You can't reason with the unreasonable mate, yet alone someone who doesn't even fully comprehend the business into which they've only invested 'a few months ago' - presumably on a whim - and then lectures others who may or may not hold.
After all, it's as good as useless trying to infer that a comparison to MC companies would be relevant when ESE produces terpenes and has little to no regulatory hurdles, and the other set of businesses have been restricted by way of 'excessive' regulatory hurdles.
Even then, you can still provide an example as I did with THC, and be ignored or refuted for doing just as was requested:
- 1.8m in revenue
- gross profit of 780k
- ended 2017 with 79m quoted shares plus 36m options trading
You don't even need to be an investor to know this one can only be described as failing to live up to its potential
thus far - but for some that's good enough to have faith in management. I mean, talk about not making the most of a competitive advantage where the regulatory landscape was largely beneficial to the company!! But hey, they've announced some 'deals' - convenient timing, mind you - maybe those deals will be as favourable as that one they did with Allor, which dragged on and on!!
And since it supposedly makes a difference, to some, I backed the biz at/before IPO. So I've used my vote to have my say in hope of actually seeing this company where it should be, which is with a greater conversion of revenue/cash, and a much higher market cap.
