Does anyone have any information as to the outcome of one of these "private meetings"?

Prior tried convincing them the New Rite of ordination is valid.

…The notion that your regular Traditionalist priest is anywhere near as prepared or knowledgeable as parish priests of old is a bad joke that many people seem to accept as true.

Agree. I was shocked to discover that one of our former pastors was utterly unversed regarding usury.

A decade ago I tried unsuccessfully to get the FIRST edition of Michael Davies' Order of Melchisedech. In the first edition, his study concluded the N.O. rite is invalid. Subsequent editions concluded the contrary.
HAs anyone compared the differing editions?

I see the Book digitized on this site, searchable text, but which edition it is? I am incompetent ...sorry. Probably (1979 or ) 1993...as '93 is in the header. 
Extremely thorough web page ☆☆☆☆☆

https://www.catholictradition.org/Eucharist/melchisedech-chp7.htm
Excerpt of Chapter VII
"....In view of the significance attached to this prayer during the Reformation controversies, its omission from the new rite can only be understood by Protestants as a retreat from the fullness of Catholic Eucharistic teaching-----and it has been seen as such, as Chapter VIII will show. This is what Canon Estcourt has to say with regard to the omission of this prayer by the Lutherans-----his words merit careful study.

Considering that these words had been introduced into the rite with the view of impressing on the mind of the ordained that he did receive a power of offering propitiatory sacrifice; considering that the practice had been in use nearly five hundred years, and had been generally adopted throughout the Western Church; considering that the delivery of the chalice with these words had thus become an integral part of the rite of ordination; considering that the Lutherans denied the Catholic doctrine of the Holy Sacrifice and of the external Priesthood; considering that the omission was made on the express ground of objecting to the faith and doctrine signified by these words; it would seem that neither the bishop nor the persons ordained could have the intention of conferring or receiving such a priesthood as the Catholic Church understands and believes, and that therefore they would neither of them intend to do what the Church does. In this view the validity of the ordination would be extremely doubtful. Hence we come to the following principle: that the omission of the delivery of the chalice, or of the accustomed formula which accompanies it, if done purposely with the motive of denying the doctrine of the Church regarding the Holy Sacrifice, even if a rite otherwise Catholic and valid be used, renders the ordination at least of doubtful validity. 8

It is of great importance to note that Evangelical Protestants, who deny any distinction in essence between priest and layman, are prepared to accept a "tradition" of the chalice and paten provided it is not accompanied by any prayer suggesting that the newly ordained presbyter has been invested with a ministerial (external) priesthood giving him powers denied to the layman, particularly that of offering sacrifice. The Reverend Peter Toon writes that such a ceremony would indicate that the Church has given the new presbyter the right to "preside at the Holy Communion. If there is no hint of ministerial priesthood in the rest of the service, then no ministerial priesthood could be read into the delivery of the chalice." 9

Hence it is not the "tradition" of the instruments (which has been retained in a modified form in the new Catholic rite) which is unacceptable to the Protestants but the prayer "Accipe potestatem" which has been abolished. But, as will be shown in Chapter VIII, the new prayer accompanying this modified "tradition" is by no means incapable of a Protestant interpretation.

Agree. I was shocked to discover that one of our former pastors was utterly unversed regarding usury.

This is what happens when you ostracize every conservative man from the Society if they are not content with sitting down and shutting up. I could not believe that Bishop Williamson would recommend you to be ordained unless you had a thorough understanding of Jewry. 

The Society has gotten so desperate to boost their ordination numbers, that they are resorting to ordaining any Joe Schmo' they can get their hands on. Let's look at Fr. Franks' ordination class: 

1. Fr. Paul Isaac Franks, pastor in St. Mary's Kansas (pretty good so far)
2. Fr. Patrick Kimball, no longer with SSPX due to lack of jurisdiction issue (oh no...)
3. Fr. Reid Hennick, no longer with SSPX, became sedevacantist (nice!)
4. Fr. Francis Palmquist, no longer with SSPX, apostate ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ (oh... oh that's not good)

And now in 2025 we have fake priests so they can have an easy "win" over the Novus Ordo. "Look how they are flocking to us!"

Novus Ordo not priest, flocking to OLOS is a big problem!  Remember this, the Novus Ordo was all restructured. It means half of all clergy are cancelled, churches, schools and orgs cut in half closed. A so-called priest for 3-4 parishes which are now Civil Society Organizations which now answer tot  the United Nations.  Sounds bizarre, but it is all on line. Start with the restructuring and go to Civil Society Orgs and poof! you are in the U.N.

Should be ok though.