I didn't post that article, nor do I debate Neuro, to contradict him per se: I am simply providing a much needed different perspective. Call it what you wish (pre-fabbed, delusional, suspect, utopian, educated or uneducated opinions/beliefs/feelings), but if my expressed doubts concerning mngmt over the years (and I am far from the only one to point them out, yourself included) caused some investor(s) on this board to hold back further investment in this miserable performer, than I consider my comments extremely beneficial. I admit that I sometimes go overboard with my venting on about mngmt--that is my darkside rearing its ugly head :(
So why does this debate on mngmnt quality continue? Apparently, we have no black-and-white, foolproof way of measuring the quality of mngmnt at this point: if they didn't lie, cheat or steal in the eyes of the SEC (which isn't saying much), or external forces provide some evidence that even good mngmts' could not circumvent or navigate through the crosswinds, than that provides some basis for others to conclude that that is why Corx finds themselves perpetually broken. However, to infer almost exclusively that external forces have doomed Corx, I personally think, is absurd. There are patterns and episodes of mgnmt ineptitude all over the place--they are a cold mess :)
Contrary to the perception others try to paint of me--that I think mngmnt is 100% to blame (which is completely untrue btw)--I am objective enough to conclude their are a myriad of reasons why we have witnessed this ugliness. I just happen to think mngmt's contribution has trumped all other factors. I wholeheartedly disagree when it is suggested that I just want to hear my own view on reality. I think the source of such slop should be more introspective, as well as more carefully scrutinized by others.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
