I see you are pretty astute at reading disclosures and putting 2 and 2 together, so I am not sure why you are using certain facts to draw attention to.......whatever you are trying to draw attention to. It certainly does matter, at least to long term investors, that the preferred conversions into common were done solely to boost market cap and that those holders voluntarily agreed to a 1 year lock out. So overall capitalization dilution is much different that immediate or short term float dilution. So while you are technically correct, the bigger discussion centers around whom and why. Another point is your mentioning a $4.5M loss..........can you be more specific? The bigger discussion on that"loss" number should be focused on "PAPER", the way the company is required to account for stock issuances. The way I read the balance sheet is that the company has maybe $400K in total debt, which is not due yet, less than $50K in trade debt (which you have to admit, for a public company, is nominal) and the balance of the loss is all attributable to stock accounting - so to point to $4.5M in "losses" without further explanation, especially for someone else who looks at the numbers, is quite........misleading. A lot of posters here point to certain "numbers" knowing, or willfully turning a blind eye as to what they actually reflect rather than trying to understand, through disclosures, what those numbers actually mean.
So my next question, and I am sure some other people here would like to know, are you a shareholder in RXSF. Because that way, the posters can determine whether you are here to play games, or have a serious vested interest here.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
