Crawford made his point, so there's no need to han

Crawford made his point, so there's no need to hang around irritating long term investors with his short term/conservative investment advise. You just said yourself, if you reach your stop loss, which you are approaching, and you sell, then you have to accept that not all dreams come true. Really?? That's a common-sense-based piece of reality, but here, at this point along this company's path (just into 8th month of sales) it would only apply to your dream of short term multi-bagger. It's a style of investing, a preference, a choice, and not the only way that works. Long term investment without established proof for reassurance just represents to much risk for some investors, and their acceptable term for ROI is whatever they need it to be. For the less patient that term is most often very short, not out beyond (or even to) a year or two. Attitude is not measured by choice of investment strategy in most cases, but how much humility and courtesy is used in the average communication. The more "cover your ass" investing style works best for average investors which is why all investment firms recommend it. Aggressive and higher risk strategies, especially when investing in a start-up, only work well for those with excellent ability to retain all of the pros and cons as they accumulate and combine how that measures up against your own ideas or "gut feelings" about the product or services they are marketing. So far what I've seen on this board is a lot of argument about what investment strategy is best, basically, and some just won't walk away from an argument without the feeling that they have won. You can't possibly win the argument that this is not a smart long term investment until "long term" (which is measured in years for most start-ups) has transpired and we see how the investments faired. Looking at that cold hard fact, it would be best for anyone not willing to wait for the company to reach the necessary milestones to just leave without jabbing and spitting, or pissing and moaning about how those who disagree are less intelligent and just plain wrong. That type of person usually either disappears once proof of their being wrong is revealed, or they try to twist or outright lie about their previous use of arrogance and intolerance when disagreed with on the investment's likelihood to succeed. Also, I always suspect a negative diagnosis for a company like this, one whose future looks fantastic to me, as a stealthy way to do all they can to help the PPS to drop further so that they can snag shares as cheap as possible. May not be his intent, but I'm sure if the PPS reaches what he feels is a steal he'll jump all over it. Especially because it'll have much greater short term potential than it had when he first decided to invest in this pink sheet. Most people professing the investment wisdom from the book don't even consider pinks except for quick multi-bagger momentum plays. Like you said, sometimes dreams don't come true. Crawford's hanging around is not a graceful departure, and is far more indicative of a bad attitude than professing the intent to sell and wait til later. Hanging around and arguing will only succeed in prolonged negativity. For what? Ego and/or cheap shares? Pease, time to give it a rest.