Because FITX doesn't 'own' the other 65%. Those sh

Because FITX doesn't 'own' the other 65%. Those shares are held 'in trust' for FITX.

I'm well aware of Bill's PR four days after the 8k (Feb 3) that you linked, and how it clears it up and describes the allocation as an attempt to avoid a hostile takeover, and his interview with Brochstein from early Feb that commented on the same.

I'm long FITX also and...IMO they are a 10% 'owner' who has shares allocated to subsidiaries WP and AJOA.

I'm an attorney... held in trust does not equal ownership. It equals control. I'm not disputing control.

Perhaps I'm splitting hairs...I love both companies.

Tell you what...I'm out of town this week and just wanted to answer your question quickly because I think it's an important point.  I will rewrite that portion when I get back in town to link the PR and definately mention FITX's control over the shares.

TM