Posted On: 10/26/2014 9:13:28 AM
Post# of 56324
I understand MF has an agenda and loves to stick it to FITX.
I can see the ongoing debate on the message boards of "he filed a 144 so he is selling" vs "there is no proof he sold". To be honest, I don't know where the truth lies, but looking at the MF article, there is form 1147, Table II that looks to detail the history of shares sold.
Does this not provide the evidence that shares have in fact been sold?
If it doesn't, then what does the information detailed in table II mean?
Regards,
-kbulldog.
I can see the ongoing debate on the message boards of "he filed a 144 so he is selling" vs "there is no proof he sold". To be honest, I don't know where the truth lies, but looking at the MF article, there is form 1147, Table II that looks to detail the history of shares sold.
Does this not provide the evidence that shares have in fact been sold?
If it doesn't, then what does the information detailed in table II mean?
Regards,
-kbulldog.
(0)
(0)
