bids building at 0.8, offer being chipped away, page-14

BRR,

This is not a critisism, but a comment.

Your post seems to be a run-on sentence with 2 ideas.

1) You agree with MOD that management is an issue
2) Being Australian, rather than American is an issue

IMO, the management issue extends way back before the current management time and into the stewardship of MOD. The current management had to pick up the pieces left behind after MODs time. Now, perhaps, the current management may have been able to do better, but to put MOD up as some sort of saint, I believe, is not historically accurate nor just. MOD seems like a great ideas guy, but managing a $1b company does not appear to have been his forte. This happens with so many tech companies, the ideas guy is not a business guy.

I recently sat next to a guy, on a plane, from one of the big consulting companies. I tapped his brain for the flight, not mentioning MST. When I described the history, he shook his head and said "I've heard this a hundred times". The tech guy founds the company and gets handed a lot of money to do whatever he wants and he's like the kid in the candy store....over spends, over engineers and is not sales focused.

Now, I am not bashing MOD, but rather, I think his skills need to be compartmentalised into areas where his value add lies. Cleary, business and finance are not his skillset. During his time, from listing at $2.50 and seeing a brief rise to up to $3.50, when he departed, MST was at 25c and the direction was set and we have lived with the legacy from then on. To say MOD would have done a better job is ludicrous. He had 7 listed years and serious sales were a million miles away. Now they are pretty close, perhaps (and hopefully) in 2011. Changing management now would be the end of the company, entirely. Who would be to blame then? Like it or not, we've got these guys. Bitching about them (I am not talking about constructive criticism) helps no one, but get's people in a negative state of mind and looking to failure, rather than success. I suspect that is a little of the 'anti-Australian' self-deprecation you speak of in 2)

Now this post is not meant to be a vilification of anyone, but, a reflection of the facts without reminscing about how good things used to be. While I think some things could have been better handled by the current management, they have done a better job than MOD would have, IMO.

This company needs 2 things;
1) Sales
2) More capital

Both appear to be being addressed by current management. We just need more of both.

On the second matter, being an Australian, the federal government, no matter of which persuassion, is an embarrassment to Australia and it's people. They don't support Australian product, innovation or employment. They don't care about the people until they have a pen in their hand about to write on a ballot ticket, nor do they care about the long-term future of the country or it's economy.

Shame on them.

BUT MST has MST Inc. and a serious US player on the board who seems connected. Change is happening. I don't understand why the constant broken record when change is happening. Do you want to sweep away with all of the experience (including from mistakes made) a start anew? And who will you put in?

On this forum, I have heard bitching and moaning about 'dilution', then last year, the board did a rights issue, allowing all shareholders to inject much needed capital and retain their shareholding (and have the right to inject another 4.5 times that amount if things go well). But many did not. But they still seem to complain? If that is you, the reader, then that just makes you a whinger and there are other fora for you to go bashing and whining, so you'll feel in good company there. Otherwise start putting specifics to your complaints. And not specifics like "so-and-so said something in 2007 and they haven't done it". We've heard it. And you are right, they haven't delivered to the promises. BUT I think they have learned, now we get less promises. And what happens, people bitch about that too? These poor bastards can't win.

Look everyone is entiled to their opinions, as am I, but I think we need to keep our heads up and straight. This company remains on the brink. It needs more capital. A lower price just means we have to sell out at a cheaper price.

Creating an aura of negativity just means it is going to be harder to get the price up. And Dutchess get their stock basesd around the market price, so a higher price means less dilution. Think about that when you get all negative and bitch about dilution.