Hey
@Terrorbyte
To put a slight spin on the aphorism: there will always be someone to part a fool from his money.
There's tons of laws to protect people from false advertising, fraud, and such. But if, armed with the facts and all of these protections, someone still spends their money unwisely, that's no longer the government's problem. To use another aphorism: you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
My personal investment strategy of engaging the management has always served me well. I only apply this strategy if I see something that doesn't fit. However, when smoke , ash and water all seem all over the place it is a good idea to go back and read each announcement and more specifically pay attention to each share issued to each party and see how that helped. Did it further the company or the party getting the share ?
Furthermore, when investing in unknown territories never ever call a technology disruptive until such has been endorsed by people putting their money in to utilize said tech. All founders suffer from bias and the tech is truly never revolutionary until the one using it pays ; and does so handsomely.
People have gotten on the ODN train rather quickly and one of the fellow posters was quick to highlight the sneak
HTML:
Holders of the $245,000 of Converting Notes rank as unsecured creditors of the Company, and the Company has the right to elect to convert the Converting Notes into Shares at the conversion price of $0.001 (0.1 cents). The conversion right is subject to, and conditional upon, shareholder approval.
If shareholder approval is not obtained for the conversion of the Converting Notes, the Company will be required to repay the full amount of the Converting Notes in cash.
(e) the Shares will be allotted and issued to various sophisticated and professional investors (pursuant to section 708(8) of the Corporations Act) who hold the Converting Notes. None of the sophisticated and professional investors are considered a related party of the Company;
The Directors unanimously recommend Shareholders vote in favour of this Resolution.
Why would they recommend to vote in favour unless related party? Just issue around 20m shares at 1.2c and repay the note and have over 220m less shares on issue.
Anyways, I digress.
The partner you are looking for and playing the devil's advocate here is
Kore. Speculation if you will humour me.
They introduce themselves as
However, if history has taught one thing then it is the rules for a tech company to associate themselves with other companies are newsworthy (for the sake of keeping the company happy by ASX) but not
really market sensitive.
Also if RYG was to announce to market that the partner is really Kore then the price of the stock will head south quicker than you can blink.
If I speak to your CEO, I can call it collaboration but for other more stricter companies running the tighter boats - less speak probably becomes more important. Thats why you will see larger companies like NEA being more stringent about what they say about collaboration because hype based engines run out of steam very quickly. The ones that truly survive are out there collaborating.
Anyways these are my humble opinions and take them if you will.
