Anyone around long enough knows your rhetoric and questions the motive of why someone would only post on one stock they don’t own. What is clear is there’s an emotional investment but others can make assertions as to why that might be the case.
In essence what you and other axe grinders are trying to assert is that a company has paid us $5M to receive services which we won’t be able to provide bc in effect the $5M is already spent and only keeps us solvent for a short period.
Am l really to believe that in accepting your assertions that some form of due diligence exercise wasn’t undertaken to satisfy the investors of our capability before entering and signing of contracts. Really? No Really?
To entertain such an assertion would only demonstrate a basic fundamental deficiency in corporate law and practices. As for the money is already spent in full, it evidences both a lack of financial literacy and another desperate to grind axes.
You see, what shareholders have really been looking for is third party endorsement of the company and it’s product. We have this now by way of $5M.
There’s a couple of other notable absences from the camp of dissenters. I’m going to assume that they have decided that prosecuting their case in the face of $5M is very difficult, in fact out right embarrassing given the veracity of some of the comments made.
However, l commend you on continuing to fight the cause, which if l actually knew what that was, l might be able to offer you some assistance with.
TV2 Price at posting:
0.8¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
