The real thing that shareholders should be pointing to as mismanagement is the following:
That upon completion of the lawsuit, Sym used almost half the money recovered to pay himself back rather than reinvesting in the company.
Now, you might say "he was loaning money to the company", and if he had done so to cover important operational costs I would agree with you. Add up how much was spent on G&A salary over the course of the lawsuit, it's quite a bit. I have no way of knowing how the break down goes, but I would assume he was getting at least half of that money (probably more since he was the CEO). So in reality, he was loaning the company money to cover costs while he paid himself a salary from his failing company, a salary that put the company in a position that it needed to take out over $100,000 in loans so that when it finally had an injection of cash from the lawsuit, it was all spent on paying him back, rather than building the company. If he believed in his leadership ability, he would have forgone at least part of his salary, and not crippled the company with his cash flow management strategy. Again, not saying he doesn't deserve to make a salary, but it's small business, sometimes you need to step up to the plate and show leadership. It's painfully ironic to me that the single largest drag on this company is also the thing that costs us the most money.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
