Questions for the web cast.
Last year, loans and back salaries were cleared from the balance sheet by imposing severe dilution onto the shareholders. The timing coincided with the extreme low PPS, having been driven down by a sustained flood of 144 shares being dumped. The worst possible time was chosen for shareholders.
1) Why does the management refuse to state a specific term for their loans and then clear the debt at that time instead of using their corporate position to unduly enrich themselves?
2) The justification given then, that the debt was at a high interest rate and not in line with today's rates is puzzling considering that new loans were made by insiders to the company at the high rate of 15% , in an environment of even lower current interest rates . . . and then also probably to be paid back with shares, when they choose, at the very bottom PPS, and then further discounted because they are 'restricted' shares. Do the words fiduciary responsibility mean anything around there?
3) What happened to the credit line being set up for 'future projects' that was also given as a reason to suddenly clear the 1.5 million dollar debt back then at the lowest PPS ? And just what were these future projects ?
4) Why was the recent approved FDA protocol held to be so important yet no action has been taken to comply with its content? Where are the necessary study sites? Where are the new patients? What about the ads that were run on the East Coast?
5) Why has management chosen to place the FDA burden on the back of a future partner or customer, yet we continue to spend thousands and thousands of dollars, month after month on FDA expenses and without showing meaningful results?
6) How many 'Smiths' does it take to wait for a deal ?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
