No. You did NOT answer the fundamental question in your post re twitter and facebook. Instead, you addressed issues regarding how GoIP Global, Inc.'s clients might market GO800.
The fundamental question does not pertain to GO800 clients' marketing. The fundamental question arises from the ongoing Mickey Mouse methods of GoIP Global, Inc. to secure GO800 clients in the first place (i.e., "Mickey Mouse" sans either significant or best practices marketing to department heads, company executives, etc.). "Word of mouth," press releases, a volunteer sales team (mostly investors), and the half-assed jabs at "marketing" GO800 to corporate decision makers (i.e., the essential totality of marketing done by GoIP Global re GO800) WILL NOT likely create the investor-expected rapidly rising demand curve for the GO800 service.
Will such Mickey Mouse "marketing" tactics eventually get the GO800 service noticed and desired by portions of corporate America (thereby creating the indeterminate revenue stream for Mr. Sutton's alleged "future" post-revenue stream marketing)? Perhaps. Nevertheless, the current, unorthodox GO800 "marketing campaign" by GoIP Global will likely result in a significantly more gentle growth incline than the double-black diamond growth incline probable with a rigorous and well-targeted traditional marketing campaign. Bottom line, using the current marketing model, GOIG might hit a PPS of about $0.25 by EOY. Using a more traditional, aggressive, professional marketing model, the GOIG PPS would probably rise above the prized $1.00 mark by EOY.
So, do we want GO800 and GOIG's PPS to succeed wildly over the remainder of the year, or do we continue hoping that GO800 just "catches-on" and spreads pursuant to the current marketing plan? THAT is the practical version of the fundamental question.
As a concerned and active shareholder, I know where I stand on the matter.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
