Just starting to read the complaint from the "disg
Post# of 154557
(Total Views: 521)
Posted On: 01/02/2022 7:34:09 PM
Just starting to read the complaint from the "disgruntled." Part of their claim is that CYDY has never had any income from Leronlimab. Oooops, maybe they might wanna amend that.....
Also after a bunch of ridiculous claims that basically say a company should not use perfectly legal but rapacious financing, which many OTC companies do, and blaming CYDY for not knowing that FIFE was behaving in a way that allegedly violated securities laws (before the SEC investigated and made this public) -- thus not knowing what the SEC didn't know is fraud. Also, they absurdly allege that a clinical trial that doesn't meet endpoints is evidence of fraud.
They invoke, seemingly as an utter non sequitur, the name of Martin Shkreli, who has never had anything to do with CYDY.
I'm just up to about page 40, but now they have invoked Amarex as evidence of CYDY's fraud. What? This claim means that CYDY would be able to kick this can down the road until the Amarex matter is completely settled, as facts are not yet fully known (at least, as far as we know). So this supports my theory that this lawsuit is not expected to have anything to come from it in the near or foreseeable future. But, it will be a lever to try to discredit the company to the naive.
I'm sure that genuine shareholders would do that, aren't you?
Quote:
CytoDyn has never earned any revenue and, therefore, has yet to
recognize any profits.
Also after a bunch of ridiculous claims that basically say a company should not use perfectly legal but rapacious financing, which many OTC companies do, and blaming CYDY for not knowing that FIFE was behaving in a way that allegedly violated securities laws (before the SEC investigated and made this public) -- thus not knowing what the SEC didn't know is fraud. Also, they absurdly allege that a clinical trial that doesn't meet endpoints is evidence of fraud.
They invoke, seemingly as an utter non sequitur, the name of Martin Shkreli, who has never had anything to do with CYDY.
I'm just up to about page 40, but now they have invoked Amarex as evidence of CYDY's fraud. What? This claim means that CYDY would be able to kick this can down the road until the Amarex matter is completely settled, as facts are not yet fully known (at least, as far as we know). So this supports my theory that this lawsuit is not expected to have anything to come from it in the near or foreseeable future. But, it will be a lever to try to discredit the company to the naive.
I'm sure that genuine shareholders would do that, aren't you?
(5)
(0)