Where to begin ...
First of all, are you assuming that because you or any other shareholder has not gone through the vetting process of Barney Visser and his companies that LQMT management has not? That is a huge ASSumption and I would hazard to guess a very bad one at that.
For as excellent as you are at breaking down technical and operational issues and digging up DD on LQMT, the industry, the players, etc ... you seem to be totally out in left field in terms of understanding corporate governance and what a shareholder of a publicly traded company should be able to expect and demand in terms of shareholder rights.
It is definitely up to management to do exhaustive vetting of strategic partners, suppliers, and even customers before moving forward on entering contracts and relationships with them ... especially when assigning something as invaluable as intellectual property. The CEO is accountable and responsible to the BOD to assure such steps are taken and that the vision and mission as approved by the BOD is being properly focused on in the implementation of strategic plans and commitment in contracts.
Management cannot and should not be expected to be updating shareholders on milestone attainment and action plan execution every step of the way. Sorry, but the shareholders are just not in the loop on things like this on a day to day, week to week, or even month to month basis. I would expect that the CEO is communicating with the BOD as necessary and expected according to his agreement of requirements of performance of his role as CEO.
Shareholders find out what is going on when the company decides to make information publicly available, and not a moment sooner. We have no more right to knowing what is going on than someone who does not own a single share of LQMT stock.
As shareholders of the company, if we don't like how the company is being managed, our recourse is through the BOD ... not management. If we don't feel the BOD is doing the job they should in performance management of the CEO, then we need to let them know. If they don't provide satisfaction, we need to try to get them replaced. If we cannot succeed at that, then we need to sell our shares.
But expecting and demanding the company to provide more transparency ad nauseum and do more PRs and conference calls etc ... to hold our hands and make us feel all warm and fuzzy about our investment is ludicrous.
Of course we would all like to know everything that is going on behind the scenes, in front of the scenes and everywhere else but that just is not reality. And add to that how many NDAs we are involved in and that just adds to the information void. But that's the way it is and the way it always will be with LQMT and any other company like LQMT ... no matter how much we scream for more.
p.s. by the way, wasn't it you who said right around the close today that you think you are more bullish on LQMT now than you ever have been? And wasn't it also you who told me in one of our first exchanges that doing solid DD and assuring good management is in place is the biggest factor in evaluating a company before investing? Yet you are invested here and launching on management time and again on this message board. Seems to be some inconsistency here.
AI
