Mr. Reece,
I read your post with much amusement. Your suggestions to Pugs are quite humourous, particularly because they come from you.
I believe the investor is contractually bound to RMCW, not RMIL. Furthermore, it was explained to me that the investor has missed the deadline for the $10MM. He has had difficulty getting the money through the proper channels. RMIL, from my understanding, extended the deadlines due to these circumstances and the investors letter of intent.
To demand a "public" statement from RMIL, when they are accomodating RMCW by extending the deadline, is not only humorous, it is potentially dangerous. I believe you and the Tideglider are provocating this kind of danger. The Tideglider even suggested Pugs post the letter of intent, assuming Pugs has a copy of such letter.
Also, I find it very revealing Tonto will not respond to Pugs direct questions regarding Zapara & Mork. It appears Tonto wasn't as interested in dialogue as he would have the board believe. It seems it would have been quite simple to respond to Pugs and call Pugs bluff. I am also perplexed as to why Tonto avoids this subject when it appears to be central to this story.
In conclusion, I would think your constant demands for shareholders to demand a "public statement" from RMIL, after they submitted a 8K, when the investor is contractually bound with RMCW, not RMIL, persists only to compromise the advent of trading and provoke more SEC woes.
Good day
RB |
