But it would be a mistake anyway to renege on a promise, imo.
SIAF is growing the same way most fledgling U.S. companies grow. They issue equity on a business plan with imagination and good management. The US companies have access to private or venture capital. SIAF did not.
Successful U.S. companies continue to dilute until they reach the critical mass they intend, and then IPO. They do this at increasing valuations, if they are on plan.
Solomon's model was basically the same. I have to laugh when someone says a real dumb thing like his way the shares would be $5. Wow, no dilution. What a genius. There would also not be any fish farms.
And companies must meet their maturity level to get a proper valuation. PEG ratios are totally inapplicable to pink sheet OTCBB companies with negative cash flow.
In Sino's case, the plan calls for significant vertical integration, which we can see with the distribution network ahead of schedule. There are steps. And these steps the company takes to manage itself operationally are mirrored by gaining acceptance to more senior exchanges, hiring investor relations personnel, and garnering access to broader and deeper funding sources.
The fly in the ointment for the SIAF model was the decreasing valuations on the very small public market exchanges due to Chicom scams.
There were then hopes the price would rise to a modest $1.50, and now there are alternative plans to achieve the target, most often articulated in NTA targets.
I would agree that the marginal cap ex is detrimental to the shareholders. But it was not done in a vacuum. Commitments were made. Pretty much simple as that.
AI
