Quote from: ||bit on March 25, 2014, 12:23:27 AM

Quote from: bobfranklin on March 24, 2014, 11:59:39 PM

I'm also not 100% committed enough to argue it (or serious!). I get the angst, but I'm tending to sit on the fence until some information appears rather than go off half cocked (but hey that's just me). Wasn't meant to appear as an attack at all, more just a case of "sure but the argument for those points swings both ways and gives no proof/evidence of either argument in that sense" which concern doesn't enter into in my mind in a black and white sense. Although I for one won't say more/some info would be nice.

I'm certainly ready to see this saga end - one way or the other. Either Zach pulls through and does right to investors. Or we find out the worse, and it is a fraud.
One things for sure, if it is a fraud, the courts will settle it. Even if a new contract is presented that supposedly nullifies the old, LRM will be susceptible to a lawsuit.

It will be interesting (but sad) if LR tries to word any new contract without including any semblance of a guaranteeing that investors returns grow proportionately with new assets.
Anything less may start a riot.

By the way, just curious, would you entertain my question on the hardware? I'd like to hear someone else's take on that. Can you imagine a reasonable explanation?

Totally agree with that. Fingers crossed scenario personally.

Sure, it's clear Dave is selling hardware and stock levels indicate he's shipping hardware. To be completely black and white on it there's no evidence to support receipt of any shipment by zach as far as I can tell (this doesn't mean it hasn't been received - but I haven't seen a manifest for example). I'm actually inclined to believe that some hardware has been received at least as the divs were up the previous 2 weeks. Until I get clarification though I'm happy to sit in the dark being the mushroom I am (although I won't be happy if it's revealed it's been in for 2 weeks and is mining beyond the scope).