Thanks for your kind advice. However, I just wanted to put it out there. People can agree or disagree with me. They are free to come to their own conclusions. However the fact remains that the painting is gone from the walls and we still don't quite know what we got.
If you knew the norms of angel and venture investing, you would know that the equity picture would not have been so horrendous for the founders and for the prior investors. A normal CEO would sell growth and future orders. I believe that our CEO purposely timed it perfectly (we did not even have a chance to recover from the last of Brio's share sales) and contrived a desperate situation and share price, then sold it for 10 "magic beans", and tried to justify the sale pleading desperation and poverty that he helped to stage and create. The difference between our opinions may lie in who and what we know. However time will tell.
What is done in the open and daylight is likely positive, while what is done in shadows is likely collusion. You know that! You also know that how you judge whether a tree is good or not is from the actual fruit. Whether a gain or a loss, whether accretive (net value added) or dilutive (net value taken from shareholders). The market knows this is dilutive and a horrendous deal, and the sale was clearly not done in the light nor had any semblence of transparency.
