Grifco Inc (GFCI)

[best2listen]

10 Bagger, not Grifco's statements, Lyamec's

If Jim Dial has a controlling interest in Grifco then Lyamec could not "force" Dim Dial do their bidding with a share vote. Why issue a PR titled "Lyamec to Force Changes at Grifco International"? Why not something like "Lyamec and Grifco work together to implement changes in corporate governance"? We could have had three "good news" PR's and a stock price much higher IMO.

Lyamec damaged Grifco's market cap in their PR with language like "Lyamec to force changes" (as though Grifco were unwilling) and "historical shortfalls that may have impacted the company's performance" (as though they were unhappy with Grifco's performance).

IMO there would be fewer stockholders dumping their shares now if Lyamec had sounded like a happy partner their PRs. I think that the partnership's interests, and ours, would be better served if Lyamec did not use expressions like "force and implement executive level changes at Grifco International." What was Lyamec's motive for using misleading language in your view? I can think of three:

1) Coercion by PR - force Grifco to respond by hurting Grifco's market cap.
2) Controversy then resolution to generate interest in the Grifco/Lyamec deal - something like disk jockeys who attack each other on the airwaves to get more listeners
3) Some sort of short term stock trading game.

best2