My reply to Waldrop's email: Will, Thank y
Post# of 2022
(Total Views: 166)
Posted On: 11/14/2017 2:13:53 PM
My reply to Waldrop's email:
Will,
Thank you for responding. However, I must take exception to your response concerning question 3, reducing AS from 1 billion to 100 million. I find it most disingenuous and illogical. It is beyond debate that 1 billion AS and 10 million OS is a serious detriment to the shareholders and the company.
Such a huge spread makes it nearly impossible to attract major investors, retail investors, equity partners, and financing. Anyone looking at that spread is immediately going to think this company is prepared to do massive dilution. As a result, the liquidity of the company's shares is now almost non-existent as trading volume has entirely dried up, and the share price has fallen by more than 50% since the R/S. Every positive PR or 8K issued has only a momentary effect on the share price, which quickly drops back to where it was, or worse, even lower.
If, in the conversations with institutional investors, none of them are concerned with the AS, then why have they not invested? Obviously our tremendous year over year growth both historically and forecasted, is not enough to entice them. Simple human psychology is going to warn them in the back of their minds that the risk is too great and, as we all know, simply saying you won't do something is meaningless. There must be evidence proving you will not do something.
In my conversations with many hundreds of current, former, and potential retail investors, the enormous AS value is the determining factor dictating to them whether or not to invest more, or even at all. In my investigation and analysis, I have explored numerous theories as to why the share price is doing so poorly and every one of them, except for the enormous AS, can be quickly discounted because interest in the stock simply is not there, despite spending $25,000 a month on corporate communications with NetworkNewsWire.
You stated in your 8K of September 18, 2017 that "On September 18, 2017, the Board of Directors approved to amend the Corporation’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation so as to reduce the Authorized Shares of the Company from 1,010,000,000 to 110,000,000, and to submit the Articles Amendment to the Corporation’s stockholders for approval at the next Annual Shareholders Meeting or Special Meeting, whichever is to occur first."
Also, the amendment to the company's charter recently passed by the shareholders states, "To authorize an amendment to our Charter to provide that any action of shareholders that would otherwise require a shareholder's meeting may be taken by the written consent of the required minimum number of shareholders without a meeting pursuant to Section 7-107-104 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (the “Written Consent Authorization”)"
As such, an annual shareholder meeting or even a special meeting is not required to vote on the additional decrease in the AS. All you need is the written consent of the majority of the shares represented, i.e., 51%. You have that already via insiders and directors alone. We shareholders overwhelming approved this amendment, giving the CEO virtual cart blanc to do whatever he/she felt needed to be done. With this in mind, there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of further reducing the AS.
There must be something else holding you back from accomplishing this then. Thirty-thousand dollars is very little to pay for the extraordinary impact reducing the AS will have, benefiting the company and its shareholders enormously. If you can spend $25,000 a month on corporate communications that has as of yet produced any noticeable benefit, then $30K is a drop in the bucket compared to the huge benefit it would be to the shareholders.
I have told you numerous times that I fully support what you are doing with the company, your efforts, and your vision. I still do. You have done exceedingly well in building and growing the company. However, this seeming lack of concern for the shareholder's plight gives the company the appearance of just another slimy OTC that serves the interest of the insiders on the backs of the shareholders.
Will, with all due respect, I feel you are failing your fiduciary duty to the shareholders. Many of us who have invested heavily in the company are in dire straights, with our investment being in a virtual free fall since the first of the year. I have been in and out as a shareholder a couple of times as my frustration and fear of a complete loss got the best of me. My initial $20K investment is now worth a mere $3K. However, I keep coming back because I know in my heart and my head what this company can be and will be.
I hope you will take my criticisms as they are meant, not as a condemnation but as a nudge to widen your view of the effects of what you do, or do not do, on the smaller shareholders. You and Lori have far more shares than any of us. That doesn't mean you should not make yourself aware of the impact on us smaller investors.
If you made it reading down this far without hitting the delete button, thank you for taking the time to read my missive, and I hope I will hear back from you.
Ed
Will,
Thank you for responding. However, I must take exception to your response concerning question 3, reducing AS from 1 billion to 100 million. I find it most disingenuous and illogical. It is beyond debate that 1 billion AS and 10 million OS is a serious detriment to the shareholders and the company.
Such a huge spread makes it nearly impossible to attract major investors, retail investors, equity partners, and financing. Anyone looking at that spread is immediately going to think this company is prepared to do massive dilution. As a result, the liquidity of the company's shares is now almost non-existent as trading volume has entirely dried up, and the share price has fallen by more than 50% since the R/S. Every positive PR or 8K issued has only a momentary effect on the share price, which quickly drops back to where it was, or worse, even lower.
If, in the conversations with institutional investors, none of them are concerned with the AS, then why have they not invested? Obviously our tremendous year over year growth both historically and forecasted, is not enough to entice them. Simple human psychology is going to warn them in the back of their minds that the risk is too great and, as we all know, simply saying you won't do something is meaningless. There must be evidence proving you will not do something.
In my conversations with many hundreds of current, former, and potential retail investors, the enormous AS value is the determining factor dictating to them whether or not to invest more, or even at all. In my investigation and analysis, I have explored numerous theories as to why the share price is doing so poorly and every one of them, except for the enormous AS, can be quickly discounted because interest in the stock simply is not there, despite spending $25,000 a month on corporate communications with NetworkNewsWire.
You stated in your 8K of September 18, 2017 that "On September 18, 2017, the Board of Directors approved to amend the Corporation’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation so as to reduce the Authorized Shares of the Company from 1,010,000,000 to 110,000,000, and to submit the Articles Amendment to the Corporation’s stockholders for approval at the next Annual Shareholders Meeting or Special Meeting, whichever is to occur first."
Also, the amendment to the company's charter recently passed by the shareholders states, "To authorize an amendment to our Charter to provide that any action of shareholders that would otherwise require a shareholder's meeting may be taken by the written consent of the required minimum number of shareholders without a meeting pursuant to Section 7-107-104 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (the “Written Consent Authorization”)"
As such, an annual shareholder meeting or even a special meeting is not required to vote on the additional decrease in the AS. All you need is the written consent of the majority of the shares represented, i.e., 51%. You have that already via insiders and directors alone. We shareholders overwhelming approved this amendment, giving the CEO virtual cart blanc to do whatever he/she felt needed to be done. With this in mind, there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of further reducing the AS.
There must be something else holding you back from accomplishing this then. Thirty-thousand dollars is very little to pay for the extraordinary impact reducing the AS will have, benefiting the company and its shareholders enormously. If you can spend $25,000 a month on corporate communications that has as of yet produced any noticeable benefit, then $30K is a drop in the bucket compared to the huge benefit it would be to the shareholders.
I have told you numerous times that I fully support what you are doing with the company, your efforts, and your vision. I still do. You have done exceedingly well in building and growing the company. However, this seeming lack of concern for the shareholder's plight gives the company the appearance of just another slimy OTC that serves the interest of the insiders on the backs of the shareholders.
Will, with all due respect, I feel you are failing your fiduciary duty to the shareholders. Many of us who have invested heavily in the company are in dire straights, with our investment being in a virtual free fall since the first of the year. I have been in and out as a shareholder a couple of times as my frustration and fear of a complete loss got the best of me. My initial $20K investment is now worth a mere $3K. However, I keep coming back because I know in my heart and my head what this company can be and will be.
I hope you will take my criticisms as they are meant, not as a condemnation but as a nudge to widen your view of the effects of what you do, or do not do, on the smaller shareholders. You and Lori have far more shares than any of us. That doesn't mean you should not make yourself aware of the impact on us smaller investors.
If you made it reading down this far without hitting the delete button, thank you for taking the time to read my missive, and I hope I will hear back from you.
Ed
(0)
(0)