"No one on this board is in charge of updating the web site, so feel free to chew on them directly"
KP..is that so! you surprise me. Notwithstanding your wit, I made no mention in my last post that suggested anyone on this board was in any way responsible for the GRC website maintenance. However, what I was trying to highlight,as you are probably fully aware, was poor 'housekeeping' on the part of 'our company' and the wrong impression for investors...new and longs alike, that the continued use of a rejected CEO creates: hardly good practice. My experience of the use of 'direct chewing' is not good. I never get the curtesy of a response...even if it is just to maybe 'correct' my viewpoint.
I must have upset them too much...
As to the conference call....yes, I agree PW was very positive, sounded genuine and said the right things.....but the proof of the pudding is in the eating....another year gone by and still no contracts. He said nothing in the call re the registration process that we haven't known for several years and my point was that the last S1 amendment was filed 20th July and now, nearly 6 weeks later where is an update from GRC to say either 'SEC are still examining' or 'GRC are further responding'. Is that too difficult for them? Maybe I should 'pop' down to London to have a quick word with PW??
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
