I have been on the sideline watching the conversation about the IPO and conversion / A shares, B shares issue. Here are my thoughts, not that anyone asked for them, and I’m not looking for an argument. You can agree or disagree but this is how I feel.
1) as Doc has said in his most recent post we were owed shares of NGIO. I have honk Joe realized that at some point and decided to “give” us those shares as part of the div. otherwise we would have been owed shares at IPO. A company can’t simply spin off an asset and say you as shareholders no longer are entitled to the value of that asset that you previously owned. In this regard we got screwed on the div. What was supposed to be 5:1 div was adjusted to 5:2 and 5:2. With many, including myself, feeling that the value would be in NGIO shares I didn’t complain. We should have received the 5:1 plus an NGIO div at a later date.
2) It is important to remember that, as Hylander says, “we are where we are” but it is also important to remember why we are where we are. For the good the bad and the ugly we are where we are because of Joe. I am not going to talk about pre-joe because I wasn’t around. So yes, Joe put the company in life support. He resurrected it. He found Olaregen and AltuCell. He also has a dormant trial with MRCK. A dormant trial for prostate cancer in China. He’s had a potential acquisition walk away (KRBP) and managed to close deals on others that have provided literally no value or revenue Pantheon, Hema. What about the deal he made for the assets of the illegal HMO that was supposed to be turn key with just a few rule changes to make it legal and don’t forget the pharmacies. What did we pay for all of that...including the lawsuit and what did we get of value.
3) the dividend delay and uplist delay are also Joes responsibility. Any of the bad actors that Joe points to to blame are all people Joe pissed off or tried to screw over. We wouldn’t be in a position where NASDAQ has to worry about looking bad if Joe wasn’t so successful at doing just that. How many lawsuits have we paid for with dilution.
4) it is entirely plausible that DJ or NASDAQ insisted on a different COB for NGIO. Not saying that is fact but entirely plausible. They hold the $$ if DJs investors like me believe in the science but not Joe and they have that feedback to DJ why wouldn’t they insist on that. And if NASDAQ is worried about being embarrassed... well. If it were me pulling those strings I’d have insisted on a new CEO for NGIO as well. Maybe I’d let him keep President depending on how cooperative he was.
5) regarding Joe and GNBT having A shares and it being in their best interest to look out for A share holders. I have not heard that the bonus shares were distributed yet. I’ve seen no filing of beneficial ownership for GNBTs shares. Do we KNOW they are/will be hold A shares or is that just speculation. My guess is that they will all hold b shares that are freely tradable upon IPO. I’ll believe different when I see it. Not sooner.
6) lastly OUR CEO comes on this board and talks to his “loyal shareholders” the way he does and we are supposed to believe he gives a damn about us and our best interest. Calling people who trust you with their money stupid, Hmmm? Maybe Joe is right about that after all.
Sorry for the long post. This concludes my opinion!
1) as Doc has said in his most recent post we were owed shares of NGIO. I have honk Joe realized that at some point and decided to “give” us those shares as part of the div. otherwise we would have been owed shares at IPO. A company can’t simply spin off an asset and say you as shareholders no longer are entitled to the value of that asset that you previously owned. In this regard we got screwed on the div. What was supposed to be 5:1 div was adjusted to 5:2 and 5:2. With many, including myself, feeling that the value would be in NGIO shares I didn’t complain. We should have received the 5:1 plus an NGIO div at a later date.
2) It is important to remember that, as Hylander says, “we are where we are” but it is also important to remember why we are where we are. For the good the bad and the ugly we are where we are because of Joe. I am not going to talk about pre-joe because I wasn’t around. So yes, Joe put the company in life support. He resurrected it. He found Olaregen and AltuCell. He also has a dormant trial with MRCK. A dormant trial for prostate cancer in China. He’s had a potential acquisition walk away (KRBP) and managed to close deals on others that have provided literally no value or revenue Pantheon, Hema. What about the deal he made for the assets of the illegal HMO that was supposed to be turn key with just a few rule changes to make it legal and don’t forget the pharmacies. What did we pay for all of that...including the lawsuit and what did we get of value.
3) the dividend delay and uplist delay are also Joes responsibility. Any of the bad actors that Joe points to to blame are all people Joe pissed off or tried to screw over. We wouldn’t be in a position where NASDAQ has to worry about looking bad if Joe wasn’t so successful at doing just that. How many lawsuits have we paid for with dilution.
4) it is entirely plausible that DJ or NASDAQ insisted on a different COB for NGIO. Not saying that is fact but entirely plausible. They hold the $$ if DJs investors like me believe in the science but not Joe and they have that feedback to DJ why wouldn’t they insist on that. And if NASDAQ is worried about being embarrassed... well. If it were me pulling those strings I’d have insisted on a new CEO for NGIO as well. Maybe I’d let him keep President depending on how cooperative he was.
5) regarding Joe and GNBT having A shares and it being in their best interest to look out for A share holders. I have not heard that the bonus shares were distributed yet. I’ve seen no filing of beneficial ownership for GNBTs shares. Do we KNOW they are/will be hold A shares or is that just speculation. My guess is that they will all hold b shares that are freely tradable upon IPO. I’ll believe different when I see it. Not sooner.
6) lastly OUR CEO comes on this board and talks to his “loyal shareholders” the way he does and we are supposed to believe he gives a damn about us and our best interest. Calling people who trust you with their money stupid, Hmmm? Maybe Joe is right about that after all.
Sorry for the long post. This concludes my opinion!
10
