lol .. sort of like the *crew* (both sides) utilizing that *profit* line

funny thing about understanding *disruptors* .. no 2 buyers will have the same *intent* re: utilization of technology

i posted on that site >> a few years back that the key word was *sustainability*

and it's just one reason why i asked *some* to both listen to other disruptors' CCs
and *read* (navigate) disruptive sector leaders' *websites*

this isn't rocket science

crew on IHUB >> which i now suspect had some *help* from SE's interaction
with GM and LONDON CALLING >> early on

has one hell of a problem .. not the least of which is their CONnections don't
run as deep as *others* looking to reverse engineer P2O's prox back when
bought and paid for was SOP

so when i noted last fall that 12 to 15c was a problem .. it's even *worse* now
for them

probably sub 10c ..

rest assured what i see .. will be seen by *others* by the 20c *range*

so that means >> LONDON CALLING >> has to make a choice @ the 30c to 40c PPS

note to self: RH's lack of a honeymoon in mid August 2013

so using 30M$ (approx) and an Issued and Outstanding (with BoD) of approx 150M

it works out to (again approx) to .20c

hmmmm

now having actually been involved with a disruptive tech .. (albeit a different sector entirely)
and having actually *benefitted* financially from an additional sector's *disruptor*
actually acquired by said sector's 800 pound gorilla (dating myself here)

it doesn't get any better than this

so do the big boys out of LONDON .. start to cover on *actual legit* volume @ 30 to 40c?

that and whether RH seats an indy BoD are the only ?s .. i have left ..

here's to what mgmt files next ..

4kids