InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Momoffour

03/02/10 12:17 AM

#9716 RE: Ron456785 #9715

Wow! This is the best post that I have ever read. With the best explanation! Thank you very much for your time and effort!
icon url

blueone

03/02/10 1:40 AM

#9719 RE: Ron456785 #9715

Ron,
Nice post, but I also think (and have said) that Whelan and Noel were piss poor at managing expectations-- they put out all kinds of teasers the last six months about FDA approval coming "soon" in August/Sept., the audit "nearly done" in December, etc.

While I agree with nearly all your points about pinks, and that the company's product is strong, it all comes down to management's execution for me:
"why not have the audit done completely in December 09, why not try to uplist sooner, why not take the bull by the horns in those areas over which you have some control (obviously, not FDA)...

Given management's track record, how easy was it for the MMs to play their games? Very easy!

So here we sit, waiting for the next episode of what has become a soap opera...
Thanks again!
icon url

Bones58gdi

03/02/10 3:19 AM

#9722 RE: Ron456785 #9715

Truth be told? Ouch.
icon url

BigTrader1205

03/02/10 10:30 AM

#9742 RE: Ron456785 #9715

This is the most descriptive and logical explanation I have read explaining the drop in PPS. I understand that management has made some mistakes but the true measure of good leadership is whether they learn from their mistakes. They learned that they were not capable of submitting 501(k)'s using in-house personnel so they hired professionals. They learned that being on the pink sheets exposes them to MM manipulation and so they chose to do a complete audit in order to get on OTC. They learned that projecting dates that are not met has significant backlash so they gave an April 30th date for the 2009 audit. They may not be the strongest and most experienced executive team but as long as they are willing to learn then I will stand behind them as I am long and expect this to take off eventually.
icon url

joc2

03/02/10 10:44 AM

#9745 RE: Ron456785 #9715

This is why I think short selling should be banned. My shares did exist because I bought them not borrowed. This practice of short selling serves no useful purpose to the share holders or company.
icon url

Nabbbss

03/02/10 11:11 AM

#9747 RE: Ron456785 #9715

Excellent Post, Ron! It was a mini-seminar!