Sorry but I find inconsistencies unacceptable. The financial problem of the company was claimed to be due to millions of subs taking advantage of a good deal at the expense of the company (ultimately shareholders). How is 100k subs all of a sudden being used against the company when before there were too many? Or is the deal not as good so there are supposedly fewer subs but wouldn’t that mean less expense for the company (ultimately shareholders)? Wouldn’t this be a good thing? Allowing the company to manage expenses/diluting less and slowing decrease in shareholder value? Isn’t something like this going to attract new money investment after R/S? Stable growth after the floodgates burst and are being rebuilt with better materials and opening the gates on demand at will by the company in a manner that is opportune and beneficial to shareholders?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
