News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Klinkerhoffen

03/29/11 6:03 AM

#29916 RE: ztect #29914

Its just common sense, nothing more. Mistakenly the against-voters are associated with "fear" and "negative".

We just want a better solution which is as well in the company's interest as in the shareholders interest.

Why should we vote yes implying voting against ourselves ?
The current proposals are an insult to the shareholders and accordingly to their intelligence.

Sure,creating visually more value for the stock by R/Splitting to dollars-range on the PINKS, thinking about some audited financials somewhere in the future and uplisting , thats something not needed at this point, but also somewhere in the future. Come on!
Sounds like interesting actions points, but executed in the wrong order !

We want guarantees as being such loyal shareholders we are !
1) audited financials
2) uplisting to a higher tier
3) optionally a R/S

All points embraced by "let's not forget this one" = creating shareholder value.

Sincerely
The Vote-No-Front
K.


icon url

Ruffieruff

03/29/11 7:31 AM

#29917 RE: ztect #29914

Excellent Post!
icon url

SirFelix

03/29/11 9:38 AM

#29919 RE: ztect #29914

You don't need to thrust your torch and pitchfork into my face over and over again. I have been lurking for the past few days, without comment, and who is to say I don't agree with some of your points?
As an investor, I need to gather info to protect my investment, even if the result of my DD means not owning shares in the coming months. I've been on this board longer then anyone here and know the players and fakers, bashers and pumpers. Hidden agendas abound. My previous post is an observation that applies to both sides of the story.

Sorry for the interruption, we bring you back to your regularly scheduled programming.
icon url

5cap

03/29/11 10:35 AM

#29925 RE: ztect #29914

ztect, you seem to make an awful lot of unfounded assumptions. Let's just take this one where you are spreading fear based on the fact that Don Andrus only owns 150,000. That's a fact, but you surmise the reasons behind it (doesn't "believe" in the company) and you spread fear. What if your assumption is wrong? What if there is some other explanation? Just of the top of my head, what if he has all his money tied up in other investments at the moment, but he in fact has his own personal plan to buy when he can?