Replies to post #30190 on VirTra Inc (VTSI)

[billpr]

I know I am in the minority even though I was one of the first to complain about the PINKS, but I DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT want to move to NASDAQ. Even though many think we are ready for the Big Leagues we can't IMO hit a a curve ball yet..We don't belong on that Board and really don't need it to serve our purpose..

What most don't realize, our product line, even if improved, will not have a long shelf life. If we get too successful someone will come along to "eat our lunch". IMO we would be better off both short and long term just carving out a niche in this market, retaining our share, and having someone decide to absorb us via a buy-out, hopefully at a great premium to the longs who are still in at that time. Done for the day...

[stormer]

The first story was that the low PPS wasn't good for some possible foreign sales. Apparently that alone wasn't a good enough reason to have a proxy and 100:1 RS. Because when the CC came around, the main reason seemed to be uplisting to NASDAQ. As brought up here many times, NASDAQ isn't even an option, and would be even further away should the conflicting director eliminating amendment pass. It would have been better if they didn't even mention NASDAQ.

Now this job add should let everyone know they are now serious about uplisting? It is now only an add and not yet a real person plodding along to get VTSI uplisted.

My problem is that I can't believe that so much trouble was just a mistake of getting things out of order. Those other amendments don't seem to be part of a mistake either.