yes but on what grounds? there aren't any, so sayi
Post# of 1147
(Total Views: 202)
Posted On: 02/19/2018 4:17:12 PM
Re: Gemmerling #233
yes but on what grounds? there aren't any, so saying they are guilty by default...what default...? they are current and reporting...they are not delinquent.
and whatever "reason" they are "claiming" doesn't hold any water what so ever.
Even their reasoning behind the temporary suspension isn't accurate and present..there is nothing linking PDXP to crypto...absolutely nothing.
Little will be required to prove their innocense. I'm sure their attorneys will be looking after that. SEC royally fucked up and they will get pressure to restore PDXP to trading. There was NO wrong doing and is provable. No leg to stand
This is now an international affair thanks to CNBC, WSJ and the likes. They brought this upon themselves. To clear any risk of embarrassment all will need to colude to clear their names. including the SEC.
and whatever "reason" they are "claiming" doesn't hold any water what so ever.
Even their reasoning behind the temporary suspension isn't accurate and present..there is nothing linking PDXP to crypto...absolutely nothing.
Little will be required to prove their innocense. I'm sure their attorneys will be looking after that. SEC royally fucked up and they will get pressure to restore PDXP to trading. There was NO wrong doing and is provable. No leg to stand
This is now an international affair thanks to CNBC, WSJ and the likes. They brought this upon themselves. To clear any risk of embarrassment all will need to colude to clear their names. including the SEC.
(0)
(0)PDX Partners Inc (PDXP) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼