First you take umbrage at a suggestion not necessarily directed towards you, then you proceed to attack, not the logic so much, but the poster. why is that?
Re: "That is patently absurd, and made me laugh. Sorry"
which part? that the proven wrong show some class, or the suggestion they not post/spin for awhile?
------------------------------------------------
Re: "It's only "bad news" if you think it is. Plenty of smart folk, their intellect being previously demonstrated here, unlike some others', think it isn't bad news at all"
Intellect aside, it's just not the point of the markets, and most real investors laugh at the so-called intellect of the penny stock cruisers. Hundreds, maybe thousands of new investors, most if not almost all are down real $ on gzfx. Regardless of the miles of useless posts saying otherwise, so sell intellect sentinel, if it helps hide the truth. That truth, to date, gzfx is big loss for most gzfx investors.
------------------------------------------------------
Re: 110% growth is "minimum"???
Yes 110% growth can certainly be minimum, what a 110% of 600? And better yet, why play word games with percentage games??? If the numbers were good to great, then post the numbers, not the spin percentages based on wording about one quarter over something previous quarter. Look at the wording, devious IMO, much like the "It is the intention of".
------------------------------------------------
Re: "Careful, "appearances" can be deceiving when you don't have all the facts, which we don't. The smart investor keeps an open mind"
Does that translate to smart investors should continue to hold??? Seems to me the smart investor would be out of gzfx for now, wait for a bottom if the believe in the company and it's willingness to pass the bottomline on to investors. I'm thinking there is a outstanding share count shock straight ahead, (students of volume and shareholder enthusiasm and current shareprice) should at least consider dilution to possibly be crushing.
---------------------------------------------------
Re: " If this made sense, I would address it. You clearly are not experienced with contractual terminology."
Why don't you tell us all about the use of the wording "It is the intention of" looks to me like that is designed as as out, placed there not accidentally, but to cover some a$$ during future eventuallities (sp) while appearing to imply something entirely different. You imply that you yourself have contractual terminology experience, of all wording, why use those?
--------------------------------------------------------
Re:"Hmmm you speak of GZFX shareholders being clueless. You must not have owned any shares, which leads any concerned person to wonder just why you are here"
No, you are trying to implicate me via your misguided perceptions, my speech was clear, when it comes to current gzfx outstanding share count, with the TA having been gagged for at least 2 months now, with gzfx having a history of dumping, and with GGI having it's hands on lots of shares with a green light to sell, it's obvious to all except shills and those who spin at all cost, that gzfx shareholders are clueless in that area.
I spoke clear why would choose to take it any other way, then proceed to rant using your perceptions as a guide? As to the rest of what you posted just above, I will not address, as it has nothing to do with facts or argument.
------------------------------------------------
Re:"Until we see real numbers from the company, you can't possibly say these folks were wrong. In general, your posts just don't hold together well, from a logical standpoint. I'm certain you'll pardon me for not giving you the benefit of the doubt here, nor lend any credibility to your arguments? I am all for learning of opposing viewpoints, but I guess I appreciate a more reasoned stance and debatable position. Call it a flaw in my character. Best to you. Cheers."
Very clever, should hold water with the ignorant quite well, you ego is showing though, or your motives! Bunch of hooey, designed to wander away from intelligent discussion while implying that you hold the cards in that arena. In other words, a bunch of bs that not even you can believe and makes one wonder why you would even bother???. Best you to too, unless of course you are a paid shill in that case, good luck with the bagholders and keep worrying that shareholders like goldleader doesn't ruffle the feathers of your bosses while you control the masses. Cheers back at you.
AI
