Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Acumen, a P.O. box is not "puffery". A P.O. box is pretty basic stuff when you have a business.
Run, well of course.
Hogman5, I wish it was baloney and it is very frustrating but, IMO, it is the driving force behind the lack of news.
"Who ever is controlling the Company wont allow very much transparency.Just enough too dangle the old carrot..." Doggiestock, maybe but the lack of transparency ,IMO, has more to do with outside interests like the DOD, etc. The carrot is not dangling at this time, in fact it is very obvious that the carrot has gone missing these last few months. If the carrot was dangling, the s/p should be higher than it is at the moment.Right??
Jacked, Maybe. Then again, maybe not.
Cool, maybe Mr. Bocchichio's quietness is a good thing.
Acumen, thanks for the question. I will also ask him how he was able to feed his family this past year with no money coming in. Anything else?
Be Real, I would like to go and am leaning in that direction. I have not asked my wife for permission yet, so it is not official.
Acumen, that's funny.I don't agree but it is still funny. Perhaps considering the patent they just applied for their niche should be "tethered or turned loose".
Check out the June blog for GTC-usa. Nice.
Run, who is "them"? And it is - btw,wtf is the status of the blimp.
Bill77b, you are right, it is a matter of personal impression. The only thing I might add is that Clark is responsible for over 65 mergers and acquisitions so he must have minimal communication skills.IMO.
Why the talk about Clark and Estrella not being well spoken? I was at the S/H meeting last July and thought both made excellent presentations.It was apparent that both were well versed in giving professional presentations relating to business and finance. That is a large part of the business.
I guess if you don't like the message, shoot the messenger.
Acumen, please no mas memories. Let's look from the present into the future.
Jet,wow, it sounds like you are upset about the opinions that I espoused a few days ago and are just now commenting on. In any event thanks for appreciating my opinions. I firmly believe in what I said.
Acumen, thanks for your concern.Please do your DD. Run can do his and I am very capable of doing mine.The point is that we have to form our own opinions.Time will tell what the real outcome will be. Enough said about the DD thread.
Well, Acumen my feeling is that the deal will play out just fine. Not to worry. I would think that both Glenn Estrella and Mike Clark, who have many years experience in the financial world worked out a favorable deal.
Jet, you are definitely entitled to your opinion. No complaints here.
My opinion : There are many interested parties regarding the Argus UAV.The Argus would conveniently and cheaply solve many surveillance/ reconnaisance needs for these interested parties not the least of which is the DOD. The impact of this equipment on security would be significant.
Start looking at the present into the future...
It does no good to look back at past failures.
Jet, A N/R has been released a while ago that the DOD is testing the Argus. You should know that when the DOD tests are underway they don't say much if anything about ongoing testing.Why don't we just let this scenario play itself out. If the DOD in the future says they have stopped testing and don't have an interest anymore,you will be proven right in your assessment. If on the other hand they say that they have a use for the Argus and sign a contract, then you will be wrong in your assessment.
No offense, but I hope you are wrong.
You are absolutely right, Cole. " It must be black". There is no other reason that the Company would be silent.
Jacked, maybe I am wrong but the way I understood Raymer's reduction in shares was that some of his options ran out. Again as I understand it,options are counted along with shares held. So when options expire unexercised they are subtracted from share totals. If that is the case then, he didn't sell any of his shares.
As for my last comment in my post, people do short and hedge stocks for various reasons.
Madmonks, I can appreciate your perception as to why the stock price is low. No doubt it is about confidence or lack of confidence in management and ultimately the ability of the company to deliver.
However, the present management team has been in place less than two years and in that time has turned the company 180 degrees in the right direction. Everyone here knows the litany of successes starting with the settlement of the SEC issues, lawsuit settlements, Acquiring GTC, patents , DOD invitation to demonstrate, the launch of GTC (usa) websites, etc., etc.
All of the above are positive events.During this time management has been fairly quiet and has not hyped their position contrary to what you state if I read you correctly.
As you say, perhaps we are just fatiqued and the stock won't respond til something monumental happens, like a contract or two.
Wait, there could be another scenario that has not been mentioned here.A person or persons are actively holding this stock down because of some other reason.
Bear, I believe most of the shareholders that have stayed with this stock who know the story have already averaged down. However when more positive developments happen more averaging down plus general interest will help to drive the stock.
The burning question still in my mind is why the stock is so low. Even with good news that has occured over the past few months the price continues to sink.I just think with the turnaround, new management,new funding, GTC positives, and a high powered lobbyist on board the stock would be heading North slightly.
Cole, as to your question "Can you think of any over the top "positive" descriptions for this "company". I really can't. Those that are positive about WSGI,IMO, are fairly even-keeled and know their limitations concerning the Company.Do you have any?
Cole, you are right, I forgot about "engine of theft". So we have "proven scam","penny stock vampire"' "engine of theft"...
Are there any others that you can think of?
Cole, O.K., "proven scam" and "penny stock vampire" back to back in the same sentence is a little over the top. Please, could you spread the derogatives out a little bit to make it more believable.
Jet, thanks for explaining. I just got confused when you used scam and ligitimate in the same sentence.But I really think this company is beyond the dream stage.We are in working prototype stage that the DOD is testing at the present time.The only way your fears will be put to rest is a contract for the ship that is viable. I have no problem with your position.
Jet.
"the people running this scam know how to do it legitimately."
Huh?
Cole, I am not asking a lot at all.Nobody is right all the time. Circumstances change. Opinions change. Companies change. Their are management changes resulting in new directions.Scams involving corrupt management are cleaned up and perpetrators end up in jail. Get my drift?
Believe me, I understand opposing views and positions.That creates a healthy environment for discussion.So if it is determined that one view is wrong over the course of time. Admit it. I don't think that is asking a lot of any one person or group.
Jet, I don't think anybody here wants your head on a platter or any other body part for that matter but if a contract IS signed by a brand name company for product from WSGI, or any U.S government agency or recognizable foreign country, a simple apology to the group would do nicely, thank you.
BB, I agree and would like to thank Mide and others for the in depth analysis of this funding agreement.It is obvious that these "financial" guys know funding agreements.They are building an ongoing endeavor out of the ashes of a disaster.GLTA
Cole, sorry you feel that the current news is not good. Your posts provide a low water benchmark for where this company used to be. please try to catch up and begin to understand where the company is today.
Hog
Kinda presumptuous of you to say Argus can't be used in it's present configuration isin't it? GO GIANTS!
Run, as they say . do your own DD. "Is the DOD REALLY interested"? Are you kidding me? And "this tech has been around for over a decade". Right, that's why they are applying for a patent. Get real , Man.
Coastie, you may be right. We all have different pain thresholds.
" They registered their INTENT to sell". We don't know if they sold. My point is it would make no fiduciary sense to sell at a loss.I just can't believe that investors would do that.
Coastie, thanks for your input. However in looking at the S-1 those 22 million shares were offered at .105 cents and ,I assume, sold at .105 cents to the buyer.Why would the buyer of .105 cent shares want to sell them at .035 cents? What am I missing here?
Moosh, I have no clue on the legal aspects of the question.I just thought someone here would be keeping score on the sale of stock Hudson received in their settlement if that's even traceable.
It seems fairly calm today in the WSGI trading pit. Is there any way to tell if Hudson Bay has "left the building"?TIA
Cool, good call.
Cole and Jet and Coastie only show up when they start to feel uneasy about the company moving forward. I take it as a very good sign.