zooey
13 hours ago
While this is your thousandth time to talk about my account and my average. Sounds legit, bro. You couldn’t manage your impotent pump show with all those twenty dollar bills flying in. However, to answer your question, I would not care to manage your, “account.” I choose not to mingle with chemically dependent voyeurs who spend their “golden” years trolling message boards for human interaction. As your “conscience” saved you from that bad ass pump show you had, it will possible rear its ugly head in your new venture of antagonizing folks on an online forum. All the best, bro.
By the way, what is NYFB? Just spell it out hedgefraud.. you can do it! Make sure you deflect when you reply. Do that one about Tony claiming to make 1.8 million again! Use that when you say I choose to mingle with penny stock scam CEOs. I would say enjoy your day, but all you have going is that cold keyboard. Shine on, bro.
hedge_fun
1 day ago
First of all Shadow, it was shared on……
the BLQC board, and probably being discussed elsewhere. I didn’t find it, someone else did.
Secondly, don’t you just hate it when I’m proven right?
It’s rhetorical.
Lastly, all I did was come here and warn folks about that POS, and I basically got the same smart ass type response you just gave.
You’re a good fit here!
Have a nice weekend.
hedge_fun
1 day ago
Remember, APRU invested nearly $200K in ISBG........ie
Alonzo Pierce, which makes this relevant. I only came here to warn folks about that clown and all hell broke loose. But it has been fun.
After a couple of name changes, ISBG is now BLQC (BlockQuarry).
On Thursday, October 3, 2024, RB Capital, a family-owned and operated San Diego investment company, filed a complaint in the US District Court for the Southern District of California against BlockQuarry Corp., formerly known as ISW Holdings, Inc. The complaint alleges several causes of action, including breach of contract and anticipatory breach, stemming from a series of loans made to BlockQuarry.
According to the complaint, RB Capital loaned approximately $12.5 million to BlockQuarry, a Texas-based energy and infrastructure company which has historically focused on Bitcoin mining. The initial lending began in early 2021, when BlockQuarry, along with its principal Alonzo Pierce, persuaded RB Capital to provide around $7.5 million through a series of Convertible Promissory Notes. These loans were justified by BlockQuarry’s claims of expected growth and specific assurances regarding the use of funds.
However, the complaint states that RB Capital later discovered these representations were misleading, as the loan proceeds were not used as intended. By August 2021, BlockQuarry requested additional loans, asserting that the company needed further financial support to achieve its projected success. This led RB Capital to issue short-term bridge loans totaling an additional $4.7 million in August and September 2021.
Despite these loans, BlockQuarry reportedly failed to improve its financial standing and continued to seek more funds from RB Capital. Even after falling into default on previous loans, RB Capital made an additional bridge loan of $627,000 and agreed to restructure the existing debt, converting $4 million of convertible debt into preferred stock. BlockQuarry assured RB Capital that these measures would enable the company to secure new investments and repay its obligations.
However, the complaint details that BlockQuarry ultimately defaulted on all loans, with its financial condition continuing to worsen. Following RB Capital’s refusal to extend further loans in late 2023, BlockQuarry allegedly distanced itself from the lender. On November 22, 2023, RB Capital formally demanded repayment of the outstanding amounts, but BlockQuarry and its counsel reportedly refused to respond.
In February 2024, RB Capital initiated arbitration against BlockQuarry to enforce its rights under the bridge loans, as stipulated in the loan agreements. However, BlockQuarry responded with counterclaims disputing liability under the Convertible Promissory Notes, claiming they were not subject to arbitration. This led to delays and increased costs for RB Capital as BlockQuarry insisted on a multi-arbitrator panel and sought to have the arbitration held in Texas, a request that was ultimately denied.
Despite multiple opportunities to comply with arbitration requirements, BlockQuarry failed to pay its share of the initial deposit required by the American Arbitration Association (AAA). Consequently, the arbitration panel terminated the proceedings due to BlockQuarry’s breach of obligations.
RB Capital now seeks to enforce an arbitration award that requires BlockQuarry to cover the costs incurred during the arbitration process and to repay the significant amounts owed under both the bridge loans and Convertible Promissory Notes. The complaint asserts that the court has jurisdiction under various federal statutes, given that the parties are citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
hedge_fun
1 day ago
Yep, sure was. CEO's would put out......
BS claims about acquisitions, revenue projections, and the like, and I was paid to tout, which I disclosed as required.
BUT THAT WAS OVER A YEAR AGO.....bwahahahaha! I should be exempt per the Colombian!
That said, some folks know the CEO is lying and they regurgitate the lies without getting paid. They do it for free.
You're a good fit here Shadow.
Happy Friday!