I thought the letter was a step in the right direc

I thought the letter was a step in the right direction, but just once I'd like to see a company admit that while technically it's true that an R/S doesn't change what your shares are worth, historically prices come down when they're announced largely because future dilution is contemplated.

I believe that to successfully have a reverse split two elements are needed, one is a commitment not to exceed a ratio that will bring the outstanding shares under 50 million shares, the second would be a commitment by the company not to exceed 200 million shares outstanding without shareholder approval. I believe such a commitment is reasonable, it may not bring an immediate Nasdaq listing, but it does provide for reasonable share growth, and leaves current shareholders with the knowledge that they'll maintain at least 25% of the company unless they vote to permit further dilution.

I believe the share price is well under what it should be if the company is open about all it's doing, that said, I would hope that before any reverse split occurs the company commits to better informing shareholders, and in so doing works to take the share price to at least a dime, and preferably a quarter or more before finalizing a reverse split. As currently stated, a reverse split based on a ratio anywhere near one for one hundred puts current shareholders in a position of owning 1% or less of the company when outstanding shares rise to 150 million shares again, which is not an unreasonable number of shares for such a company. Roughly a one for three would take us down to roughly 50 million shares, that's a reasonable number to build from.

I intend to maintain a position in the stock, however if a reverse split is at the levels indicated by the company, I may rethink that position. I believe the management needs to rethink what they're doing and propose something far more palatable to shareholders.

Gary