I never said Kyle was selling shares. A pump and dump involves the dumping of shares based on false information being presented to the public. There is ample proof shares have been dumped. There is also ample proof several false statements have been made by the company, as well as posters claiming to have conversations with Mary and others.
I asked the company to confirm or deny if the permit linked here is in fact the permit Mary would have sent based on a public record request. This is either a copy of the permit or it is not.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/298727048/2014-07-...t-EXECUTED
Those documents contains NO agreement or even a suggestion about 3 items being found being enough to convert to a full salvage permit. In fact it states the issuance of the current permit DOES NOT GUARANTEE any future permit will be issued. See 14 in the link above.
Now on July 31, 2014, an Ihub member stated two weeks before Kyle did in a PR that 3 items were needed per a rep from the FBAR. Several emails from the FBAR show that info to be utterly false. All we have from posters is "alleged" conversations.
SFRX's attorney has been given the documents needed that show my claims are correct. At any trial that may come about, the Court will be shown every effort was made to work out any disagreement beforehand.
If you want to comment about anything please comment about the 3 items. What documents refer to three items?
What document refers to an 80/20 agreement? That ONLY comes with Phase 3, and not before. I have emails from the FBAR that say Seafarer has no salvage rights.
Even you asked about the coins, yet that is exactly what the company stated to the Court.
Where is the mention of the Captain's wife or the coins in the research design included in this application? See page 5 of Sinclair's report.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/299332582/2014-05-...on-Area-A2
Yet SFRX filed a complaint "agin" the Defendant on 9-3-14 (see time stamp at top), and this was posted here less than 12 hours later. The company is the source of this information. If it's not true then it's just ONE element in a pump and dump scheme.
http://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=1953162
But the company isn't involved in any scheme you say?
I asked the company to confirm or deny if the permit linked here is in fact the permit Mary would have sent based on a public record request. This is either a copy of the permit or it is not.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/298727048/2014-07-...t-EXECUTED
Those documents contains NO agreement or even a suggestion about 3 items being found being enough to convert to a full salvage permit. In fact it states the issuance of the current permit DOES NOT GUARANTEE any future permit will be issued. See 14 in the link above.
Now on July 31, 2014, an Ihub member stated two weeks before Kyle did in a PR that 3 items were needed per a rep from the FBAR. Several emails from the FBAR show that info to be utterly false. All we have from posters is "alleged" conversations.
SFRX's attorney has been given the documents needed that show my claims are correct. At any trial that may come about, the Court will be shown every effort was made to work out any disagreement beforehand.
If you want to comment about anything please comment about the 3 items. What documents refer to three items?
What document refers to an 80/20 agreement? That ONLY comes with Phase 3, and not before. I have emails from the FBAR that say Seafarer has no salvage rights.
Even you asked about the coins, yet that is exactly what the company stated to the Court.
Where is the mention of the Captain's wife or the coins in the research design included in this application? See page 5 of Sinclair's report.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/299332582/2014-05-...on-Area-A2
Yet SFRX filed a complaint "agin" the Defendant on 9-3-14 (see time stamp at top), and this was posted here less than 12 hours later. The company is the source of this information. If it's not true then it's just ONE element in a pump and dump scheme.
Quote:Posted On: 09/04/2014 1:07:33 AM
Avatar
Posted By: wlfr01
This Month's Featured IR Firm
Uptick Newswire
This is from the law suit involving Buccaneer 1961
83. In actuality to the above portion of the post, there was readily available
information to V******** that there was treasure in the form of actual coins from such wreck that is the subject of such site. As a matter of fact, it was one of SEAFARER’s actual archaeologists who made recoveries on such site. And in fact there were three platters that were found on such site, which included the name of the wife of the very Captain of the ship being pursued. All such matters are were publicly available from the State of Florida records that were publicly available. The site in issue is a known site, far removed from the falsities that V********* posts.
http://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=1953162
But the company isn't involved in any scheme you say?
1
