I was there- I was the only one who knew about thi

I was there- I was the only one who knew about this relatively new but now commonly applied scenario- you have to understand something before you can intelligently dismiss and nobody really understood it- many obviously still dont .

it was so misunderstood despite careful pages long detailing that 1 person tried to convince everybody here i was attacking the company-an egregious misrepresentation bandied about on this board akin to misdirection.

the concerns were openly dismissed by only 1 person who tried to prevent the co from being warned and tried to heavily influence others-i couldnt believe it-i was flabbergasted.

There is no logical reason to prevent warning the co re something they would have no way of knowing about without having experienced it and thus many companies fall into that transition to revenue pps increase without current info trap. Companies need the info and then intelligent adults in the co can decide what to do w the info.

I cant imagine any downside to their having the info so they can make an intelligent decision whereas the result of not having the info could be disastrous to longs so the decision making tree -tell the co or dont tell the co- should be an easy one.

Most companies have no idea of the games played in present penny land political environment and I was the only one who had experienced this scenario and thus knew how brokers mm's sec fbi dtc coordinated their attacks against a company once otc slapped the caveat emptor skulls symbol on the stock because in the present political envirnoment they all believe noncurrent info co's are attempting to defraud investors when they or 3rd parties put out PR's emails promos etc that result in a large pps increase because there is no independently vetted info for investors to rely on in making their investment decisions .