As I told the other board with the post below, Thanx.
I thank all of you for supporting rather than bashing my attempt to jolt a reply of substance from them, rather than the usual put off. I know that they do not consider how I think in their daily business nor should they, but they do need to realize that we want to be informed as any stockholder/stakeholder would. They can put us off and chalk it up to stealth all they want, but their product, the science behind it, and their plans and vision for it are already known, so just what is it that the stealth is supposed to be doing for them exactly? If I were a competitor rather than investor, I would already know more than I know now, and if I wanted to pull something I would already have done so, so I don't buy the stealth BS. I also wasn't very concerned about the "snide remark" remark, until I thought more about it and now think that Dr. Bob needs to learn better understanding of investor concerns. I personally don't recall any snide remark whatsoever, and I have read every single post since number 300 and something. I already said, to a previous post, that as stockholders we all have a right to not only expect, but demand information, the same that the SEC requires, and they are giving the impression of incompetence by doing such a dismal job of providing this information, all with the worn out excuse of stealth. I don't buy it, and don't have to. I own stock and can think and say what I please, and their reaction should be no less than professional and informative. Due to an unemployment, I am a man of modest means until I can replace what I lost. I started with 19,000 shares and have scraped and clawed my way to 30,000, and I will keep accumulating as I can, so I don't mind holding their feet to the fire because they work for me. Now the ball is in their court.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
