The Jailhouse

[CSykes]

"Diluted to death by the company"

This is exactly what I am talking about. You do not have a clue what happened do you? If you understood business a little bit better and took a more professional approach you might understand the problems Peter faced.

First off, before I ever got involved in RVGD, the damage had already been done when Peter decided to work with Carnes. When Carnes and group demanded conversion of their notes after most likely shorting the stock into oblivion. They caused massive dilution to the company. I don't expect a message board trained investor to even comprehend how difficult that makes things for a CEO.

RVGD was a start-up, anyone that invests in a start-up is taking a HUGE risk. That is investing 101 and blaming Peter for your losses only shows your lack of experience in investing. Lets see what the definition of a start-up is..

Start-up - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Startup_company

A startup company or start-up is a company with a limited operating history. These companies, generally newly created, are in a phase of development and research for markets. They have an uncertain future, and may result in a spectacular success, or failure. The term became popular internationally during the dot-com bubble when a great number of dot-com companies were founded. A high tech startup company is a startup company specialized in the high tech industry.

When you invest in a start-up you are taking a huge risk since a large number of them fail. When Peter set out to start this business I don't think he planned on a recession and $5 gas. I also don't think he planned on having his initial financier stabbing him in the back. The odds are already stacked up against a start-up, these situations just made things worse.

I believe that Peter's plan did not work out well for him. External forces such as bad financing, a weak economy, poor investor confidence and a weak market all played a roll in the performance of the company. This made it difficult for him to raise the capital he needed effectively.

I don't agree with how he handled a few things, but investors blaming him need to bear some of the responsibility for the decisions they made. Nobody forced anyone to invest in a start-up with no proven revenues or guarantee of success. They took the risk.. and lost.

Now, had this been a company that was not a start-up, had operations and revenue, and the CEO run the company into the ground due to poor management, then I could see a reason for investors to be upset.

Bottom line, start-ups are an extremely risky investment. I think this is more about inexperienced investors who are playing with money they can't afford to lose and making bad investment decisions based on their level of risk tolerance. If you don't like loosing money, then don't invest in a highly risky business. Find a solid company, that is generating revenue and has a proven management team.

Wall Street takes no prisoners, you either have what it takes to survive or you don't. Those that don't will go down in a ball of flames. When I see someone blaming a company for their losses, I see someone who is not cut out to be playing this game, period. I would suggest a new hobby for those people because they are not going to survive in this market.



Disclaimer: http://www.numarketsolutions.com/Disclaimer.html
Charlatan's Learning Board:#board-9884