InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 57
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/20/2007

Re: Jerry12302 post# 2653

Wednesday, 03/28/2007 3:35:45 PM

Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:35:45 PM

Post# of 18807
Jerry,

Do you really have to talk slower while you type? Obviously, you think slower as well. Now that I am past the exchange of petty insults, let me respond to what you just “slowly” articulated.

RRGI has one product. That product is a TV show. The management of RRGI is responsible for insuring that the necessary elements to accomplish the goal of producing this sole product (a TV show) are set in place. They have been given more than adequate time to write a general script, grab a production company, and haul their lard asses down to what now turns out to be one of the shortest tracks in the country in which to film their 80 mph yawn. By now, they could have driven everyone down there in that much needed Pace Car.

As a public company operating with investor funding, they have a duty to shareholders to insure that they act in a prudent manner to accomplish what they purport will be achieved. Thus far, they have clearly failed to do this as demonstrated by innumerous production delays citing the absolute silliest excuses imaginable. RRGI has yet to produce a product.

Without even knowing what the product is, the performance of RRGI could be readily gauged by comparing the pro-forma statements to the financial statements. Projected goals are either met or they are not met. Production funds were either banked or they were not. It is a very simple concept Jerry and I seriously doubt that a pro-forma budget will be forthcoming from RRGI. Am I typing too fast for you?

For Schaefer to state that they have once again been totally blind-sided by yet another unforeseen event (i.e. No Production Funds) without having anticipated what the negative repercussions of such an event would be, clearly displays that as a management team, they are impotent. The only conclusion to draw is that If they are not completely and totally inept, then they are less than credible. Being less than credible is the only rationale explanation in my opinion that explains why the insiders (all of them) have cumulatively cashed in millions of dollars worth of restricted personally held shares of RRGI stock at any price attainable.

I fully understood what Schaefer was stating between the lines in his latest public banter. Did you?

Stan