e-mail is a disgrace, he's why:
Option 1: Why is he talking about market and product expansion if he hasn't been successful in the regions the product exists today with the products that exist today? No growth? Didn't he say revenues would be exponential with VFizz? This says one thing and one thing only, the product isn't selling and the markets aren't working. NYC was a catastrophe and from the sounds of it the UK is the same. SoCal didn't live up to the hype either. What happened to the 'cut & paste' model into new markets that he disclosed and alluded to being a home run? Now all of a sudden new market entry is capital intensive?
Option 2: What's the difference? Perception doesn't change as PE/Market Cap is the same? Any reasonable financier knows this and isn't going to be 'tricked' into what the pereception of the company is worth because their share price is .12 instead of .0012. It's based on valuation and the company will be valued the same with 100 shares or 100,000,000,000.
Option 3: Again, doesn't change the valuation. There will be no 'better terms' because they decided to be an OTC at .12 as opposed to .0012 -- that's not how funding works. How is a r/s more advantageous to allow Minerco to 'grow at a responsible pace'? It doesn't, it just gives them the same value of ridiculous abundance to unload a/s (more now because this was not split proportionally to other shares, locked up or not) for dilution.
The sympathy "im a shareholder too" remarks are so see-through it isn't even funny. Everyone knows with a glance of any Q or K what his salary is and that his series C's are going to hold more weight since they are valued differently.
Finally, the note about the 250 mill a/s and not filing a 14C again is scary. With his track record, him saying "we do not want to be filing another 14c in the future" is far more scary than "we will not be filing a 14c in the future". He has gone at length previously to say he WILL NOT be r/s in the foreseeable future and this softening of language would tell me that this is not the last of hits to the common shareholder.
My 2 cents.
