How so? I have given full outlooks and analysis supported by data and facts. I don't see any given to the contrary.
Why is it there are only 100% positive analysis for the long outlook? Why is it there has never been a better company or CEO named in the pinks?
Roger didn't have a choice in starting out in the pinks, but he chose to go down the path to get us off them, while maintain the SS and without toxic financing.
There is tons of positive support for the company. The forest view is simple:
Growth company growing Increasing quality recurring revenues in the millions BGC Leader in burgeoning multi billion dollar market No mass dilution or toxic financing Controls the total supply chain from development to retail