RE:RE:RE:The Dealrusty,
What are you talking about? a lawsuit involving the SEC???? Please, do tell! No one knows what will come if/when deal fails....for good.
I've always foucussed ont he facts:
1) CUnningham does NOT have $210 million,
2) The 36 month tokens subcription facility will not, and did not, provide Cunningham the ability to close the AMK tansaction. Sure, they can raise some money on a day to day basis, but nothing close to satisfying the DEAL. Despite what Cunninghsam and AMK may, or may not have, tol dyou,
3) Deal did not close in November as the said it would when Definitive deal was announced,
4) Deal did NOT close mid december as circular suggested it would.
5) In NR announcing SH vote results, AMK chose NOT to specify an anticipated closing date which was different from what you would usually see ie you always see a date.
6) THe OUTSIDE DATE IS DECEMBER 30! Deal can be terminated with no recourse.
7) AMK has chosen to stay silent. THey have given no comfort since SH vote. In fact, the NR is anything but comforting (that part is my opinio)
8) AMK is trading at a huge discount to "bid price"
So those are facts.
Would you like to hear some of my opinions?????
rusty111 wrote: What this crew has been suggesting is illegal trading and nefarious activities in order to undermine AMK's and Cunninghams credibility
Why would companies that never have been involved with any shady dealings of have any convictions on their books all of a sudden decide to do something outrageous and get into a lawsuit involving the SEC as Larry has constantly been suggesting? ? ?These guys are businessmen not criminals okay ( please advise if you have illegal convictief information )
it's ridiculous to slander a deal unless your set to benefit from misinformation causing a selling frenzy to weak handed investors
Stockhouse really needs to clamp down on predatory posting as it is misleading and hurtful to all legitimate parties
shameful tactics