Their purpose in going public was to gain access to capital markets. That means they will be selling additional shares when the time comes, i.e., when the pps reaches a level that makes it worthwhile to do so. If someone doesn't agree with what we have to say, it doesn't mean they must be blind to not see things the way we do. There is more than one way to interpret the scant information this company has made available about its operations. For example, who was present at the "directors meeting" on August 26, 2011 where it was decided to reduce the no. of authorized shares? I can just picture Lou Porter, Jim Porter and Jim's wife sittting at their kitchen table discussing how to reduce the A/S. I would think one of them must have said, "Well, we can always increase the A/S again later on, if we want. After all, we have complete control with all of those pfd shares and 1000 to 1 voting rights." Meanwhile, shareholders are thinking how magnanimous the Porters must be to reduce the A/S to remove the illusion of dilution. The fact is, they had to reduce the A/S for fear that the company could be taken over. If more than two thirds of those 3B shares were acquired by some third party, they would have more control than the Porters with their measley 2M pfd shares with 1000 to 1 voting rights.
Everyone has the right to agree or disagree with someone else's opinion. Because the Company is not sharing any information at this time, no one can say they have indisputable evidence to support their view of things. Even if they were to publish a PR, without third party confirmation, their word is only as valuable as their perceived honesty and integrity. All in my own opinion.
