InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 3
Posts 778
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 09/24/2009

Re: luckyrabbit post# 215533

Saturday, 06/05/2010 12:09:31 AM

Saturday, June 05, 2010 12:09:31 AM

Post# of 326383
lucky, When you took the gamble, you were relying on this company's management protecting your interest as a common shareholder, which is their legal obligation. The preferred shareholder has the written agreement to rely on. We have to rely on management [officers of this company.] This current management team has done nothing I can name to protect the interest of common shareholders. YA doesn't have to even worry about the written instruments. When the previous agreements no longer suit YA, they just get together with this company's officers and ammend them to suit them until they decide to ammend them again. Each time it is to the betterment of YA's position and to the detriment of our [common shareholder] position. Some would say this management kept us alive by surviving on YA's money at these terms. I would answer how many NEOM investors would be thousands of dollars better off if Neomedia had just closed the doors back in 2006, rather than continuing to pour money into this investment in the years since? Especially when hearing such words from IM as "we own the patents and we're in a strong position", or "some have wanted this for free but we're a business and we can't do that" or "we have many licensing agreements I can talk about in 6 or 8 weeks." The list of Iain's strategic announcements goes on but you get my point. Strategic for YA's scheme but not for our benefit. I could say a hell of a lot more but this post is to long already. I share your frustration and I would like to personally kick Iain McCready's two faced ass! Los [P.S. I'm not saying that I would nor that anyone should. I'm just saying I would like to. I'll bet that I'm not the only one who feels this way.]