Well put, bank. I appreciate your perspective and respect that you're willing to level criticism when warranted. I'm also someone who can't stand it when the details aren't handled with care and professionalism. (Although, I must admit that I'm guilty of posting my share of typos on this board.)
I think that's why I've been encouraged by the upgrades that they've made to the WSGI and GTC websites. They look much better - more polished and professional.
But they continue to fall short on the filings as you point out, and I'm still up in arms about the company name change. It doesn't seem well thought out at all. I cringe every time someone asks me what the name of the company is that I'm invested in. I feel compelled to apologize to them on behalf of the company for the bone-headed, short-sighted, and embarrassingly chosen corporate name. Why didn't they just change the name to Global Telesat Corp. after they acquired the company? It would have been much more appropriate.
Also, little thought seemed to be given to the time-lines set forth in the shareholders meeting presentation. I started criticizing management almost immediately after learning of the unrealistic schedules they had announced for development and delivery of the Argus 2 (2012) and Argus 3 (2013). Any moron could see right away that these time-lines would never be met. Why couldn't management? Are they that naïve?
"Those who are giving management until the shareholder's meeting to show major increases in the SP or "they're out" are thinking too emotionally about their investment. This is a process that can't have success demanded upon it. Be more patient."
I can only speak for myself, but I'm not giving management until the shareholder's meeting -- I'm giving them until the end of June. And MY deadline has nothing to do with the share price. It has to do with securing an 8-figure airship contract. This is a very low bar I set for management considering that each Argus One supposedly costs $3 million. Also, I feel the time-frame is fair based on the fact that management would then have had two years to make this happen. That's more than enough time. I'm not "thinking too emotionally" about my investment. I'm just thinking that if management can't make this happen in the alloted time that I've given them, then this company isn't going to move quickly enough or grow rapidly enough to support my vision of why I stayed invested in this company for all these years. I refuse to listen to any more of their lame excuses. People on this board have stated that $500,000 is "peanuts." Well, I think $10,000,000 is "peanuts."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
