I think Jorad’s comments are a little dodgy. He was asked for context for his earlier moderated comments but didn’t provide any.
The perspective of his posts also change.
Three posts ago he was in Australia and reporting on a phone conversation with the a court representative…
‘by the sound of things from the guy [court rep], smm will take longer than 3 days’
then, despite being asked, his posts simply didn't give any reference to the source or his location....
‘the judge has accepted the consent agreement with smm and sig, and he seemed very intrigued and convinced by it during closing, asking a lot of questions, but did not seem interested in avq case at all. this is not looking good!’
and the latest, now being in court himself…
‘I was there yesterday, court only for half a day. They were talking about wrapping up the case and the logistics of packing everything up, but also short mention of the smm agreement. The judge chuckled and said "well this could have resolved most of our issues and saved us a lot of time?" and the smm lawyer replied but I couldn't make out what he said.’
Of course, all possible that he has travelled there in between posts. He has no obligation to inform us his location or source, but in my view it seems a little dodgy.
Apologies to you Jorad if I have got it wrong.
AVQ Price at posting:
1.7¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
