Replies to post #156105 on World Surveillance Group Inc (fka WSGI)

[hogman_5]

People CAN change, but generally don't.

"The race doesn't always go to the swiftest, nor the battle to the strongest, but that's the way to bet!"

I.e., track records are extremely relevant in trying to make bets on the future.

[turbodog]

well SAID indy

[ColeThornton]

Respectfully, that is a strangely rigid view of the world.

There is your first problem indy, my post said nothing of the "world", it was simply about WSGI.

IMO companies can change just like people can change. I am not saying WSGI is presently putting up good evidence of having changed but I am saying IMO it is irrational to say it cannot change.

Bingo! No evidence here that this company is any more than the scam it has already been proven to be. In fact all the evidence points to it being just as it always has been.

IMO real change would be evidenced by things like transparency and communication, the putting out of a lucid plan for corporate advancement and other things like that.

You're wrong again indy. That would not indicate change at all, as this company has done that before, and it meant nothing.

I do know a few folk working hard to make a future for WSGI and I wish them all the best.

Please name all those people working hard to make a future for WSGI. Could you also tell their qualifications. With all due respect, your previous plaudits for those at WSGI have proven to be a joke as far as them improving this horrible excuse for a company.

Yes, experience does tell me it is hard for people to change so your cynicism has SOME basis.

And don't forget this company is at 100% in this regard.

Change is hard but it has always been worth fighting for in my experience, whether individually or corporately.

We know what has happened to investors who have believed in and fought for this company long term... they have lost, lost, lost. I believe many of the insiders for this company have pocketed(collectively if not individually) millions while those common shareholders were losing millions. And all the time there has always been someone like you speaking about(for) the company and misleading investors.

I don't think that's a coincident.