"the only ones trying to be manipulative is you and your pathetic cronies"
And how am I being manipulative (or "dead wrong" per your last repliez)?
Because I wanted to understand the working relationship between IR/TPAC and wanted to know how their interests as an IR firm aligned with mine as an investor?
Because I wanted a phone # to speak with IR/James/Specialist in person to understand that relationship (long before James provided the nunber via CC).
Because I wanted to know whether IR were paid employees? Independent contractors? Third party affiliates?
Or because I wanted to know how IR was being paid/compensated? The company didnt have cash to pay them. Bill said he was buyback/retiring shares so it didnt make sense to be issuing new ones. If it was commission basis - what were the metrics (back to the alignment issue).
Because I was against the company/affiliates (especially their Investor Relations firm - yes - that is how they were referred to when they took over and how they were listed on PRs) providing PPS targets? Further, because I asked them how they could possibly substantiate them unless they were going to directly impact supply of shares (that or ramp up top/bottom line so aggressively that demand took care of the suspply.side)?
Because CEO distanced himself from these targets even though they (James) WAS speaking on behalf of the company?
Because I asked how IR was going to reduce shares that fast (below 1BB) when they were expecting less than $275K (per CC) in revenues in 4Q16 and MRVBs would be up and functioning en force before 1Q17?
Because I questioned why they continued to affirmed price guidance WITHOUT adjusting revenue guidance or addressing how they were going to affect supply?
Because I was against how IR treated shareholders in general (let alone long term ones)?
Because I questioned why Bill allowed IR/Muse to harass shareholders?
Because the pathetic use of grammar/syntax on IR/Muse tweets reflected poorly on the company (though not as bad as how they were attacking shareholders)?
Show me one example of "manipulation." I can point to many examples of where IR encouraged people (me specifically) to buy shares via Twitter after the price went up and then told shareholders to sell after it went down. Repeated price targets and OS reductions were provided with no substantiation. Those targets were replaced with even loftier ones. What about the $135MM BTL SLA that James went over via CC rather emphatically how it was money.in the bank and now it appears via tweets from Bill that he never committed to those numbers? What about Australia SLA? Or the billion dollar EIA that IR/Muse was throwing around out there? All of this dangling while preferreds were unloading hand over fist, AS cap removed, dilution STILL occurring and you want to suggest/imply/call me the manipulator...?
You or "your cronies" steadfastly refuse to debate any of these issues. Instead you call names, delete messages, block users, attack them, etc. You continue to allude how great things are and everything is going as planned. Is that part of protecting and enhancing shareholder value that is paramount in fiduciary responsibility?
Please - show me where I manipulated the board/PPS. There wont be any examples just like you never had with the other salacious claims like the 56MM shares.
I have zero affiliation with the iLie board or any posters there. I have never shorted this stock or ANY other stock. I have zero affiliation with this company or any of its affiliates. I have a long term position (though my time horizon certainly has changed as my belief in the legitimacy of the entire operation).
My posting history on this stock speaks for itself to modeling the potential of the company/PPS and providing rationale for both. My sentiments turned on IR/reconstruction when I got the runaround on some of the basic questions above and then was attacked because "they were already answered." They werent. Still arent. The irony is your group saying "know what you own" and "do your own DD" and then attacking shareholders when they do.
There has been ZERO manipulation on my part.
And how am I being manipulative (or "dead wrong" per your last repliez)?
Because I wanted to understand the working relationship between IR/TPAC and wanted to know how their interests as an IR firm aligned with mine as an investor?
Because I wanted a phone # to speak with IR/James/Specialist in person to understand that relationship (long before James provided the nunber via CC).
Because I wanted to know whether IR were paid employees? Independent contractors? Third party affiliates?
Or because I wanted to know how IR was being paid/compensated? The company didnt have cash to pay them. Bill said he was buyback/retiring shares so it didnt make sense to be issuing new ones. If it was commission basis - what were the metrics (back to the alignment issue).
Because I was against the company/affiliates (especially their Investor Relations firm - yes - that is how they were referred to when they took over and how they were listed on PRs) providing PPS targets? Further, because I asked them how they could possibly substantiate them unless they were going to directly impact supply of shares (that or ramp up top/bottom line so aggressively that demand took care of the suspply.side)?
Because CEO distanced himself from these targets even though they (James) WAS speaking on behalf of the company?
Because I asked how IR was going to reduce shares that fast (below 1BB) when they were expecting less than $275K (per CC) in revenues in 4Q16 and MRVBs would be up and functioning en force before 1Q17?
Because I questioned why they continued to affirmed price guidance WITHOUT adjusting revenue guidance or addressing how they were going to affect supply?
Because I was against how IR treated shareholders in general (let alone long term ones)?
Because I questioned why Bill allowed IR/Muse to harass shareholders?
Because the pathetic use of grammar/syntax on IR/Muse tweets reflected poorly on the company (though not as bad as how they were attacking shareholders)?
Show me one example of "manipulation." I can point to many examples of where IR encouraged people (me specifically) to buy shares via Twitter after the price went up and then told shareholders to sell after it went down. Repeated price targets and OS reductions were provided with no substantiation. Those targets were replaced with even loftier ones. What about the $135MM BTL SLA that James went over via CC rather emphatically how it was money.in the bank and now it appears via tweets from Bill that he never committed to those numbers? What about Australia SLA? Or the billion dollar EIA that IR/Muse was throwing around out there? All of this dangling while preferreds were unloading hand over fist, AS cap removed, dilution STILL occurring and you want to suggest/imply/call me the manipulator...?
You or "your cronies" steadfastly refuse to debate any of these issues. Instead you call names, delete messages, block users, attack them, etc. You continue to allude how great things are and everything is going as planned. Is that part of protecting and enhancing shareholder value that is paramount in fiduciary responsibility?
Please - show me where I manipulated the board/PPS. There wont be any examples just like you never had with the other salacious claims like the 56MM shares.
I have zero affiliation with the iLie board or any posters there. I have never shorted this stock or ANY other stock. I have zero affiliation with this company or any of its affiliates. I have a long term position (though my time horizon certainly has changed as my belief in the legitimacy of the entire operation).
My posting history on this stock speaks for itself to modeling the potential of the company/PPS and providing rationale for both. My sentiments turned on IR/reconstruction when I got the runaround on some of the basic questions above and then was attacked because "they were already answered." They werent. Still arent. The irony is your group saying "know what you own" and "do your own DD" and then attacking shareholders when they do.
There has been ZERO manipulation on my part.
3
