Strange.
I saw your post and looked at a couple reply's above it in the subject lines that said (good post). Then I opened your post and started reading it.
When I got to around the third paragraph and reflecting on the 'good post replies) from some of my biggest critics, I thought the post was a 'spoof' on me and the last parargraph was going to say something like 'this is typical verbage from our board know-it-all, but it is not helping the company'. Then I finished reading your post and was in somewhat disbelief of what I just read....and morever, the replies of 'great post'.
Anyway.....
I agree with everything you wrote, as I've been saying the same for quite awhile now. Buyers of the 220 look at the balance sheet/SP for viability. Buying from a company that on paper, looks like they are going BK (even though we think differently) doesn't matter to them. Do you think if IMSC was a profitable company right now with a SP of $10 that it would be MUCH easier to sell the 220? You bet it would. For people that 'don't care if the share price goes lower' because they can 'buy more cheaper' is what I've said all along is a FOOLS GAME.
Buying 'on the cheap' is making it all the more difficult to sell product. There is no doubt in mind about that. I've said it for years. Would you as an outsider that new little about the company (except financials) put 10M to buy product fm a company that looks like a huge financial risk with a falling stock price?
Sure....hope for more cheap shares, care not how low it goes and you are playing with fire. You will get burned badly with that attitude as the company will struggle for survival.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
