Hi, pointandfigure.
I agree that it is most important that QPSA is building the platform and attracting users, which I think is what your interesting Twitter revenue/valuation figures show. It appears that QPSA is still very undervalued.
I also think it is positive that QPSA now has some real revenue, even though small ($167k).
But the basic point of my post was about honesty in communication.
I was very happy that they revealed that most of the millions in revenue was from a related party, but concerned that they continue, without let-up, to trumpet these revenues as if they are “real.” I would prefer details about the beginning revenues from SnapMeUp and details about how DSM is attracting new advertisers rather than this continuing misleading focus on the Ancira donations.
Another example is the talk about cash flow break-even and EBITDAS. When you’re paying management mostly in stock, the cash flow figures are simply not meaningful IMO. When management will be paid in cash with stock as an addition, then the real cost of doing business will be much higher, as we all know.
For me, this persistent lack of straightforwardness brings into question the reliability of all statements, and this can only hurt a company. That's why, for example, I am anxious to see "proof" that the DSM platform really is attracting advertisers.
JMHO
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
