InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 554
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/30/2001

Re: stockguy1000 post# 31157

Saturday, 04/30/2011 1:58:21 PM

Saturday, April 30, 2011 1:58:21 PM

Post# of 53787
What's ironic about your arguments is that no one is disputing that the company is on the right track. Many, including myself, aren't even arguing with the eventual need of a r/s to reduce the OS. What we're opposed to is that the company didn't do all that it could do for existing shareholders to get the pps up prior to proposing an r/s so that any r/s didn't need to be such a large ratio resulting in an illiquid float. The company put the cart in front of the horse. The controller should have been hired, audit firm retained, inside shares bought, GM news released and proxy not issued to closer to when an uplisting was closer on the horizon.

Why there was such a rush, in conjunction with the nature of other proxy amendments raised concerns as to what management's actual intent was (and maybe still is, since nothing has or hasn't happened yet).

This whole proxy has been an IR disaster.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent VTSI News