That's amazing. I didn't know any company could survive a reverse split multiple times. Thanks for the lesson. I noticed that some of these "reverse split offenders" change their company name and/or ticker along the way. Trying smoke and mirrors to reinvent themselves, I guess.
Well, maybe the idea of another reverse split for Cal-bay isn't such a far fetched proposition afterall. If Roger wanted to, he could do a 500:1 reverse split, change the company name, change the ticker, and even change the company objective overnight without notice. None of that would amaze me. If you do some research, you'll find out that Roger has done everthing from sell cosmetics to buying race cars.
I really am convinced this guy wants to keep this company alive anyway possible for long enough for his luck to turn around. He is slippery and unethical, but I don't think he's doing anything illegal, at least not on a grand sense. He just wants to build that stock price up so he can exercise his 50:1 conversion rights on his pref shares.
I doubt if Roger feels good about all the shareholders who have lost almost everything. On the other hand he depends on their greed to keep this thing alive. He did tell is in that one-way conference call that this is a very high risk investment, so he probably rationalizes everbody's loss as "their own damn fault - I warned them, and they could read about the 50:1 conversion rights before they invested - it was in the SEC reports".
I lost a lot of money, but I'm glad I'm out. I think Roger is going to hang onto this thing until he goes bankrupt, or his luck turns around, whichever comes first.
I don't think any big institutional investor would touch this company with a ten foot pole. There isn't enough market cap, and the history is terrible. I think Roger depends on small investors to keep this thing alive. Notice that he has even offered advice in his past PR, indicating that the company was selling for a fraction of book value, and typically companies trade for a multiple of the book value. Gee Roger, thanks for that advice back when the company was selling for a dime.
I do wish he would provide some transparency into the company, but no, he wants to continue his PR campaign to convince new investors that this stock is a bargain at today's price. He seems to avoid all discussion of how he got into this mess, and what assets the company really holds.
If you owned this thing for a while, you've already lost 99% of what you put into it, so you have little to lose by hanging on. Now if you are a new investor thinking you can get rich, that doesn't look like a good idea. Roger is in deep trouble, and I haven't seen any evidence that this company is going to turn around. Any decision to buy this stock must consider his 50:1 conversion rights, no visibility into the balance sheet, no business plan, and horrible history.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
