I don't see how Clark dumping 20+ million shares, Warp a few million more (plus others?) is manipulation.
Just because HighStandard supposedly bought some shares in the .011-.013 range, doesn't mean that once it hit that range, there wasn't a whole slew of investors lined up to unload shares at that level, thus sending the share price back down. The share price decline could also be related to the latest $250,000 offering. As some have already pointed out, the company is broke and needs money.
I don't think we'd have to worry so much about manipulation (or hypothetical manipulation), if the company delivered some substantial contacts, but it doesn't. So, as a result, the company continues to alienate shareholders. Some to the point where they're fed up and are willing to have a fire sale on their shares.
Estrella just can't seem to close any big deals. We need a closer. (Where's Mariano Rivera when you need him?) As a result, the share price stays depressed (along with shareholders), and we blame manipulation. Go figure. Oh, and we have to borrow more money. Step and repeat, step and repeat, step and repeat...
Now Indy says we won't see any clarity until the shareholders meeting (July?). That means we might as well continue to stuff our shares under the mattress until then... ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz.
Speaking of Indy, I might as well share some observations I've made since he started posting (all IMO):
1) Most timetables he lays out are usually missed by anywhere from 6 months to over a year. Therefore, any clarity about the company might not occur until after the shareholders meeting.
2) He tends to be easily impressed. If Phipps lands a few $10,000 contracts, he thinks it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.
3) He won't criticize Estrella -- ever. I guess this is understandable since he works for a company that does business with WSGI. He doesn't want to jeopardize that relationship, so he is WSGI's biggest defender and cheerleader. This, in my mind, creates a conflict of interest and a bias.
4) He doesn't care about money. He has stated this himself, and it is something that's widely known on this board. As a result, he doesn't care about the performance of his investment and often can't relate to shareholder frustration. He also doesn't seem to have a firm grasp on what it means to be a public company.
5) He doesn't care how long things take. He recently posted a "turtle/hare" scenario concerning the Stratellite. He seemed to imply that that's the approach WSGI is taking and that, in his opinion, WSGI has the tech and IP for a stratospheric airship. What he's basing his confidence on is vague to say the least. Why would this approach result in a positive outcome? Who knows? I would venture to guess that TAO Technologies and Lockheed Martin are/were just as confident. The only difference seems to be that Indy's approach will take a decade or more to fail. And I'm sure it's in his interest to milk it and drag it out for as long as he can. Afterall, he's a "patient" man. (Where's Steve Jobs when you need him?)
I just bring all this up because I think some of what Indy posts has to be taken with a grain of salt. He offers some valuable insights, but he's become more and more biased IMO as he's become more involved with WSGI.
A cautionary note for all.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
