it was already settled by a jury trial whereby CLCT won on all counts. This is just an attempt by an ill informed or desperate short to create fear, uncertainty, and doubt.
Why buy here when a large investor just shares at 78c that yield 6% and come with warrants? The money raised still barely covers expenses for the year
RVM is running higher finally on having the better fundamentals and being years ahead in the permit process
saying I am wrong and giving no other information is a stupid argument. Give the reason.
The market agrees with me. MGN should finish BELOW the 78c offering price as holders at that price are not getting warrants nor a 6% dividend. Ergo, you could see 60c here
I'll be sure to keep you off my list if I wish to remain anonymous. This is many years old case that Blake keeps trying to restart. PCGS just sued to collect legal fees which they should be entitled to since Blake lost his case by jury trial.
the 1992 PCGS patent for slabs and photo grading pre-dates all this stuff. Like I said 10X now, lawyers and patent lawyers and coin folk all weighed in on this years ago on the PCGS forums. Everyone except associates of Blake thought the suit had no merit. Blake can sue and re-sue as many times as he wishes, he is not going to win.
the point is this is a very old case that a jury has found for PCGS and NGC. You made it sound like a NEW suit was filed. This case is a total joke. As are those websites you are working on.
well, numerous attorneys, including patent attorneys have talked about this case on the PCGS forums for years now. It was laughed at by all except for 2 friends of Blake who do business with him and could gain in a favorable ruling. The case is over. The jury found on all counts for NGC and PCGS. You can go find the threads easily on the PCGS forums but I doubt you will do that because you have alterior motives.
hey Bob Judge from Wakefield MA. If you are going to post #$%$ on companies, make sure your don't register websites with your yahoo id. See you around
what is wrong about that? 29M shares now. 5M shares added and 5M warrants. New share count is 39M. That's 33%. Please show me the error of my ways
Why did the founder of PCGS testify for NGC? Because this suit was originally filed against NGC, the #1 competitor to PCGS. The case went to jury trial and Blake LOST. End of trial. A few months back PCGS sued Blake to recoup legal costs.
David Hall on the PCGS forums:
Monday January 21, 2013 7:52 PM
Part of the story for your enjoyment...One of the witnesses on behalf of NGC was...David Hall.
Blake also claimed that NGC had given marketing ideas they received from Blake about plus grading to PCGS. And that it was his idea to launch plus grading in conjunction with a major coin show. And it was his idea to use a very rare coin to illustrate plus grading.
Question: Mr. Hall, when did you first see plus grading in the coin market?
Question: Do you share marketing ideas with NGC?
Answer: (laughter) Absolutely not. I don't tell Mark anything and he doesn't ever say anything to me.
Question: How often do you launch a new product or initiative at a major coin show?
Answer: Twice a year for the last 20 years.
Question: And when do you use a major rarity you've graded as a tie-in to marketing?
Answer: Every time we've graded one for the last 25 years.
I heard that Blake was wiping away tears during his attorney's summation as the attorney talked about how Blake was an inventor whose ideas were stolen by NGC and PCGS.
I guess the jury didn't believe the act. And by the way, Blake is far from an innocent inventor, he's a patent attorney.
and now we learn their premise is based on a the flawed argument that PCGS and NGC have violated a patent that has attempted to patent "eye appeal" through the use of a "+" on the slab.