InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 61
Posts 3673
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/27/2008

Re: Serenity post# 152201

Sunday, 11/21/2010 11:19:07 AM

Sunday, November 21, 2010 11:19:07 AM

Post# of 241040

If "we" are all shareholders...E and crew are the only ones being rewarded for the consistent decline of this stock. Yes..they have to pay their own bills and should be paid something but for the commander-in-chief to take a pay raise (see filing) is wrong. Should he be asked to go without pay? I am sure he can afford it but maybe he needs to at minimum take a 2/3rds cut in pay. Shareholders on the outside are asked to be patient, sacrificing their money (and health for some) in good faith that E will turn this thing around... where is E's sacrifice? That he appears to work 24/7? He is the CEO..that is his job. His sacrifice should always be the biggest. If he wants to ask people to have faith in him, to trust what he says...he needs to show the same type of sacrifice.



I wouldn't consider payment for services rendered a "reward". When your husband gets his paycheck on fridays, does he consider it a reward, or compensation for his services.

Where's Eric's sacfifice:
I wouldn't mind if he were to reduce his salary, but I belive considering his salary for 2005 was 10,000...2006 was 12,000...2007 was 74,000...2008 was 74,000...and 2009 was 120,000. He also put up a 100,000 property security for compensation recieved.

The man works tremendous hours in his efforts to build a successful comapny, while many on this board has made more money trading this stock than Eric has made the last 5 years. This ploy to have him work for free is nothing more than a ruse to make more money for traders. As stated in my earlier, I believe it should be tit for tat if people expect this from the CEO. He gives up his salary, and you have your shares restricted until he decides to take a salary.