bfiest, in context of what I just replied to Corporal, Ronin needs to show me they have vision for making Avid more profitable than just announcing they plan on cutting off PPHM research from benefiting from Avid net earnings for funding. If Avid is already profitable stand alone (seems it is), the underlying issue is what can Ronin do to grow Avid sales and translate gains to shareholder equity that isn't already in the queue with the current management team?
Consider the post from Threes earlier today. Threes noted how a presplit 100,000 share position would amount to about 14,000 shares post split and expressed concerns about profitability and risk of further dilution.
Then consider how maybe 20% of the 45 million outstanding shares are about what is being held by a few >5%, SEC disclosing investors or maybe 9 million shares. A 51% controlling interest hostile to the PPHM Board would need to tally to about 23 million shares. Figuring Dart preferences as a wild card for Ronin support, somewhere around 14 to 17 million shares in "retail investor" hands will need to align with Ronin against supporting the current PPHM directors and stock option holders. In turn, that means that somewhere around 1000 long term investors with holdings like those described by Threes need to be persuaded to support Ronin, fewer there are some large long term investors convinced for change.
I see myself as one of those thousand long term investors who needs to be convinced, situated like Threes and other long investors who profile similarly.
All this added together, I don't see that Ronin has made the case that their BOD candidates will bring customers and sales to Avid any quicker than the current Board. When it comes to getting value for PPHM tech, Ronin suggesting defunding the tech development while it is being groomed for sale and turn over to third parties comes off to me like the tech will be getting released at distressed value, which is a big red flag. If the tech value truly became distressed after the Phase 3 Bavi trial halt (I think it did), the ongoing R&D efforts to cull out value and advance prospects for new applications seems essential. Status quo leadership is not the party presenting that fire sale risk to long investors, so if Ronin is going to convince the 1000 retail investors like me to align with their interests, Ronin needs to offer more than leaving the pps floundering without support after their position entry while dozens of anonymous message board posters play off of existing long investor frustrations accumulated over the years. I am not sure if "where's the beef" or "show me the money" coins my sentiment here, but I am certainly not cheering in the streets for a PPHM occupation force entry. Not yet, anyway.
Best wishes and IMO.
KT
