InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 14
Posts 1794
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 06/14/2007

Re: billscomp post# 191391

Tuesday, 07/22/2008 6:06:53 PM

Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:06:53 PM

Post# of 246923
I'm not supporting anyone in any way for what it said or doesn't say. I'm just saying that the message was intended to address something that everyone was questioning at the time - and that was the legacy debt.

As for the other conversions that happened afterward, that came from and continues to be a result of what was purchased as value add to the shell. I'm trying to figure how everyone thought these assets would be paid otherwise?

Here is the main problem that Tom needs to rectify:

The legacy debt caused a drain on the resources that investors could have otherwise thrown to conversions due to true asset adds to the shell.

“A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”
Winston Churchill