Okay. I'll bite. Performance of the company: Seemingly underperforming business and/or business model that lacks the aggression for positive results that WE THINK they should have so that we may line our pockets with monetary rewards commensurate with our belief and fiscal investment in their development products while they continue to dilute the share value in order to stay afloat. But, what if it pans out because it all works in the end despite the rocky road? That about sums it up. Now, do we reamin faithful to that possibility or do we belabor the negatives on a daily basis so that everyone who still has some belief in this company's prospects should feel stupid, naive, and foolish for their hopes? As for being the focus of attention ssc, if you self-appoint yourself as the watchdog and guardian against the "Rusty's" of the world, you've positioned yourself for attention and scrutiny as to what your own motives might be. I'd like to think they're noble, but "protecting" us from the hyperbole doesn't seem to take into account that we do think about the company's shortcomings. By grandstanding for us implied stupid people what you believe should be your obvious-to-all business acumen and brilliance hasn't exactly endeared your cause to me by way of its relentless method. Others can speak for themselves.
At one time I thought it would be terrific to have this company succeed for the benefits its product could provide to those with developing cancer. I still believe that, but I also think it would be nice for Manhattan Scientifics to succeed to finally wring out your wet blanket. Well, at least for a day or two until you decide it's not enough to detect itty bitty amounts of cancer cells, the company should have developed a machine that could accurately predict who will be stricken with the ailment among those not yet born.
