We've heard that: Headcount is being increased to support increased manufacturing activity. and Headcount is being reduced in order to conserve cash. and The headcount increase refers to the beefing up of management. We've added a CFO (it's been a while and some may not remember it, but there essentially was no CFO prior to Ingham), a new CEO, a COO, an in house attorney and it wasn't a headcount increase, but one employee got a very nice raise (>25%). (I have NEVER heard the term "headcount" used in reference to the senior executive level of a manufacturing company, but around here terms get re-invented regularly, don't they?)
In theory, at least, the most recent information we have (assuming another "misunderstanding" hasn't surfaced and we can rely on the information conveyed) is that "He (the CEO) said he has been and continues to work diligently to reduce costs and has reduced head count as part of it." I fail to see how that squares with this, from the 10Q.....signed 8 days before the above statement was made: "Additionally, as the Company continues our strive to commercial roll-out, we have slightly increased our headcount." The idea that that statement was in reference to the addition of senior executives in a prior quarter and that it is no longer currently applicable sounds an awful lot like the recent denial of the reliability of the SAIC Exec Summary and I find it laughable.
In the absence of bullshit one would logically conclude that increased manufacturing effort would require an increased headcount as it would for any manufacturing company, even this one. In the absence of bullshit and the presence of logic, that is.
Market Data 
Markets 
