unbelievable that this scam "pg. 29 of a public do
Post# of 43064
Posted On: 03/26/2014 11:47:14 AM
unbelievable that this scam "pg. 29 of a public document" is still being propogated.
From today's HUB:
It will be very interesting to see if the 8-9 million per processor, as printed in the Madison County minutes, will be the mid-point.
So, Zecca merely repeats what JB (falsely, IMO) told him about why JBI is breaching the much-heralded contract, and this mere repetition (e.g., "the CEO told me that they are going to sell the processors for 8-9 million dollars initially") and this becomes VALIDATION! What kind of DD is this ???
And this is considered DD by those who publicly refuse to simply e-mail and ask JB about breaking out the figures on current production from the monster procesors??
Or, in the alternative, it is merely being propogated as good DD, for ulterior motives. For what those motives might be, just read about the history of otc scams and how they operate.
The JBI scam couldn't be any clearer. Nothing but lies, deflections, historical revisionism (and how!)
It's very entertaining, though, I have to admit.
From today's HUB:
It will be very interesting to see if the 8-9 million per processor, as printed in the Madison County minutes, will be the mid-point.
So, Zecca merely repeats what JB (falsely, IMO) told him about why JBI is breaching the much-heralded contract, and this mere repetition (e.g., "the CEO told me that they are going to sell the processors for 8-9 million dollars initially") and this becomes VALIDATION! What kind of DD is this ???
And this is considered DD by those who publicly refuse to simply e-mail and ask JB about breaking out the figures on current production from the monster procesors??
Or, in the alternative, it is merely being propogated as good DD, for ulterior motives. For what those motives might be, just read about the history of otc scams and how they operate.
The JBI scam couldn't be any clearer. Nothing but lies, deflections, historical revisionism (and how!)
It's very entertaining, though, I have to admit.
(0)
(0)