InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 5
Posts 461
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/29/2013

Re: billybobski post# 2835

Thursday, 06/06/2013 1:44:10 AM

Thursday, June 06, 2013 1:44:10 AM

Post# of 20114
If the CEO, in your opinion (and if you are correct)has no intention of production until after a legal win, then this would be the greatest mistake of all time. I for one certainly don't believe this is the case and I believe Ms Hendrick to be much smarter and no doubt believes in her product, enough to dilute her holdings (to a certain extent) and raise funds for production.

The R & D has been in existence for well over 10 years and probably a lot closer to 15. The interest in the company from it's very origin has been the technology and if I am one amongst many, then this is why we invested in the company in the first place. The lawsuit is contemporaneous to the current situation the company finds itself in.

Are we saying if the lawsuit did not exist, the last raising is all that is needed to commence production. I don't think this to be the case.
Production of the card (or any product for that matter) is paramount to provide the company credibility and to exhibit the fact VC/MC are infringing on a viable product.

Production of the SMME must proceed as if the lawsuit does not exist and in my mind this is the thought of Chaya as well, the frustrating aspect is that we do not know what she knows, including defence applications of infringing on a company that has no production or revenue stream.

I must say I am very confused about the last 8K - 6.67 units sold with each unit being 75,000 shares???

I do believe in the product and I do believe there is a great deal happening behind the scenes that we are not privy but inevitably will be very happy with in the end.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent SMME News