I’d nothing else that ihub post answers some of

I’d nothing else that ihub post answers some of my questions. My take:

GNBT got involved with these people by purchasing Pantheon.
Veneto failed attempt to purchase Pantheon... GNBT steps in and buys Pantheon.
Pantheon tells GNBT hey they have problems you can probably buy their assets and right the ship (not knowing how bad things were at Veneto)
GNBT agrees to buy Veneto and take on this guy. This serves 2 purposes 1) for GNBT he knows the assets 2) for Veneto he’s an insider, a watchdog for their best interest.
GNBT for some reason (my guess would be they suspect him of some type of improper information sharing with the Veneto folks)terminates this guy. Probably for cause but really just suspicion.
This guy gets pissed and starts badmouthing GNBT to the Veneto folks.
No longer having a watchdog inside Veneto loses trust and starts the process of removing the restriction on their shares.

There seems to be lots of reason for bad blood on both sides. My opinion is that both sides share some degree of guilt. Question is now who has facts to prove their case and how will the SEC see it.

All speculation based on various unsubstantiated posts. No one should take this as fact, just trying to put the puzzle together in my head and figure out how we landed where we are.