I think it's clear JC misled everyone on the number of households up and running -- SS as well as shareholders. Yes, he is liable for misrepresentation. Yes, he should pay for this. However, with the recission of the Punch TV sale -- what does he actually have to go after?! I am sure SS thought this through before a long and expensive lawsuit. And the 'assets' of Punch TV turned out not to really be assets at all. And the name, which was thought to be an asset, has turned into more of a liability. Sure, he's culpable, but what's to gain by going after him? Really, you just can't squeeze blood from a turnip! I find it humorous that he had the nerve to say that what I said was untrue. Notice the conversation (see below). Notice he never responded. He and I both know what I said was true.
Posted On: 05/13/2013 3:16:24 PM
Posted By: Ann1
Re: gmoneypenny #29192
JC is still liable to shareholders for his role in all of this -- not to mention advertising a certain number of households and affiliates when he didn't have them and hid that fact from SS and us too! He's obviously shady in his dealings --- with employees, partners, shareholders. But of all of these, shareholders can bite the hardest, IMO, if sufficiently provoked.
Posted On: 05/13/2013 5:18:10 PM
Posted By: Joseph Collins 29240
This is an untrue statement. We were in 60 million homes and we do have adverting, as a direct result of the work that in did.
Posted On: 05/13/2013 5:30:09 PM
RE: Joseph Collins #29240
Others claim otherwise. You sure you want to say it's 'untrue'?
Would you like to comment for shareholders on Phoenix and approx. 15 or so, give or take, other stations that we were told were 'on' but were actually 'off-the-air'?
