Good points and observations all the way through.
The other thing that seems to make them different from the usual penny stock scammers is that they were in business prior to going public, and had actual installations. Although you say, "The photos of past jobs look like back-yard projects" -- and I tend to agree -- it could be true that they simply weren't concerned (at the time) with taking 'high quality photos' that would have made their projects look more non-backyard-y.
I also wonder what is keeping them afloat (I noticed the same thing about Vinnie seeming to be a well-funded wanderer), and it is a bit of a worry that their offerings aren't generating any operating cash; but on the other hand, prior to going public, the projects they did must have gotten funded somehow. So I presume that in the immediate future, new projects will be paid for by the customers (like the old projects were), with financing worked out somehow.
This raises a point in my mind about the difference between able to do current and future installations, and being able to 'be the bank' (=the "Finance"-ing element in "Green Stream Finance.) My understanding is that the stock offering is meant to help them 'become the bank,' and then make money on financing the projects they would be doing anyway.
Although that seems to be a reasonable business goal, having people on their team with questionable backgrounds in financing [toxic lending] certainly raises elements of doubt about their future success on that front. HOWEVER, as mentioned, their past projects and their current one obviously didn't involve THEM being the ones to lend their customers the money for their projects, so that suggests to me that the GSFI itself does not need to borrow money [from toxic financers] to make their projects a reality.
Now, could their 'toxic lenders' as officers hurt their potential customers who need to borrow money for their projects? I suppose … but what's the business model there for future success, or even short term goals of making-quick-money-while-burning-others-in-the-long-run?
--
Lastly, I would hate it if they lowered their offering to $.01/share or lower, as I'm still holding from pre-Ken days (bought in at then .0001). Maybe instead they will abandon the goal of becoming financers, and just stick with doing the projects that are financed by whatever means they have been financed in the past.
