Thank you for that post. I’m amazed how few people understand that companies, particularly start up companies, go through some difficult times where it is necessary to decide the best use of the limited funds available. If early on MDHI had sufficient funds to either produce goods to sell or remain fully reporting but not both, making Medi-Pendants wins. It would not be a hard decision for any good manager.
However, there is no doubt that Ronnie put unrealistic expectations in the investors’ minds by giving specific dates that they could expect the audited financials would be completed and posted when he had no control over the completion time frame. These things always take longer than expected and I would consider this a mistake.
In my opinion, MDHI would have been better served if the audits were never mentioned in advance. Then, if the audits were not done by a specific date, MDHI could release the unaudited financial on time and back them up with the unaudited financials they have given us with the audited ones as they get completed on an annual basis or all at once.
While not everything he says about MDHI is 100% accurate—this can be said about most CEO’s of most companies big or small---MDHI does not have a repeated history of adding massive amounts to the AS, adding massive amount to the OS, paying contracts in shares with a par value of .0001 when fair market value is .002, insiders dumping hundreds of thousands of shares as soon as the restriction expires only to have those insiders receive more shares, and so on. MDHI does not publish a 150% increase in the AS and OS 6 months after is supposedly happened when nothing but positive info was released during those 6 months duping investors—they tell us in advance and do so by proxy letter. It may frustrate some of us that we have no say in such decisions but again that is proof that no dumping is going on as the insiders refuse to yield their 51% control of the outstanding shares.
I find it extremely ironic that any posters here would try to call Ronnie out for misleading statements about MDHI that probably were intended to protect the company—for example, most investors don’t want to hear the truth if it is going to be 2-3 years before a company can afford the costs associated with becoming fully reporting--- while posting one misleading statement after another peppered with bald faced lies about MDHI and its history.
By no means am I saying everything posted about MDHI should be positive. In fact I believe exactly the opposite. There is enough about MDHI that raises legitimate questions about the company and where it is headed. Posting repeated false statements or outdated information about MDHI—whether positive or negative—is help no one.
I happen to believe in the product. I have elderly parents who live in a big house that have another monitoring system because I didn’t know about the Medi-Pendant when they got it-and their insurance may not have covered it back then. I would much prefer they have a speaker directly around their necks so that regardless of where a problem occurs they have communication rather than just rely on someone knowing they fell. I am willing to bet that feature is what will make MDHI huge as long as they grow the brand before the patent expires.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
