Seems to me shareholders share the same sentiment. I've...

Seems to me shareholders share the same sentiment. I've held stock in companies that have been in dramatically more difficult positions that have performed so much better. I've held/hold companies that have not reported any such revenue, companies that have NTA's of only a fraction of the SP. Companies that haven't a proven track record,,, but companies that still perform on the market. I've nested in mmj because most of the figures check out and the good investment boxes are checked. One thing I constantly write to Jim Hallam about is the lack of investor inspiration released to the asx. MMJ have a fortune of news which is released to on the website and other investor channels, Jim keeps saying that this news reaches thousands of investors - but I keep saying it's not reaching enough potential investors that circle the asx announcements and chatter, it may be short lived but if it's a tenacious campaign true/stable growth follows. MMJ need to continue their day to day business strategy but really improve their marketing strategy. Movement comes from news and investor understanding of productive work. MMJ's held companies are working and producing news constantly but only a tiny fraction of this reaches the asx. I'm not absolutely sure if this causes conflict with the asx listing rules but I find it hard to think it would. As an investor I think this is material news... Any other shareholder with the same sentiment should send a quick email to mmj ATTN Jim Hallam and state the same. MMJ have a proven revenue strategy, cash, and I think a good, capable board and management - it could certainly be a 70c stock. They just need to think bigger than basic business and think along the lines of a listed company. That's my two cents. If anyone can clarify asx listing rules, specifically as to any conflicts arising from announcing/regurgitating news from MMJ's vested companies is appreciated.