Drexion, I have no problem with looking at these companies with a skeptical eye. Heck, with what's gone on recently in this space you'd be crazy not to! But sometimes I think the conspiracy theories get a little overdone, like when people start questioning the acerage of the HU plantation and implying it's a much smaller percentage of land than has been publicly reported (that's not a slam on you. I think it was Snow or somebody who started down that path).
I mean really? With as many hit pieces as have come out over the last six months (Greenberg, Little, Geo, et. el.) I'm fairly confident that if SIAF was a big scam we'd have seen at least one hit piece by now.
These kinds of accusations can be made of ANY company. "Have you actually SEEN how many boxes of MS Windows are rolling off the conveyors belts with your own eyes?!" I mean, come on...at some point you have to believe what's being reported if it passes the sniff test. The revenues are there to support the HU plantation, and the Jordan Fund has done an amazing amount of due diligence, the result of which influenced them to invest in something like 30% of the company. That goes a long way toward easing my mind that SIAF isn't a scam.
Have some bad choices been made along the way? Perhaps. Did SIAF over pay for the recent/upcoming land purchases? Perhaps. I don't think we really have enough information yet to make that assessment though with any degree of accuracy.
Solomon Lee needs to articulate his business plan going forward in a much better way than has been done so far. I think there should have been a conference call to coincide with the 10Q filing to answer some of the lingering questions about land use, justification for the price paid, etc.
On that much we agree.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
