InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 18
Posts 1516
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/06/2012

Re: x993231 post# 144973

Tuesday, 06/13/2023 9:19:01 AM

Tuesday, June 13, 2023 9:19:01 AM

Post# of 195757
Not sure what you’re insinuating. Let me spell out the “story.” Invested heavily since 2007, based largely on the hype from management and the quality of the scientists associated with the company. Spoke to Steve, spoke to Z, spoke to JM. Have always believed in the science and the good intentions of the science team. Have always disagreed with the non-science operational side, including poor communications and lack of a qualified CFO to guide the ship, and, now, a legitimate tech CEO to support Lebby in his better-suited role as CTO.

The litany of muffed shareholder communications, lack of clarity over commercialization hurdles and realistic timelines, insider sales, poor salary and comp decisions, has resulted in LWLG digging its own grave with regard to shorts. There is simply no basis for any short seller to not see this stock as a goldmine given its multi-decade history not delivering.

So, why am I here and why do I complain? Because I still believe in the science; and also hope that a critical mass of us can cause a shakeup in management and cause it to chart a different managerial path. One can believe in the product but not in the execution. It’s the very basis for the existence of private equity. What I hate here is the intellectual dishonesty in constantly defending management’s execution and communication, which has been objectively flawed. I say that as a lawyer and CPA who has represented publicly traded companies for over three decades. It’s my opinion, of course, but I’m not sure that there’s anything controversial in what I’ve written above.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent LWLG News