@blueandblack... We don't know that yet. I have too much of a stake in the company to just let it go. If this were a company in death shakes gasping for air (like 99.999% of revocation situations), I would agree with you. But it's not. This is a company that is going to survive and either make money or get bought, IMHO. There is no way in hell that is going to happen while I stand by and have a good laugh with my equity drained to zero. This is not a "just walk away" situation. Not for me anyway. They are going to have to deal with me until this is resolved, whether constructively or tragically. The latter will be their choice.
@grandslam... If they don't report by mid month, I am going to contact Jim Musick and John Evans one final time, and just lay it out, politely but directly. They have always been open and (I think) honest with me. That communication is already written. If they are not going to report, they will need to supply an audited share count to requesting shareholders privately. If they won't do that, then they need to gird their loins for legal action. I will encourage any and all legacy shareholders to pursue that, when the time comes. If it turns out that they do intend to screw legacy shareholders, I intend to sue them into non-existence.
But I still doubt that they are stupid enough to do that. And I also think Musick and Evans have too much integrity to do that, despite what others might think. OTOH, I do not have any reason to trust the CEO or CFO. The former has all but disappeared. My communications with the latter were unsatisfying, and he finally stopped responding when I posed a couple very direct and specific questions. Not a great sign, admittedly.
The share count is a vital issue. Technically, they have no current obligation to report publicly. But we have a right to know what we own. If they refuse to clarify that, they do need to understand that the consequences will be existential for VB. I have zero patience and tolerance for being scammed. But I still don't fully buy into that idea. I think Musick made some premature statements after the revocation, because he likely felt embarrassed and responsible (he's a scientist, not a businessman). This likely led to a rethinking of strategy by the Board and the subsequent shuffling of officers. COVID didn't help, as it effectively shut down all their revenues. The new officers are a different breed, and (I suspect) have no loyalty to legacy shareholders beyond basic legal obligations -- I think they have a different set of loyalties and motivations, which is a major concern. And, presumably, they are running the show day to day. But Evans is still the Chairman as far as I know, and the current officers serve at his pleasure. I suspect (this is a guess) that if the CEO and CTO take this nonsense too far, Evans and Musick will fire them. They know this is serious. I don't think Musick wants any part of screwing the people who supported his company for a couple decades. Basically, I want Evans and Musick to know that they have to do something about this very, very soon, or this game is going to take a very unfortunate turn.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
