You argue just to try and prove that you are right by definiton, and arguing semantics, so be it, you win.. But if it smells like a duck, and quacks like a duck..well....Lets look at the facts. I am well aware of the definition of a startup co.I am well aware of A BOD members obligations, I have been one several times. Are you saying you would consideer suing a board member?Tell me who you would add as a board member? Seriously, with respect, I choose you!. I mean it. You are exactly what they need, and have needed for some time. Id vote for you in a minute, and i dont even know you. But you get fundamentals and that is what this is about! When I bought the second co. that was 5 years old and I considered it a startup co.(PPS was low) They were doing the same things Phil is doing. 1. Financials were not on time.2. when presented, they were not complete, thorough, or always accurate. 3. the CEO, like Phil loveed to hear himself talk, but when he talked, it was usually grey, not black and white.4. The co. was a service business, which I particualry like, because quality service, at a right price, which includes quality work, knowledge of product and other products in the marketplace can be quite profitable. Most everythiong mechanical breaks, and most technology needs serve. Done right, complete thorough and accurate, can build on itself, as a lot of mediocrity reigns in the work place.Id much rather discuss how to fix it.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
