|
| AC8 | AEB | BOT | CGB | CAN | CPH |
|---|
| 1 | accumulated losses | -$4,438,372.00 | -$4,354,562.00 | -$4,204,873.00 | -$4,944,428.00 | -$4,898,171.00 | -$16,845,686.00 |
|---|
| 2 | period | Half | Half | Half | Half | Half |
|
|---|
|
| EXL | MXC | MMJ | THC |
|---|
| 1 | accumulated losses | -$860,000.00 | $565,675.00 | -$12,694,000.00 | -$1,865,000.00 |
|---|
| 2 | period | Annual | Half | Half | Quarterly |
|---|
G'day Bas.
I can't give you the breakdown of related party transactions however why should it peak anyones interest when the expenditure is in line with peers? (not that I agree with actual spending). Would making this comparison peak anyones interest to search for further breakdown? What is it exactly unless it is just the Feldman name on the Q?
Yes I did notice the loss & they are in line with most other companies in this space as per accumulated losses above so again It's not a biggy for me. I also assume there would be higher costs to CGB seeing they have multiple groups now under the same umbrella & due to the re-compliance period. As previous I have done my diligence on this company & also assumed & hoped for the positive changes with directors & company secretary (an extremely experienced & well known CS) which have now occurred with many more changes for the positive to come I'm sure. Remember again I have always said we should see positive changes through the company metamorphosis.
I'm so sick of doing all of the work in this relationship Bas!
Why is it that you can ask all of the questions yet still refuse to provide a simple response to my previous request?
I have heard you & many others with the same old same old to which I have provided my input. You are focused on the same arguments which we can now see some progress towards. You want further disclosure which I feel is coming also especially with the new company secretary. Again I ask, if you truly & diligently researched this company what is your opinion of the people (board/management/staff/growers/producers) & businesses under the CGB umbrella & how do you position them in market to their peers? It's not a trick question, I would appreciate your view.
Second & last time I ask..... so would it be fair to assume your agenda here is to discredit the company only if you can't provide?
Just like the well thought out response to my question from Stringking as above (gasp)
"a little prayer" -
Dear Social Media God's of HotCopper. Please let us be able to discuss all of the exciting new business opportunities within this stock without prejudice or feeling dumber for the baseless, factless & repeat crap we are about to receive!
amenNot surprised with that response at all based on the facts (that's right...there are none) provided
In essence, I'm sick of anyone & everyone telling me & others who actually want to discuss the fundamentals of the new company we invested in that we have tunnel vision. All I say to those saying such is look in the mirror. You are blinded by the corporate compliance stuff (which is now showing promise) & can't discuss what I think puts us ahead of many of the much larger businesses in this space.
That's right
@Stringking, once that was people like yourself however you were hit with the Feldman stick & obviously can't look past anything else & only prefer to bait people like BigDaniel for expressing his opinion (that is what you were doing wasn't it?)
Repeat above prayer!
