Whether the moral burden of communication is on the investors or not, the de facto burden is. Steve seems to feel he's communicating enough. I don't feel he is. People haven't been able to force or convince him to communicate more by any methods that have been tried so far. In the absence of enough communication to satisfy me, I'm trying to figure things out.
Not sure what you are proposing about communication - are you suggesting that since the moral burden is on Steve, that we shouldn't try to figure anything out and we should wait until Steve lives up to his moral burden? I have to tell you, that doesn't seem very productive. I think I tried that for a few years and I wasn't satisfied with the results; that's why I'm trying this now. If you want to stop communicating, feel free. It certainly can't hurt your investment.
And as for demanding a refund, anyone that wants to is welcome to do that for their investment. It doesn't seem to me like a solution that will work for everyone. I've stated that I'm not intending to do that right now. Unfortunately, I don't agree with your premise that "he should be forced to refund that money if his plan and promises don't work out". If he's stealing or committing fraud, yes. If he thought the tree farms and tree investments would be successful and lucrative and they aren't, well, I believe that's the risk we took on in investing with TATF. When I invested, I hoped and believed it would work out well. Every investment prospectus you get indicates that they want and plan for things to work out well, but they don't control the outcome. Is this investment on some magic TARP plan, that it can't be allowed to fail or do poorly?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
