Your post shows a fundamental lack of understandin
Post# of 41414
(Total Views: 535)
Posted On: 03/02/2017 4:46:19 PM
Your post shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how Tony intends to run this company. Let me shed some light on your thoughts:
1) The 767 isn't their target aircraft. Tony has suggested that the best aircraft for the company is the Boeing 777. The 767 gets them through certification, and Cheryl has certified over a dozen major airlines so I seriously doubt that updating the manuals "to perfection" will be an issue.
2) The FAA hated Igor, and vice versa. Tony has an extremely powerful general counsel, and many more attorneys, with one specifically assigned to the SEC to deal with ALL legal matters pertaining to false accusations such as the ones you suggest may be made against the company in your third point.
3) Russia is not our target market. No one cares about Russia. The company's goal is to serve major cities that don't have major hubs, and establish itself in those cities (all of which will be major tourist destinations). NO ONE has said we need to fly direct to any of these cities. We will probably form partnerships with other major airlines to produce the most profitable routes for all companies.
4) What dilution?? Stock hasn't been issued since Tony became CEO. The R/S will address the "low" stock price. The ONLY number that matters after the R/S is the market cap. The # shares is irrelevant except for uplisting....so think about the R/S benefits to us when the market cap hits $500M and we're on NASDAQ.
5) I suspect we'll transition from a dry to wet lease for aircraft quickly. The company wants to have crew members contracted, there's NO reason to hire flight attendants if major airlines simply contract them. We'll be no different. So your "more crew, more weight, lots more fuel to burn" comment is simply nonsense.
You have $100 to lose but much to say. While I see that you tried to make good points, you failed to understand this company's intentions and goals, and as a result, you come across as someone who wants to make the price drop to acquire shares.
If any of the other members here believes the words of a person who has nothing to lose ($100 really is nothing in the grand scheme of things), they're idiots.
1) The 767 isn't their target aircraft. Tony has suggested that the best aircraft for the company is the Boeing 777. The 767 gets them through certification, and Cheryl has certified over a dozen major airlines so I seriously doubt that updating the manuals "to perfection" will be an issue.
2) The FAA hated Igor, and vice versa. Tony has an extremely powerful general counsel, and many more attorneys, with one specifically assigned to the SEC to deal with ALL legal matters pertaining to false accusations such as the ones you suggest may be made against the company in your third point.
3) Russia is not our target market. No one cares about Russia. The company's goal is to serve major cities that don't have major hubs, and establish itself in those cities (all of which will be major tourist destinations). NO ONE has said we need to fly direct to any of these cities. We will probably form partnerships with other major airlines to produce the most profitable routes for all companies.
4) What dilution?? Stock hasn't been issued since Tony became CEO. The R/S will address the "low" stock price. The ONLY number that matters after the R/S is the market cap. The # shares is irrelevant except for uplisting....so think about the R/S benefits to us when the market cap hits $500M and we're on NASDAQ.
5) I suspect we'll transition from a dry to wet lease for aircraft quickly. The company wants to have crew members contracted, there's NO reason to hire flight attendants if major airlines simply contract them. We'll be no different. So your "more crew, more weight, lots more fuel to burn" comment is simply nonsense.
You have $100 to lose but much to say. While I see that you tried to make good points, you failed to understand this company's intentions and goals, and as a result, you come across as someone who wants to make the price drop to acquire shares.
If any of the other members here believes the words of a person who has nothing to lose ($100 really is nothing in the grand scheme of things), they're idiots.
(12)
(0)