It could be any one of a million EDIG excuses. But EDIG is responsible for delivering the product to APS. And they did not do that. Why are you even arguing? EDIG states right in the filing they expected to do that in June, but failed to do so.
Now you want to say because EDIG has no direct agreements with the parts suppliers and are entirely at their mercy, if they get stiffed it isn't their fault? Guess what, they decided to do business that way, so it is no one's fault but theirs. They paid themselves bonuses instead of paying the bills, so when a supplier will not enter into an agreement with them based on their track record, who's to blame?
When the manufacturer refuses to schedule units for production until EDIG can raise the cash to pay upfront, who's fault is that?
" your interpretation is always the most negative interpretation possible...to each his own"
My interpretation? It is EDIG that claims to be responsible for overseeing the production of these units for APS, EDIG stated they expected to deliver the units in June and failed to do so, EDIG reported they had $93K in revenue during that quarter. There is no interpretation there, just a reporting of the facts according to EDIG.
What do I have wrong? Is EDIG not responsible for overseeing production of the units for APS? Did EDIG expect to deliver the units in June and did not? Did EDIG have $93K in revenue in the quarter? What do I have wrong here?
According to their own statements, EDIG failed to deliver the products on time, but you want to argue that?? They had $93K in revenue as a result of their failure to deliver. They had less revenue than a average Powerseller on Ebay working out of their basement. Now you want to crow about a "record" quarter?? Glad they fooled you with that one, because no one else is falling for it.
You are the one that is actually ignoring facts and the SEC filings to spin fantasies about record quarters; based on nothing more than what some message board hype told you.
