I'm not anymore from OTCMarkets.com than you are f
Post# of 9144
(Total Views: 458)
Posted On: 04/27/2018 3:42:15 PM
I'm not anymore from OTCMarkets.com than you are from the Microcaps industry. It's just the particular username I happened to choose at the time. Now that we have that marvelous riddle solved and out of the way, I can address some of your other questions/comments.
I haven't interrogated anyone, nor have I ever been properly trained in the field of interrogation. Although I've always found water boarding to be a unique and highly effective method, I have yet to be properly trained in successfully executing it.
Mits made the statement that the company has only been operational since 2012. I didn't make that statement. To gain clarity, I asked him/her to define what being operational entailed. He/she said sales. Therefore, if sales is the primary indicator a company has been operational, 2012 is incorrect. They've generated sales, as you've just pointed out, from a much earlier time period.
Mits would seem to have some people believe that Nanologix just started business in 2012. That is actually incorrect. Hence my involvement in the discussion, that has now carried on too long, especially considering that I've now had to explain a prior conversation that was quite easy to understand the first time it took place.
What's most interesting to me is why someone would find interest in a low revenue generating business during a bull market. I like earning a return on my investment. Apparently some here do not. Good day.
I haven't interrogated anyone, nor have I ever been properly trained in the field of interrogation. Although I've always found water boarding to be a unique and highly effective method, I have yet to be properly trained in successfully executing it.
Mits made the statement that the company has only been operational since 2012. I didn't make that statement. To gain clarity, I asked him/her to define what being operational entailed. He/she said sales. Therefore, if sales is the primary indicator a company has been operational, 2012 is incorrect. They've generated sales, as you've just pointed out, from a much earlier time period.
Mits would seem to have some people believe that Nanologix just started business in 2012. That is actually incorrect. Hence my involvement in the discussion, that has now carried on too long, especially considering that I've now had to explain a prior conversation that was quite easy to understand the first time it took place.
What's most interesting to me is why someone would find interest in a low revenue generating business during a bull market. I like earning a return on my investment. Apparently some here do not. Good day.
(1)
(4)