Les, you have to calm down and start looking for the value in people's posts instead of looking for what to disagree with.
I see you constantly defending MCIG mgmt by pointing out technically correct details, but missing the point.
Example: MCIG states they are close to finalizing two large distributor agreements. People point out "it hasn't happened yet". You reply, "it could have happened, but they may not have PR'd that it has not, so we don't know ... ". You logic is correct, but the spirit of what people are saying is "it most likely has not happened because why would they PR news that they are close to finalizing but then never PR that they closed the deal! If they had closed the deal, they would probably say so!"
MCIG has a history of PRing their good intentions and goals, but then in the cases where they don't achieve said goals, or they change strategies, they don't PR any updates and shareholders find out months later in a 10Q or from some third party news.
I'm long. I'm long a lot of shares. I think MCIG really will be a very well diversified holding company in the MJ sector and will be the #1 public company in the space.
I'm also realistic and see that they are very young, they are not perfect, and they have hit many many bumps in the road as they are learning how to grow into Paul's vision for the company.
When you defend all PRs and all mgmt decisions and argue against any post that implies MCIG as being anything less than perfect, you come across as very naiive. I can't imagine you actually are.
It would do you and others a lot of good to not always assume that MCIG mgmt is perfect, and instead realize there may be some validity to the questions and doubts people post on this board.
