This is a little investor theorizing.
We are strange creatures at time, for our greatest endowment - our ability to reason so well - is often irrational. This is because we are not solely rational creatures, but also emotional. Of course, we probably wouldn't want to be solely one of these, so the mix is a better endowment. But it comes with a price.
When we have considered any undertaking seriously, like our investment, we create a fundamental position within our own mindscape, and no two mindscapes are the same between thinkers, even if we are fed all the same information. Take the half-full/empty dichotomy we often see on this thread: same info, same goals, different understanding.
Our fundamental positions are made from our knowledge, our ability to process it within its field, our attitude in general, our emotional and psychological condition in general, and more. It is very complex, for the interactions in our mindsphere are an endless array of process too complicated to describe. But at the end of the day, we come up with some mismash of thoughts that we self declare are gospel.
To create something more obvious in this little mental exercise, lets place some tangible criteria to work with. Take DataFlex; it has been said that if it holds so much potential, then why have it on the backburner? Have you considered that it is because it holds so much potential that it can be allowed to be contained? This of course antagonizes your fundamental position, for a rising share price is a strong outcome of your mental arthitmetic.
But is it in the minds of the company?
Thankfully we can say yes, but how that rising share price is achieved requires a different process than what some would suggest. Here we have to consider their's and our fundamental positions. Their knowledge of the subject matter, just to mention one dynamic, is different from ours, and on this point we can rest assurrred that the knowedge gap, and especially the knowledge keepers, deserve the benefit of the doubt in how they play their cards. We can safely say this because relying on this team is basic within our positions.
The refocus from Asia to the US, is wide open to interpretations, and all too easy to fall fowl of our emotions, especially when the emphasis is placed on Asian download figures etc. Maybe the size of the present SYT team and limited resources is worthy of consideration, but this is only one mere possibility amoung many others.
The two examples above are mentioned to draw light on the vast complexity of our business with all its varibles unknown to us. But of course, even this line of info-lack argument is under contention, for clearer communication from the company in itself is an issue to some. We can go on raising issues and counters, but for me, I'm still very content as my fundamental position is based on certain key criteria that are unchanged:
Right market
Right product
Right team
Right time.
Sure, we can contend that any of these can be lost if Syntonic isn't more careful, but that I believe is stretching the bow too far. Recall the video of earlier in the year that demonstrated what's required for a successful tech start-up, and you'll see that we still fit the bill very well.
Expand
. Unless you believe, they are trying to save you!
