'Now we can see the same kind of logic you pumped out like this:"
I have no problem with the logic that if someone sold at the peak after buying in at cheaper price they have been rewarded. How else do you think someone will be rewarded by investing in a speculative share of a company that does not pay dividends? I'd question your own logic.
Your arguement was pushing the Cooked Modus Operandi of company rewarding management. The "Cooked" being reference to Peter Cook whom was not present in 2005. You cant change your arguement when someone catches you out.
So realistically, you are now saying its the boards fault. They are (John Grant & co) are the ones awarding the options. So why blame Peter Cook? He would not approve the number of options or increase he is allowed.
BTA Price at posting:
$1.30 Sentiment: LT Buy Disclosure: Held