TD yes, I agree, its been a long journey but I hav

TD yes, I agree, its been a long journey but I have had other endeavors which were tougher and have lasted longer before. As Hoffman in "Wag the Dog (1997)" stated, "This is nothing!".

This has always just been for me a side show and speculative dip into the possible emergence of publicly traded ecig manufacturers. I still believe that eventually, over the decades, the population will begin to transition to vaping and ecigs rather than sticking to tar cigs. If I could invest in the private ecig corps I would; I would, but I cant, so I wont. Therefore I have always allocated responsibly and appropriately for such a micro cap spec position. While the story is intriguing to say the least, it still is not "dead", as they say. Many cannot get it through their thick skulls that public corp entities are owned ultimately by the shareholders, not the current management. Management teams or individuals come and go and if one of the individuals are involved in questionable business practices then they are cast aside and the business operates "as usual". It does not mean that the company is not saddled with complex problems it has to over come in order to regain credibility and momentum to move forward, however it is entirely possible to do so.

My own take here at this point is that the USA patent is the real key in bringing immediate shareholder value, locked or not. If the company could land the USA patent then "big T" would probably buy it out or the company would be able to find financial backing quite easily to ramp up operations once again. Though not getting the patent granted is not a death knell for the company. There is still a niche available in the emerging market for a vaporless device and even if others copied and began selling a "similar" product, the competition would not put them out of business, it would just constrain each company to a smaller economy of scale. As for the Euro patents, they provide shareholder value only in so far as they can be used to gain royalties via Denverson sales and so far I do not see any progress by Denverson so that is a big question mark in my opinion. Many of the naysayers will simultaneously say that the ecig ship has already sailed and SFIO will be late to the party and so not be successful, then go on to make the claim that tar cig smokers will not change to ecigs and vapers will stick to their old devices anyway so there is no emerging industry. These two arguments cannot exist at the same time, either there is a market for such devices and SFIO will thrive but also have competition, OR, there indeed will be no move to ecigs and so no market but then competition is the last of SFIOs problems, and so therefore would not ever be "late" to the party because with no ripening industry they can take their time introducing their product at will. Anyway, any new product or idea is met with criticism and skeptical negativity at its beginnings since the dawn of innovation. Its nothing new. Its easier for those with no vision or creativity to use negative spin to knock down ideas and inventions rather than coming up with new ideas on their own. It is easier to destroy than to construct. Alas, the never ending basher element which has been present ever since the first basher made poor investment decisions in this stock to lose him/her money and then subsequently assuming it a scam and taking such complaints to the SEC which in turn could not find any obvious illegal operations and so with support from the FBI set up a sting operation in order to entrap the ex-CEO so as to sit on the charges for multiple years while unsuspecting investors piled into the name, only to have the trap sprung a day before the powers that be locked them all up in a cage where we still sit today. Its unethical and sad, but apparently legal, so here we are, with no word, no news and a stock which still can trade, but not by those brokerages who possibly had a hand in "causing" the current sad state of affairs that is this "global lock".

As for the board, as I have always wished, hopefully it is just a sounding board for all to express whatever points and arguments they wish, negative or positive. Fairness and neutrality are the key, no manipulation. HOWEVER, my only hope is that in the light of fairness, we will frown on constant negativity or positivity which either bashes or pumps the same exact baseless nonsense over and over. Once or twice, or even thrice, in my opinion, should be tolerated, however daily pumps or bashes should be deleted. Just my opinion. Let all negatives be discussed and let all jubilation run free, as long as it is directly about the company, stock or CURRENT management! And let it occur within reason, otherwise, to the recycle bin it goes! I am not clear on the exact "procedure" for this site either but let our guide just be the simple fairness and reasonable perspective that I should think most investors and interested parties would enjoy.

GLTY

$SFIO!