Doc, I don't see JC's posts, but got curious and read his responses to you. I am a former corporate attorney and CEO of a subsidiary of a publicly traded gaming company. I don't really want to get involved in your discussion, but I am 100% supportive of the self-imposed quiet period. When you have a very small streamlined operation with very few resources, in the middle of a process to release results of a very long trial and focusing on getting your product through the approval process, the last thing you need is a bunch of frivolous law suits to take away funds and man power from your objective. We saw a completely left field attempt to create such a lawsuit back in the spring, which was based on compensation issues. These law firms would be jumping at the bid if company released any public statement of ANYTHING. They are waiting in the wings as we see so very often with these small companies. They could care less about Merrits of the case as they are being paid regardless and their only job is to take away focus from what the company is trying to do. The general retail investor is not savvy enough to understand that these cases are completely without Merrit, so they get spooked easily. You can take a look at a very aggressive media company GNUS, who had a lot of tail wind las spring and a CEO who was very communicative. They got completely flooded with shareholder suits the minute the SP started to go down. This is an otherwise solid company that has a very competent, though inexperienced management. They are still reeling from that period. Disclosure: I did not own shares at the time it was on the wild ride, but have traded in it since last July, well after the initial takedown to sub $1 SP.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
