"Stan, you really like to provoke an argument, don't you?"No,...

"Stan, you really like to provoke an argument, don't you?"
No, like you I have a different perspective. and because you are so bullish on your stance, I will retort just as strongly. I rarely fire the first shot. And as I am stuck in conference calls most of today, I have time to expand on your thoughts.

"You claim that the market doesn't know squat (but you do)"
I made no such claim. I simply counted your claim with giving examples of two high quality businesses that the market ignored for a long time. and believe that this share is well within my risk. There is a difference. Why can't you see the difference there?

"make some absurd statement about institutions not lending to companies with cash flow."
I disagree with that statement. You make it sound as if institutions never do. Again I never made such claims.

"Then you bring out a couple of alleged success stories that have NOTHING to do with VRC"
It was never meant to refer to VRC. It was to counter your point that Markets are right. They aren't always. How did you possibly draw such an absurd conclusion from what I typed? They are not alleged. If you have the know-how, a quick research of a graph and dividends and company announcements will prove my point on both.

How you possibly read into what I have typed is beyond me. I can see that your anger clouds your judgement. I suggest you re read my last post and you try again.

But as an aside. I will chance that you bought in the MOZ days at the height or near height of the Sugar spruikers somewhere between 8-12 cents. Because otherwise you would have had ample opportunity to sell out of this share you despise so much.

I'll be happy to further our discussions when your comprehension improves and we can discuss things without your inflated assumptions