Yes, it does make perfect sense when one is talking about real companies, but when one is talking about penny stocks where probably 95% of the companies are Mom and Pop operations with delusions of grandeur, and where more stocks are prone to PnD schemes, and where more companies end up failing, and are subject to scams, I would say everyone should be very skeptical about anything the CEO says, unless there is actual verifiable proof of those statements. When it comes to penny stocks I believe the focus should be on past history, past results, PR statements and whether they come true or not, and most importantly executions of a business plan, in addition to analysis of the competitive environment, past, present, and future.
One key reason not to believe a CEO is when you catch them in a lie or in a misrepresentation of the facts. Once that happens you should loose all confidence in that CEO. When it comes to Bruce I simply find too many PRs that have resulted in failures to execute, too many spin stories, too little results, and simply too many lies and/or misrepresentation to ever believe anything coming from Bruce unless it can be actually verified.
Why so many PRs about collaborations, channel partners, beta tests, field tests, code verification, and more without the credibility of a named party? To me that makes everything very suspect!
