But could they not have accomplished that same goal without the S1 and subsequent institutional shorting taking place. It's becoming more apparent by the day that this is what is taking place.
They could have rolled that debt to preferred shares like they did, and used the cash from Gen 0 sales to promote all without screwing over the Gen 0 buyers who were are also their investors from a higher range.
They had a good group of investors here who gave them $650,000 for tokens to the game. They invested in the company to see it prosper.
The institutional investors are screwing over the entire shareholder base that supported this early on. $3 million is not needed to market this game in the world of retweets and shares. It's not like they're running TV ads.
The CEO should address why he let the institutional investors in in the first place. The $3 mil is nice but not needed. They could have marketed this game just fine with $650k the shareholders invested in their product.
The CEO sold out the very crowd that raised the shareprice from the floor and funded the early operation of this project.
If you disagree, I would like to hear why you think they needed the S1 investors and gave them open reign to short against us.
Everything was going well until they got involved, the share price was declining - but that was because the company missed their deadlines and pushed the game out.
.22c to .07c and still dropping. All thanks to the institutional "investment"
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
