Wrong! The only option you leave open with a comment like this is/ was to keep buying or get others to throw their money into this. And what do you think the financial result would have been? Let me make it easier, what do you think the financial result would have been with a company that couldn't follow up on their so-called business deals or keep their word about the stock not being reversed again and so on? And if Bal was the problem, what does that say about the company allowing him to continue? And continue as long as he did? Legit company and stock, just inept? People don't invest in inept. Legit company and stock, corrupt or scammy ? Like I said in another reference from my post: banks stay away for a reason. And it's not because they know they can make money. Whether you want to technically say the company isn't a scam is just semantics. If it quacks and walks like a duck.....and here we are ten years later. Is the stock/ company better than it was? The easiest answer is a simple So What if it is? A 50% improvement on junk is still junk. It's still a junk investment no matter how you call it. 5k from the new guy doesn't cut it when there are loads of institutions etc willing to pour in, and yet no one ever does on this one. So, it doesn't surprise me with all the evidence out there, you're still going to find fault with everyone or everything, except your own possible foolishness, directly or indirectly.
Simply saying the company/stock is a scam only helps that agenda above, keeps people away (reducing the likelihood of lawsuits), so management and its funds could get away with it. Thus you are part of said conspiracy directly or indirectly.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
