Fred, I believe I take a little different view of the Riverwood deal. That deal would never have been done if not for the approval of the UGSI Board of Directors. So, if that deal was (or ends up being) a bad deal for UGSI, I believe UGSI management, and not Riverwood, should be viewed as those responsible.
As to whether the Riverwood deal should have been done, since we little guys know virtually nothing about the company's finances, market position, project forecasts, profits and losses, etc., I don't believe any of us outsiders can say for sure whether the deal was something that was a business necessity at the time of the deal.
What I do know, is that the deal further diluted mine and your stock value. But, I believe no one at UGSI really cares about the healthy amount of equity investment money us outsiders pumped into the company over these many years. Money that likely allowed this company (Mark Smith) to get up and running.
Look, I fully realized then and realize now, the risk related to investing in pennies - and private pennies at that. I've made a lot of money on them, and lost a lot of money on them. We don't know why management hasn't yet taken the company public, but I have to assume they haven't because of either 1) they have no intention of EVER taking it public, or 2) they believe it hasn't reached the point because of failure to reach chosen goals, that investors will have enough confidence in the company to find its public stock attractive enough to buy.
So Andy, which is it? Or is there a #3, or #4, or ???
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
