The results of the negotiations could have a big impact, and if it is a favorable one I will happily change my view. But since they are in negotiations as you say, and the stock price is 3 cents, it totally confirms the validity of my post. The act of being in negotiations has added little or no value. To eliminate any difficulty anyone might have grasping this point, an example might help. If being in negotiations with other companies was worth anything, why would the stock be trading as it is? Why aren't buyers stepping up to pay 4, 5, 6, 10, 15 cents or more? With big names like Walgreens, WebMD and whole countries put out in multiple news releases for everyone in the world to see, it is not because people are not aware of what is going on. As someone posted recently, "tons of new eyeballs are on mmr". Obviously they see the same logic I see and are not mislead by hyperbole. Or to make it even ezier, Michael Bass - $1 billion; entire mmr market cap - 1.5% of that amount.
I simply state an objective observation based on all the known facts, not misleading at all. On the other hand, saying a company is worth tens and even hundreds of times more than its current value based on things that may or may not ever happen, information gathered from phone conversations, or forward looking statements with a demonstrated track record of not being delivered upon are much better examples of misleading.
Of course this is just my opinion and I put it out as a logical answer to a question that was asked about why the stock price is only 3 cents. I have not seen any other reasonable explanation posted.
To switch topics, Mr. Tiffer, here's a question for you. What will the explanation be if no meaningful revenues are reported from email frequency after Q2?
If anyone believes this post contains anything false, tortious or libelous, please point it out. I will promptly retract it and appologize or else explain why I believe you are wrong.
