![](https://investorshub.advfn.com/uicon/564105.png?cb=1547105359)
Thursday, November 14, 2019 3:55:58 PM
But my questions (re-stated below) aren't who is better; my questions are "What can they do?" and "What actions can they take?" (which is really a re-statement of "What can they do?" but tries to drive home the point of the question). Instead, people seem to want to answer a different question, one that I did not ask, and one which allows people to cast blame and point fingers, rather than propose solutions. I'm looking for solutions, specific actions which any team, new or old, could do to fix this situation.
Original questions, verbatim:
What do you think new blood can do differently? What specific actions can they take to secure funding for a company whose stock is so strongly suppressed by rapid-turnover investors?
Message in reply to:
There is a reason for the rapid turnover. No?
Well it's due to managements mess with all factors of this company - hence new blood would "possibly" be a better ensemble to obtain funding.
Not sure why you don't see that... I'm pretty sure you would acknowledge that the old blood killed funding, so now what are you getting at.
You really believe the old blood gets funding, and new doesn't. Why?
FEATURED POET Wins "Best Optical AI Solution" in 2024 AI Breakthrough Awards Program • Jun 26, 2024 10:09 AM
HealthLynked Promotes Bill Crupi to Chief Operating Officer • HLYK • Jun 26, 2024 8:00 AM
Bantec's Howco Short Term Department of Defense Contract Wins Will Exceed $1,100,000 for the current Quarter • BANT • Jun 25, 2024 10:00 AM
ECGI Holdings Targets $9.7 Billion Equestrian Apparel Market with Allon Brand Launch • ECGI • Jun 25, 2024 8:36 AM
Avant Technologies Addresses Progress on AI Supercomputer-Driven Data Centers • AVAI • Jun 25, 2024 8:00 AM
Green Leaf Innovations, Inc. Expands International Presence with New Partnership in Dubai • GRLF • Jun 24, 2024 8:30 AM