I must say, I've been waiting a while for someone to pick up on this.
I'm a long term holder (bought in at 1.8 cents), however, only my profits remain in this, as after all the talk, you have to ask yourself: does it pass the pub test?
Warnie hit the nail on the head - if this company's sole revenue stream is based on the internet and technology - how can their websites, and the main contact or quote buttons from the main product(s) pages, not work?
If they haven't realised this for weeks, what does that say about the product's popularity? Are people trying to sign up, but when arriving at their website, finding out that their website looks like one a Year 10 student designed in class during a Webpage making tutorial, and hence being turned off? How can EN1 not know their website has errors in it?
If someone has brought these issues to their attention, how come they haven't been fixed?
Overall, I agree with the "very poor" assessment of the EN1 client-facing interface, particularly the fact that the websites look more like a school project, with buttons that don't work or lead anywhere, as opposed to the website of a company which is publicity listed.
Not impressed.
Also, I have already once mentioned to EN1 to contract an English teacher (which should cost all of $500, a trickle compared to the hundred of thousands of $ EN1 issues in CNs to its debtors on a monthly basis) to read through all EN1's websites and fix the very embarrassing grammatical and spelling errors - no reply, no action. Same old mistakes. Case in point, here is an extract from the Iconicreach website's main page:
"The Brand set's a budget and pre-pays for the initial campaign. IconicReach will send out an automated invite to tens of thousands of Fashion oriented influencers within the brands specific target audience, inviting them to participate in the campaign."
*sets
*fashion
*brand's
If I were a business and ended up on their website to find a whole heap of elementary spelling and grammatical errors, not to mention a website that doesn't work properly, would I engage EngageBDR (pun intended)?
Expand
