I complain about the company (and have sold most of my position), because I CAN and DO see the value in it. That being said, I think our leadership appears to have priorities that are not consistent with bringing value to shareholders.
It does not appear that the execs give a crap about shareholders, but it does appear that they REALLY care about image. PR is one thing, but being vain is something else. Every time someone writes "MusclePharm sucks" or "Brad Pyatt sucks" or "Cory Gregory sucks" ... it will get indexed by Google. Everytime someone writes a bad tweet about them, it will be logged in the annals of history. Everytime someone writes negative comments on FB, it will be forever on the internet. Since they will not address us directly, this is the only voice that we have.
If they treat customers like they appear to be treating shareholders, this will all come to light eventually and everyone will react. Eventually, the number one search result for Brad Pyatt might be "Brad Pyatt Sucks." He cares about that.
In my opinion, a good company will take some of these concerns as they come to light and address them, even though " his SEC advises against it"(not sure what that means). If not through a PR, through action ... to give shareholders knowledge that they have something to back up a wanksta facade.
A bad company and CEO will just end up with a #1 sucking image, which it seems that they are very concerned about.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
