has nothing changed ?, page-24

"but what we do know from past experience is that if this story is told properly, the market will love this company"

That is rubbish GS. The love for the company in the past was not based on the story being told properly, but appears to have been based on a combination of hot air and lies about the true financial state of the company. The market's love for the company was predominantly the result of overly ambitious sales projections by the previous board(which I think from memory included sales for 2011 well in excess of one hundreds million dollars - looking good for that aren't we? - although I must give the directors credit for including massive disclaimers with the projections), and continuing glowing reports about the number (over 90 I believe) and potential size of early adopters (from memory I think many were claimed to be amongst the market leaders in their field although very few were actually ever named due to that useful all-purpose cloak that listed companies (especially smaller ones) like to hide behind - confidentiality).

Also, at the time the market loved this company, the balance sheet included about $10m of current assets (cash and sundry debtors) that according to the current board did not really exist (well, going by the court cases going on at the moment they probably did exist but were seriously misdescribed and their recoverability was highly questionable).