@dg33, I do not pretend to be an expert in all the paths that corporations can take. Others with more expertise in the seamy underside of corporate stock manipulation would be better sources of possibility. I can only comment on what I know and what I've been told. Last year, when I asked some very poignant questions about their $3.5 million round of fundraising, the company stated to me very unambiguously that there would be no reverse stock split and that the path to wiggle room that I was worried about with the new shares did not exist (I saw a potential path where new shareholders might effectively be able to vastly devalue older shares). Unless they are just lying -- and they have never lied to me -- I see zero indication that they have any nefarious plans to attempt to devalue older shares, other than the usual dilution that one normally sees when a startup goes a long time without making money.
I would add three observations to this:
First, I think that they think they are going to be profitable fairly soon, and are expecting a major inflow of cash next year from offshore activities (for starters). Everything they are saying (and have done for many years) points to a company that is trying to keep the share count as low as possible while bootstrapping its way into profitability. If you look at what they did ca. 2018, and subsequently, you see a company with what amounts to a five year plan to get its financial house in order. They cleaned up the financials with Dr. Musick, and hired the people needed to build a small but first class manufacturing capability. In the past year, they sucked it in and raised the money required to carry out the balance of the plan. To me, the delisting was something that they saw as a possibility, but basically viewed as a "so what?" kind of thing -- i,e., "We're in the middle of this five year plan, and we don't really care whether we stop trading for a time in the middle of it. Why the heck should we divert valuable resources to an accounting firm right now?" And I believe that to be true because I think the insiders at VB expect to make a LOT of money when they get to the end of the plan -- none of them are looking to jump ship while the destination is still in sight and the company is making great progress toward it.
Second, and very simply, how could the company actually do what people are fearing, short of closing shop and starting over with a new equity arrangement? I know that's a naive question, and that's why I would welcome the input of more knowledgeable, experienced people. Whether the company is public or private (it is effectively private right now), it has an equity structure. They can't just burn shares unless they do a reverse stock split (which would affect the insiders as well, and would serve no purpose). All they could really do is some sort of dilution that is somehow structured to benefit insiders. But I have no idea how they could get away with that, and even if they did, the lawsuits from people like me would shut them down.
Third, and finally, I have grown to trust the people who run the company. The big exception to that now is Zamora -- whom I have no reason to mistrust, I just have had no interaction with him. Most small startups don't answer the phone and respond to E-Mail like the people at VB do. They answer questions quickly and directly. That is not how people operate if they have nefarious plans to steal your money. I am comfortable that what they are doing is on the level. Now, to be clear, this doesn't mean that they will succeed with the SEC, or that the SEC won't draw out the process. That's out of VB's control. But assuming that goes well, and they can find market makers willing to deal in the stock, my expectation is we will all hit the market with our equity positions intact.
