make sense?
François