I am humble and realistic enough to know that we are not seeing the totality of the work being done or the strategy being employed. I liken it to a guy working at a 9-5 job criticizing the US government for its war in Iraq when that individual has no clue about the totality,aim, scope, or enemy. The public, in both cases, is not to be blamed for being against something they know little about - we assume transparency, and thus, feel confident in our opinions and right to expres them. Unless one has access to top-level information or global strategem we are only nipping at the heels of an elephant. Rightfuly.... but probably ignorantly.
USSE chooses to negotiate with small companies. Theo nly thing I canglean from that is that they are trying to posuition themselves to be a leader and not a cog. They are trying to acquire cogs - not end up being one. It is a visionary, greedy, and risky approach. As shareholders, we have to remember that the only way this stock will ever become the goliath is to properly handle its David-days. These are the David-days. To own a suite of products is todominate a market. There have already been failed partnerships with ridiculously flawed partners. All this tells us is the bent of our leadership. They seem to be swinging for the fences.
The announcement of the Illinois group is not significant logistically. Give me a break. It's almost innocuous. However, itis significant for its timing and the entity with whom they plan topartner. Announcing before the pony show shows they do not put all their cards on the table. They wait. Good or bad, the absence of information does not mean there is no information - the investor would be wise to see the character of the company in this regard.
Secondly, they are dealing with an entity that is microscopic at best. Again... and again. It's about the terms. WHen you are the little guy, you accept terms. WHen you are the big guy, you dictate terms. The terms of each and every agreement they make will determine their success more than anything else. I, then, see their partnerships all have one lonk - those with whom they can dictate terms. The ones who don't capitulate completely (or who think better of the terms after some reflection) end up not being our partners. Our little management team has some bully in them. It's worth noting.
50,000 shares that you arent daytrading with should be enough to benefit from a potential boom without destroying the family finances if it falters. It should beenough to leave in for 35 years without blinking. Be wise.
Remember, those who nip at the elephant are too close to it to see where it's going. From your vantage point, it is impossible to see where the elephant is going. You may know the route it should take, but you can't posibly see the path it takes on a decision by decision basis. Even with a baby elephant like USSE its more effective to learn the habits, character, and mentality of its leadership... then the information you are able to see will be interpretable. Otherwise, you'll simply be left comparing BTU's, measuring output, and calculating fertilizer revenues ad nauseum. Good stuff, all, but limited by knowledge and access to the details.
AI
