Mary Conway is not making accusations. Whatever your motivation, you doubt the company; however, Other Chap is far more sinister with his accusations, and he has declared all-out war against NETZ.
No doubt about it. About 45 days ago I was willing to bet you 50 shares of NETZ that the financials would be done. We'd have to go back and check the record to determine whether that bet would have rested on the fact that the audit was "completed" or "released." But if ESVS completed the audit and released it to NETZ by April 30th, then "release"--in the strict term of the word--would have won me the bet.
So who would have won the bet is still not clear--unless you want to go back and check the record to see if the bet rested on the term "publicly released." I don't have the time to do that right now, since you didn't take the bet.
But the problem with clarity remains my earlier posting, which only Luminous--and it wasn't even directed at him--attempted to answer. Once again, I repeat the question:
Jon and Other Chap,
Do either of you, or both of you, know for a fact that the audit was not completed by Zulu and delivered to ESVS by April 30th?
I gave you a point blank question. I expect a point blank answer. Thanking you each, in advance.
Joe Copia, made a similar type wistful remark. When I challenged him on this question, he answered, "No, I don't."
I fully expect one of four things to happen as a result of my question:
1) You'll each ignore my question.
2) You'll each ignore my question by asking me a question.
3) You'll each respond by saying, "No, I don't."
4) You'll each respond by saying, "Yes, I do know."
If you choose option number four, please qualify your answer so that we know that you're being honest. |
