if P2O didn't 8k .. imo there would reason for con

if P2O didn't 8k .. imo there would reason for concern .. but they do
and as was noted .. the extension was a mutual one .. which is more revealing

if i'm interpreting your post correctly .. it's clear you believe that P2O controls
the execution re: the buyer .. not the other way around .. and i can't agree with that take

Quote:

---

Yes, the founder is easily sourced....enough said.

And 8ks are worthless without follow thru.

---

that said i do find the timing
of the next date rather interesting myself .. smack dab in the middle of when
the annual is due .. which of course (covers 2016) i expect will suck .. unless
there are subsequent events *noted* in that filing

and i will be the first to crank out on RH .. if this Q doesn't see one or more
of the following 8k'd

RH's form/s updated (as CFO's were in 2016)
blending site isn't leased
RE asset isn't closed
DA isn't 8K'd


however .. i do like YOY %s *GREEN* on PTOI .. i do like the cracks *visible*
re: CEs and their many headed multi alias trolls displaying angst or disappearing
in total *there* .. but mostly i am appreciative of P2O investors whose legit
bids keep CEs in check now that (every appearance given) that abusive liquidity
is scarcer to obtain then hens' teeth

Jan 2017 .. appears to be going down as one of the lowest *volume* months
since PTOI first began trading in April 2009 ..

more telling (and perhaps only to me) .. it's also the lowest PPS .. so there is
something to be smiling about ..

zero doubts there is a plan and a path .. the only aspect not known *imo* is the timing


4kids