[PHGI]: Promoter Paul S. Davis (rrufff) goes on the attack defending Perihelion Global Inc. CEO
.
.
It is hard to understand why promoter Paul S. Davis attacks this stockholder by accusing him of creating "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" when all he is doing is pointing out that the $600,000 note that the PHGI CEO received has a prioriy over common stockholders.
Next thing you know, this promoter will begin his "coward" and "evil naked short hedge fund" accusations of stockholders who post on the message boards and bring out the red flags about PHGI and its CEO.
more on this later
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=24591414
_________________________________________
.
It is hard to understand why promoter Paul S. Davis attacks this stockholder by accusing him of creating "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" when all he is doing is pointing out that the $600,000 note that the PHGI CEO received has a prioriy over common stockholders.
Next thing you know, this promoter will begin his "coward" and "evil naked short hedge fund" accusations of stockholders who post on the message boards and bring out the red flags about PHGI and its CEO.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=24591414
_________________________________________
posted by the_worm06 | 11/15/2007 04:27:00 PM
2 Comments:
BASHER and short seller "the worm" is exposed and found to be posting illegally and detrimentally to profit personally.
Will the worm post this post on his own crappy little meaningless website to show he is fair and unintentional in his opinions and bias ??? Next thing you know, he will delete this message and continue bashing as authorities expected.
Next thing after that, he should expect the big black cars and the authorites subsequent arrest of his stupid ass as should be and will be.
Nice comments.
Thanks.
Keep reading the blog for some interesting "Research" reports on PHGI that are going to be posted in the near future. I am sure that you will like them very much.
Say, any thoughts as to why the same series of Preferred Stock has two different sets of terms, according to the company?
You don't think that people get indicted for issuing the same convertible preferred stock to investors with two different sets of terms do you?
regards,
the_worm06
Post a Comment
<< Home