Dave, you were acting mentally disturbed because o
Post# of 30067
Posted On: 03/21/2015 12:37:12 AM
Re: Daveludlow #18580
Dave, you were acting mentally disturbed because of the NUMBER of times each day you posted your concerns. Normal people don't usually act like idiots. I realize you're in over your head with your investment here and that's why you are so fearful of losing money, but that doesn't translate into everyone else sharing your concerns. In your view, anyone not sharing your concerns is drinking the Kool Aid. Maybe you should buy some more shares at these prices, since you believe having too many shares insulates one from concerns about the company. LMAO
Oh, but that would require you to go to work, right? Obviously we can't let work get in the way of critical thinking and posting on message boards and holding management's feet to the fire. So if you have to sell the rest of your shares, will you still be holding management's feet to the fire? Just curious.
Gotta love how you are clearly ignorant of the science, and then you learn something new, like "multivariate" analysis, or "small molecule" and you make hundreds of posts using those terms, trying to educate everyone else, or is it simply to try to sound intelligent and cover up the fact that previously you didn't have a clue what you were posting about? It comes across as simply being people over the head with your new-found "intelligence". LOL
So, how did you vote on the AS increase?
Perhaps you'd like to give back ESS, the Georgetown assays, and MSPrecise. Funny how you thought those were great moves by the company, but did you not make the mental connection between those acquisitions/licenses and the increase in AS? Gerald clearly told us back before the vote that some of those shares would be used for acquisitions. But I suppose we should have listened to you and all voted NO. You can't have it both ways, which is how you seem to want it.
How exactly does upper management benefit from exercising their options if they dilute the company into oblivion as you think they're doing? How are they immune from this effect?
Before you suggest they'll RS the shares and the options, warrants and convertible securities won't be affected, you'd better brush up on Nevada law or you'll make yourself look like an idiot in your response.
I wonder why JP voted YES when he was so clearly against the increase. And no, the vote was NOT a done deal with management's shares alone. I proved this in a post prior to the vote, using management ownership from the latest filing and proving it would require a substantial number of the common shareholder vote to approve the increase. The increase was overwhelmingly approved, but it was far from being a done deal just because management thought it was the thing to do.
So how did you vote? Be careful how you answer, because I'm sure someone will look it up.
Oh, but that would require you to go to work, right? Obviously we can't let work get in the way of critical thinking and posting on message boards and holding management's feet to the fire. So if you have to sell the rest of your shares, will you still be holding management's feet to the fire? Just curious.
Gotta love how you are clearly ignorant of the science, and then you learn something new, like "multivariate" analysis, or "small molecule" and you make hundreds of posts using those terms, trying to educate everyone else, or is it simply to try to sound intelligent and cover up the fact that previously you didn't have a clue what you were posting about? It comes across as simply being people over the head with your new-found "intelligence". LOL
So, how did you vote on the AS increase?
Perhaps you'd like to give back ESS, the Georgetown assays, and MSPrecise. Funny how you thought those were great moves by the company, but did you not make the mental connection between those acquisitions/licenses and the increase in AS? Gerald clearly told us back before the vote that some of those shares would be used for acquisitions. But I suppose we should have listened to you and all voted NO. You can't have it both ways, which is how you seem to want it.
How exactly does upper management benefit from exercising their options if they dilute the company into oblivion as you think they're doing? How are they immune from this effect?
Before you suggest they'll RS the shares and the options, warrants and convertible securities won't be affected, you'd better brush up on Nevada law or you'll make yourself look like an idiot in your response.
I wonder why JP voted YES when he was so clearly against the increase. And no, the vote was NOT a done deal with management's shares alone. I proved this in a post prior to the vote, using management ownership from the latest filing and proving it would require a substantial number of the common shareholder vote to approve the increase. The increase was overwhelmingly approved, but it was far from being a done deal just because management thought it was the thing to do.
So how did you vote? Be careful how you answer, because I'm sure someone will look it up.
(0)
(0)