Not at all. Sure, if logic prevailed and even matt
Post# of 167
Posted On: 10/11/2014 9:01:33 PM
Not at all. Sure, if logic prevailed and even mattered, then the answer would be "YES!" And resoundingly so. But you need to keep in mind that the bashers never gave a crap about management's veracity or even their own, for that matter. Logic isn't involved.
The idea behind effective bashing is that of fomenting unrest and uncertainty. There's logic and it's incredibly simple:
"Hurt those who stand in disagreement and they'll be weakened. The weaker they are, the easier it becomes to control the company's destiny by managing the emotions of longs."
The shorts are in control of USEI, make no mistake. Tony has not shown the leadership necessary to command legions of believers. Nor has he demonstrated a willingness to delegate to others, either. This results in his running a one man show which is failing miserably in my opinion as is reflected by the current share price.
He has spoken of advances beneficial to the company but as co-owners of the company's stock, can you point to specifics enriching any of us?
Refiling may be nothing more than a token salute to those who nagged long and hard enough to actually push the CEO to act. I'm unable to see any enrichment due us longs. And it is this item alone that I suspect explains the stagnant share price. Also, remember that the challenge to "prove" was never meaningful except to apply pressure on USEI. I didn't doubt or even care about this challenge or another. I know of nobody else coming from a differing vantage point. The whole thing was nothing more than a ploy aimed at discrediting Tony.
While I'm a long-devoted long, I'm hardly convinced this company will go anywhere meaningful to me. I like that Tony is working to procure a rec license. I'm disturbed at the quality or lack of quality shown in the PRs, particularly the last one. The writing is atrociously ill conceived. Concepts are lost in a maze of defensiveness and overall, his messages lack clarity and strength of purpose. A bright seventh grader would likely do a better job of writing the PRs.
For the record, I volunteered via emails to help with PR presentations, this---twice. I made no mention of compensation. I'm a writer with professional background. Tony and I have spoken on two occasions. He didn't bother to respond to my offers. I interpret that as his not giving a damn by favoring his determination to be the super-human CEO who could single-handedly overcome all obstacles.
I hope it's not a tossup between narcissism and stupid. Still, in my opinion, no responsible corporate leader has any right to sacrifice the publicly held company in defense of his wish to accomplish the impossible.
Furthermore, I'm holding five millions shares at a cost of .0059. I'm not hurting financially and for this reason am prepared to go down with the ship. But I'm pissed because I see room for massive improvements---changes that won't happen until Mr. Miller wakes up to the fact that he is failing to enrich shareholders.
And that enrichment is what has people willing to invest in the stock market. Isn't that right?
The idea behind effective bashing is that of fomenting unrest and uncertainty. There's logic and it's incredibly simple:
"Hurt those who stand in disagreement and they'll be weakened. The weaker they are, the easier it becomes to control the company's destiny by managing the emotions of longs."
The shorts are in control of USEI, make no mistake. Tony has not shown the leadership necessary to command legions of believers. Nor has he demonstrated a willingness to delegate to others, either. This results in his running a one man show which is failing miserably in my opinion as is reflected by the current share price.
He has spoken of advances beneficial to the company but as co-owners of the company's stock, can you point to specifics enriching any of us?
Refiling may be nothing more than a token salute to those who nagged long and hard enough to actually push the CEO to act. I'm unable to see any enrichment due us longs. And it is this item alone that I suspect explains the stagnant share price. Also, remember that the challenge to "prove" was never meaningful except to apply pressure on USEI. I didn't doubt or even care about this challenge or another. I know of nobody else coming from a differing vantage point. The whole thing was nothing more than a ploy aimed at discrediting Tony.
While I'm a long-devoted long, I'm hardly convinced this company will go anywhere meaningful to me. I like that Tony is working to procure a rec license. I'm disturbed at the quality or lack of quality shown in the PRs, particularly the last one. The writing is atrociously ill conceived. Concepts are lost in a maze of defensiveness and overall, his messages lack clarity and strength of purpose. A bright seventh grader would likely do a better job of writing the PRs.
For the record, I volunteered via emails to help with PR presentations, this---twice. I made no mention of compensation. I'm a writer with professional background. Tony and I have spoken on two occasions. He didn't bother to respond to my offers. I interpret that as his not giving a damn by favoring his determination to be the super-human CEO who could single-handedly overcome all obstacles.
I hope it's not a tossup between narcissism and stupid. Still, in my opinion, no responsible corporate leader has any right to sacrifice the publicly held company in defense of his wish to accomplish the impossible.
Furthermore, I'm holding five millions shares at a cost of .0059. I'm not hurting financially and for this reason am prepared to go down with the ship. But I'm pissed because I see room for massive improvements---changes that won't happen until Mr. Miller wakes up to the fact that he is failing to enrich shareholders.
And that enrichment is what has people willing to invest in the stock market. Isn't that right?
(0)
(0)