Just to remind everyone that as shown below, PTSC had no problem confronting, even filing for arbitration to investigate and even allege wrong doing against people within their own organization and in essensce potentially tainting their purchase of Crosslfo, and PTSC itself. There was no gnashing of teeth or accusations of deliberate attempts to drive the price of the company down lobbed their way! Yet, when we, who have OUR OWN MONEY invested in the potential of this company contemplate investingating our options legally, it seems to completely unsettle people and pit one investor against the other.
I find this such an interesting irony that I had to mention it. Are people afraid of the perception or are they afraid of what might be discovered? It makes no sense to know less than to know more, IMO. The majority of people here have always expressed a frustration about the level of transparency from PTSC. Clearly, after all these years, PTSC won't elevate that level voluntarily, whether they are obligated to or not. Perhaps they are not obligated. Perhaps they are. Investigating those options should be welcomed and supported by shareholders, not scorned, IMO.
From the 10q:
Under the terms of our Agreement and Plan of Merger (the "Merger Agreement") with Crossflo, and certain of its principal officers, an escrow account was established to hold back approximately 10% of the merger consideration payable to the shareholders of Crossflo (the "Escrow Merger Consideration"). We contend that certain representations and warranties made by Crossflo and certain of its principal officers in the Merger Agreement were false when made, and were false as of the closing of the merger. We submitted a demand to the escrow agent on August 31, 2009 not to release the Escrow Merger Consideration to the Crossflo shareholders and to instead return it to us. Enough Crossflo shareholders have opposed our demand that the escrow consideration has not been released to either side.
On August 31, 2009, we initiated an arbitration proceeding before the American Arbitration Association against the three Crossflo principal officers who were signatories to the Merger Agreement for having provided false representations and warranties in the Merger Agreement and for nondisclosure of information about Crossflo during the due diligence process leading up to the Merger. Those three principal officers have not responded to the arbitration claim as of the date of this filing which is deemed to be a denial of such claim.
