I strongly disagree Zorax. Here's why. I have never taken an economics or business course in college. But I think it is common sense. Although I have never taken a business public, I have run businesses all my life. The whole purpose is to provide a service or good and exchange it for money. If things aren't working out in one direction you find another direction in a timely manner. You certainly don't have to abandon the initial direction. But you do have to generate revenues and/or assets. You cannot sit there like a spoiled boy, wait for it all to fall into your lap, and sponge off others in the meantime. In this public company environment it seems to either run up debt or cause dilution. That seems very elemental to me. You buy something, repack it, and sell it albeit at a markup. You have to be resourceful and make the right purchases, rebrand it in a desirable manner, and sell it properly; granted for it to work out. No task is beneath me in the pursuit of a successful business. It is a strategy that has worked out well. I have had to do that and a lot more my whole life. You have to be aggressive, resourceful, work hard, and be shrewd about it. Many of these jackasses have no business calling themselves corporate officers. The last thing they want to do is actually work and it shows; not just to me- where are the buyout offers? .
If you disagree, I would ask how is the spoiled boy strategy of these guys waiting endlessly for a handout working out here or in the vast majority of OTC stocks? The first thing I look at is management and their performance; very seldom do I need to go further.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
