Yes - many our frustrated but one of the main irri
Post# of 22940
(Total Views: 368)
Posted On: 04/25/2017 5:58:51 PM
Yes - many our frustrated but one of the main irritants for that frustration is that has been self induced by the treatment of shareholders from IR. Those of us that invested in this long term had plenty of chances to flip in the teens, 20s, 30s, and all the way up into the 60s and 70s but we didnt as we saw this as a long term play. In the meantime, IR/Muse is harassing and mocking shareholders for being "stupid" for "investing" in your company when there was nothing but debt and lossez despite the fact it was R&D stage and pre-revenue. It was further compounded by their unsubstantiated PPS predictions and OS targets that they refused to back ip or even take nownership of. They routinely putted shareholders against the company and ridiculed and mocked them until they snapped and frustration turned into anger. That had little to do with the problems and challenges of the company.
That being said, there is also a disconnect between the informatjon they provided on behalf of the company and what has been put out by you/company. IR/James was rather specific on the CC last year on the BTL SLA and that it was for $135MM over 10 years and it was "guaranteed revenue." He was point blank asked if that meant $13.5MM could be counted on as a baseline for 2017 revenuez and he said yes (as well as calling for a substantially reduced OS in 6-8 months). The exact opposite has happened and per your tweets - it seems the BTL SLA is largely in question with a respect to the #s James provided.
I appreciate you taking the time to address shareholders here and being willing to speak on the phone. While we have had our disagreements (and still do), you did call back and we did speak even when it was contentious. I have directed several shareholders to you to speak live for clarity. However, the key issues now (revenues going forward and OS/AS) need to be addressed in an open forum in plain English and none of the IR hyped doublespeak and suggestive language. Obviously you/we arent where we were hoping/expecting to be but where ARE we right now? What can realistically be expected in 2017 from:
SLAs
EIAs
MRVBs
Consulting agreement (s)
And to a lesser degree - new bikes/trikes.
We understand the wrinkle with ExIM, the changing Chinese economy/government crackdown on corruption , etc. Where does that leave us with respect to the above? Some of this may be addressed in more detail in 1Q numbers but what/how has the outlook changed for 2017? Also - for tbose of us NOT interestsd in flipping this between 1 and 2 - what is realistic endpoint for AS at the end of 2017 with all of the converting from the preferreds? Muse kept saying 1BB+ shares were "bought back" but that certainly isnt the case. Whether or not they are held 3rd party in some MRVB might be realistic but why not discuss that with shareholders (again) in plain english instead of the cryptic word soup employed by IR/Muse?
The shareholders I have spoken with arent asking to see copies of contracts, looking for PPS targets, or trying to verify every single contact. However, it would be extremely helpful to provide some concrete numbers and guidance whether it is $13.5MM or $1MM expected for 2017. Without a meaningful discussion/dissemination- one cant help but look at what has transpured in the last 18 months without being very suspicious. IR has consistently "blamed" bashers and manipulators for the tanking stock price but it simply has been a matter of supply of shares overwhelming the demand for them. That demand drastically tanked when results failed to materialize and were further exasperated by the unsubstantiated PPS target of $0.01 which was just as arbitrarily moved to $0.03-0.05 in up to 36 months with the same lack of substance.
You can call me a pot stirrer, negative, a basher, etc but the questions above and discussion I am asking for is absolutely BASIC to any publicly traded company let alone one that has to be above rapprochement while mired in the OTC. An individual phone call does no good as these key metrics must be done openly. Hopefully that discussion can begin in earnest.
That being said, there is also a disconnect between the informatjon they provided on behalf of the company and what has been put out by you/company. IR/James was rather specific on the CC last year on the BTL SLA and that it was for $135MM over 10 years and it was "guaranteed revenue." He was point blank asked if that meant $13.5MM could be counted on as a baseline for 2017 revenuez and he said yes (as well as calling for a substantially reduced OS in 6-8 months). The exact opposite has happened and per your tweets - it seems the BTL SLA is largely in question with a respect to the #s James provided.
I appreciate you taking the time to address shareholders here and being willing to speak on the phone. While we have had our disagreements (and still do), you did call back and we did speak even when it was contentious. I have directed several shareholders to you to speak live for clarity. However, the key issues now (revenues going forward and OS/AS) need to be addressed in an open forum in plain English and none of the IR hyped doublespeak and suggestive language. Obviously you/we arent where we were hoping/expecting to be but where ARE we right now? What can realistically be expected in 2017 from:
SLAs
EIAs
MRVBs
Consulting agreement (s)
And to a lesser degree - new bikes/trikes.
We understand the wrinkle with ExIM, the changing Chinese economy/government crackdown on corruption , etc. Where does that leave us with respect to the above? Some of this may be addressed in more detail in 1Q numbers but what/how has the outlook changed for 2017? Also - for tbose of us NOT interestsd in flipping this between 1 and 2 - what is realistic endpoint for AS at the end of 2017 with all of the converting from the preferreds? Muse kept saying 1BB+ shares were "bought back" but that certainly isnt the case. Whether or not they are held 3rd party in some MRVB might be realistic but why not discuss that with shareholders (again) in plain english instead of the cryptic word soup employed by IR/Muse?
The shareholders I have spoken with arent asking to see copies of contracts, looking for PPS targets, or trying to verify every single contact. However, it would be extremely helpful to provide some concrete numbers and guidance whether it is $13.5MM or $1MM expected for 2017. Without a meaningful discussion/dissemination- one cant help but look at what has transpured in the last 18 months without being very suspicious. IR has consistently "blamed" bashers and manipulators for the tanking stock price but it simply has been a matter of supply of shares overwhelming the demand for them. That demand drastically tanked when results failed to materialize and were further exasperated by the unsubstantiated PPS target of $0.01 which was just as arbitrarily moved to $0.03-0.05 in up to 36 months with the same lack of substance.
You can call me a pot stirrer, negative, a basher, etc but the questions above and discussion I am asking for is absolutely BASIC to any publicly traded company let alone one that has to be above rapprochement while mired in the OTC. An individual phone call does no good as these key metrics must be done openly. Hopefully that discussion can begin in earnest.
(11)
(0)Trans-Pacific Aerospace (TPAC) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼