Hi Jay lim,
I haven't responded to any of your posts save perhaps your original one because, frankly, I feel your motives for making posts on this board are very questionable. But since the person you just now quoted made the statements s/he did in direct reference to something I had said, I thought I'd make an exception.
As I insinuated, I'm not sure why you come to this board. If you would have followed your own recent advice to everyone else to sell their shares in the $1.25 range, it wouldn't seem like you'd have any reason to still hang around. But if you didn't sell your shares back then (if you ever have had any)and now feel certain the share price is going to drop big time, I hope you don't miss this opportunity to unload your position. I'm sure you'll find some eager buyers who've done their homework; indeed, I'd be among them if I had more funds.
But that aside, it seemed clear from the post of Flo-bee's (#5170) that you quoted that he doesn't keep close tabs on this board or on this stock. So if he's a long, then he's obviously not concerned about short term fluctuations in the share price because he's so confident that it's a good long term investment he doesn't care about such things. On the other hand, if he's not a current share holder, then he clearly is not making much of an effort to learn about the company. So either way he strikes me as a particularly poor choice for you or anyone else to "follow" and, as you have done, immediately latch onto a few of his statements and proclaim them as being the gospel truth. But such an approach is entirely in keeping with all your other posts so you evidently think otherwise and are of course welcome to base your decisions on such information if you want to.
To me it's absurd to think even for a moment that the company has done anything "illegal" by stating in their corporate update back in January that they expect to release earnings in "a few weeks." The word "few" is inherently vague and companies always put out disclaimers to caution investors that forward looking statements are subject to change without notice. Fine, their legal butts are covered. But this is not to say that stretching the normal meaning of a word might not reach the point of really ticking someone off. Such is human nature, so why risk it was in part my point. As it is I don't actually think that anything "traumatic" will come to pass. I certainly don't think one person voicing a criticism about something a company has done (or in this case appears to have done) in any way warrants jumping to the extreme conclusion you have. I certainly will not be pounding the table on this issue day in and day out, and I find it highly unlikely anyone else will either. And as I clearly have stated, I have no doubt the company will in fact post earnings. So I feel yours and Flo-bee's stance are more knee-jerk reactions than anything else.
Nonetheless, my previous way to stating my opinion obviously elicited yours and Flo-bee's response and might not have settled well with others as well. So if I may, I'll recapitulate my point. When a dictionary itself does not give one a clear definition of what constitutes "a few", then it's no wonder that the term will remain somewhat vague. But on an every day level we use the word "few" all the time and my guess is that for most people when they use the word themselves generally intend it to mean 3, 4 or 5 things, whatever those things might be. But the inherent vagueness of the term leaves it open ended, and such vagueness can be purposely used if one so wishes. Moreover, like everything else, it can be used for good or not, consciously or not.
I happen to feel this company's track record and the job Chad is doing are such that they don't need to artificially prop the share price up by taking advantage of the inherent vagueness of the word "few". But "if" that is what they've decided to do, then one can hardly complain that it's negatively effected the share price. Hence, for many this would be a "good" use of that vagueness. Yet to me the company would gain more long term credibility, especially in today's environment, if they would not play that game. Investors in every other company have to wait until earnings come out regardless of how much they might want to have them come out early. So why should SIAF shareholders be any different? Are we little babies that can't wait until dinner is served but instead need a special meal prepared for us so we can eat before everyone else gets to?
I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of the Form 10 requirements or all the restrictions or lack thereof for pink sheet stocks. As such, if the company goes out of its way to tell me in a corporate update that, unlike any other company I'm following, they expect to announce their year-end results in the "next few weeks", I take their word for it. Prior to reading that my assumption was, naturally, that we would have to wait till earnings season like everyone else. But, hey, I don't know the rules their working under, so if that's what they tell me then I assume that's the way it is. I know I'm not too knowledgeable about stock stuff, but I find it hard to believe that others wouldn't read the press release in the same way I did. So, again, one must weigh what's more valuable: long term trust or short term price levels. My vote is for the former; others no doubt will vote for the latter, or think that you can have the latter without jeopardizing the former. I don't think you can have it both ways. But that's me. I also think there's no serious downside to the former choice, whereas the latter can instill doubt and in some cases get people very angry.
So that's it. If Chad and management think there's any validity to this, then they will make use of it as they see fit. If not they won't. I don't have an axe to grind here. As I've stated all along, I intend to be invested here for quite a long time. Moreover, SIAF is way and above my largest holding and currently constitutes 43% of our port. This is not meant as something to "brag" about as it may prove to be very foolish. But I thought it might better contextualize my previous statements to note it here. And I wasn't kidding, Jay lim, if I had more funds, I'd be buying more shares.
Good luck in your decisions.
Steve
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
