What IF Phil is intentionally deceiving investors? It has been done MANY times before by many other CEO's. Look at the court files where CEO's are being brought up on charges. Now, all those shareholders believed what those CEO's were telling them also, until the proof hit them hard in the pocket books with minimal to zero left in their accounts. So, playing devil's advocate, let's say Phil is misleading us - what proof do you present to demonstrate that he is actually carrying through on the MAJOR majority of his promises. Charleoi provides his evidence to present his case of conerns, and some (very few), shareholders present their evidence to the contrary which shows Phil is to be trusted. However, what I see most is:
A statement that the company would make $75MM in revenues last year and they only made something like $51MM,
No detailed explanations of our debt, and the conditions under which that debt is being held
No detailed explanations of the AR's - we shareholders are left to guess and hope that the guess that has the most positive spin on it in regard to Phil's integrity is the most correct spin,
3 dividends that were promised that have not been delivered or even explained about where the company is in the process of being delivered,
No forms filed showing company buy-back, or even Executive buy os shares, when this was promised over two months ago to prop up the stock price
No layout of how they are going to decrease the fully diluted OS as they had promised by the 05 10K, but our OS has now increased to a whopping 138MM shares.
No explanation of how the convertibles that are a huge overhang from previous deals are being handled
No detail of where all this increase in OS is coming from - no forms filed to let us know. Are they debt conversion, payments for services, conversion of convertibles????? Us shareholders with money on the line here are getting no information regarding this and it is absolutely KILLLING our share price.
A promise to be on a different exchange almost a year ago,
No detailed layout of what each subsidiary is achieving with specific financials so that we have some idea of how those acquisitions are doing
And the list can go on for at least five more issues at hand that we are not getting direct feedback as to how it is affecting our invested money. Charleoi is well adept at elaborating on such.
So, now, there is a possibility; A more than average POSSIBILITY that Phil is deceiving us. And there are many other things on which he only told us half truths. So, Charleoi may, in fact, be presenting more truth than positive shareholders like you want to hear, but it is not able to be disproved because Phil is not willing to be brought to addressing such. So, your anser is to shut Charleoi up and ban him so that other shareholders who buy in do not have the full information about the risk they are putting their money at. That's right, hide what some see as the truth, refuse to be required to disprove it, but just shove it under the rug so that we can all be in the same boat whether it sinks or floats, at least we'll be here telling each other it is a great plan because, by George, we are certainly no going to peek at the possible risks. That is not real smart, IMO. Raging bull has alread banned the most negative posters. If you want a board that will tolerate only a minimal bit of questioning the running of this company, RB does you a great service already. Aren't shareholders allowed to find a board somewhere that will really contemplate the other side?
I don't care if you want me to help out as a moderator, but regardless of me helping the board by trying to organize the information in the iBox so it is helpful, and keeping the discussion from becoming continual pile-ons of insults that give noone information and only a few pleasure to read,
I have A RIGHT TO HEAR WHAT OTHERS SEE PUTTING MY INVESTED MONEY AT RISK. And you do not have a right to keep me from getting that information. This board may stop the access, and I guess people who are concerned about both sides of their investment - potential and risks - will just have to go somewhere else to discuss the risks, if the positives on the board here chose to stick there heads that deep into the sand.
I do not want to behave that foolishly with my invested money. So you just let us know what your decisions are. You can behave like total ostriches and ban our discussion of real concerns, or you can just ignore those discussions that you do not like to read and participate with a full, all encompassing board. As always, it is the board members' call. I am one board member that wants to see Charleoi's, and any other negative posters', positions and would love to see the responses that the positive posters have to refute such claims, if they are confident enough in the investment to participate. If you positive posters lack such confidence - ban people who see things differently from your discussions, it does not change that many people see such risks and will be less willing to support your share price until those concerns are addressed by the company. All you have to do is look at the chart and know that they DO exist, no matter how blindfolded you keep your eyes.
