Do you know the reasons why the filings are late? It is important, but we don't know why the filings are late, just that they are late. You cannot come to your conclusion without knowing "why". Let's look at everything you missed in jumping to your rash opinion.
Your premise that Squires should be replaced for late filing is misguided, to say the least. First, thank you for agreeing that Squires got us here, to the point of waiting on the expected revenue reveal from the association with Innova alone, resulting from over $4.5B in sales. In my mind, that's enough to make him indispensable and irreplaceable because only an idiot would think he wasn't responsible for making it happen. You don't replace leadership and genius for a paper pusher. 30 or more new employees from major corporations that have come on board. Why? They came because of Squires vision. Why else would they come? You have to applaud Squires for the UK sales, the Pasaca deal, as well as the new hires.
I fear you may be buying a little of the bullcrap of the other board who repeatedly say obscenities about him for no reason except that's what their circlejerk is paid to do. I hope it isn't affecting your judgement, but surely you can understand my concern. Your only reason for replacing Squires is that filings are late. I know you state a condition - that he continue to be late, but that is just semantics. Your hope is that Pasaca replaces him seemingly irregardless of any outcome. You can understand my concern that that's a similar shallow opinion without reason.
I say that because of your blanket "no excuses" position. You say "no excuses" but there are many valid reasons which you brush aside, judging him only on only what you can see, which is insufficient to understand reasons. At the least, that's a failure of your due diligence. You'd rather have a paper pusher run the company. LOL. What would a paper pusher know about growing companies?
Let me give you the biggest "reason" an investor should appreciate Squires AND be reassured the company is in good hands.
Do you think Pasaca Capital did any DD on both QMC and CEO Squires? They are Venture Capitalists, so of course they did DD up and down and in and out and 360 degrees around. I am sure you have to agree they must have done DD out the Wazoo! I'm being so emphatic because you blithely ignored this fact in your "no excuses" claim.
Would and should Pasaca keep Squires?
Let's look at some implications and results of the impending consumation of the Pasaca agreement.
Some background-
Squires pivoted the main focus of the company to a proprietary blockchain and foresaw the ability to marry it to quantum dots for anticounterfeiting and in assays of all kinds, and as a Quantum Key. Genius!
Squires approached 3 test manufacturers and made agreements with them which were announced in press releases.
Squires was responsible for a further alliance with Innova in which QMCH is bundled with Innova's Antigen and antibody tests.
and, Squires is responsible for the upcoming agreement for the Pasaca purchase and subsequent uplisting to a better exchange where the stock prices are in dollars and institutional investors buy our stock and no miserable MMs can keep us down.
In this context, the question, Would and should Pasaca keep Squires? is more of a no brainer, but let's dig deeper.
Let's look at his history, a little. The man thinks big and makes BIG DEALS. QMC China was a huge deal,. but China backed out. By that I mean, China changed their policy and killed it. Squires had already made himself CEO of QMC Asia when it happened. Not his fault. It would have been a game changer. Replace that guy for a paper pusher? You have to be kidding, right?
In November 2018, QMC went to India with a Blockbuster deal which is still active but delayed. Tornados, hurricanes, floods, and pandemic are the reasons. The weather is Not Squires fault. It will be a huge deal which gives QMC license fees and royalties. Two QD reactors are there and I have stated my DD leads me to believe at least one is up and running for R&D there. JIMO. All signs are everyone is still on board. As Squires has said, don't confuse no news with inactivity. Think Iceberg.
Pasaca will keep Squires because of his ability to do big deals. The Ecosystem is his concept and vision and he knows best how to grow it, as he has already proved to everyone. Innova makes tests, and that's their forte. They hired Dr Malan after QMC had hired him, proving that Squires was first to see Malan's importance to the future of both Innova and QMC.
Finally, one of your biggest failures is to not consider the future. I admit that at some point Squires turns over running QMCH to some capable CEO, That's Squires plan. That will free him to develop the next disruptive quantum dot vertical industries. That's his vision. Without him I would doubt they would be accomplished. Two main ones are Solar and QDLED in both SSL and Displays. You want to give all that future away, and get back nothing, absolutely nothing in return. Your paper pusher can't do it, not in 10,000 years.
IMO, All indications are that Pasaca will keep Squires as CEO, and my guess, later as Chairman, and perhaps onto Pasaca's board. Clearly they want him to run QMC. Of course, they will keep Squires but take action to protect their investment by both installing 3 of their own onto QMC's Board of Directors and a Pasaca consulting contract to help get to uplisting. I would bet that once QMC is current in their SEC reports, they'll never be late again.
Did you do any DD, Mr. Sockmelier? It's easy to place blame and say "no excuses" by not considering any other factors but except for traders, who mainly consider price alone, this is one CEO and one stock you have to look at in the entirety.
You'll probably blow this whole post off because it seems to me you'll just say you don't give a damn, because some people nowadays have to act like sharks all the time, and boast of how well they've done, which in most cases is a lie, and have lost a part of their humanity in doing so. In the words of Mr.T, " I pity the Fool".
This is probably a strange concept to you, or maybe my standards are too high, but I consider the failure to admit you are wrong to be a character flaw, not something to boast about. There are no excuses for that. You have no excuses.
If course, I'm jumping to a conclusion about you, just as you did about Mr. Squires. See what I did there?
Your premise that Squires should be replaced for late filing is misguided, to say the least. First, thank you for agreeing that Squires got us here, to the point of waiting on the expected revenue reveal from the association with Innova alone, resulting from over $4.5B in sales. In my mind, that's enough to make him indispensable and irreplaceable because only an idiot would think he wasn't responsible for making it happen. You don't replace leadership and genius for a paper pusher. 30 or more new employees from major corporations that have come on board. Why? They came because of Squires vision. Why else would they come? You have to applaud Squires for the UK sales, the Pasaca deal, as well as the new hires.
I fear you may be buying a little of the bullcrap of the other board who repeatedly say obscenities about him for no reason except that's what their circlejerk is paid to do. I hope it isn't affecting your judgement, but surely you can understand my concern. Your only reason for replacing Squires is that filings are late. I know you state a condition - that he continue to be late, but that is just semantics. Your hope is that Pasaca replaces him seemingly irregardless of any outcome. You can understand my concern that that's a similar shallow opinion without reason.
I say that because of your blanket "no excuses" position. You say "no excuses" but there are many valid reasons which you brush aside, judging him only on only what you can see, which is insufficient to understand reasons. At the least, that's a failure of your due diligence. You'd rather have a paper pusher run the company. LOL. What would a paper pusher know about growing companies?
Let me give you the biggest "reason" an investor should appreciate Squires AND be reassured the company is in good hands.
Do you think Pasaca Capital did any DD on both QMC and CEO Squires? They are Venture Capitalists, so of course they did DD up and down and in and out and 360 degrees around. I am sure you have to agree they must have done DD out the Wazoo! I'm being so emphatic because you blithely ignored this fact in your "no excuses" claim.
Would and should Pasaca keep Squires?
Let's look at some implications and results of the impending consumation of the Pasaca agreement.
Some background-
Squires pivoted the main focus of the company to a proprietary blockchain and foresaw the ability to marry it to quantum dots for anticounterfeiting and in assays of all kinds, and as a Quantum Key. Genius!
Squires approached 3 test manufacturers and made agreements with them which were announced in press releases.
Squires was responsible for a further alliance with Innova in which QMCH is bundled with Innova's Antigen and antibody tests.
and, Squires is responsible for the upcoming agreement for the Pasaca purchase and subsequent uplisting to a better exchange where the stock prices are in dollars and institutional investors buy our stock and no miserable MMs can keep us down.
In this context, the question, Would and should Pasaca keep Squires? is more of a no brainer, but let's dig deeper.
Let's look at his history, a little. The man thinks big and makes BIG DEALS. QMC China was a huge deal,. but China backed out. By that I mean, China changed their policy and killed it. Squires had already made himself CEO of QMC Asia when it happened. Not his fault. It would have been a game changer. Replace that guy for a paper pusher? You have to be kidding, right?
In November 2018, QMC went to India with a Blockbuster deal which is still active but delayed. Tornados, hurricanes, floods, and pandemic are the reasons. The weather is Not Squires fault. It will be a huge deal which gives QMC license fees and royalties. Two QD reactors are there and I have stated my DD leads me to believe at least one is up and running for R&D there. JIMO. All signs are everyone is still on board. As Squires has said, don't confuse no news with inactivity. Think Iceberg.
Pasaca will keep Squires because of his ability to do big deals. The Ecosystem is his concept and vision and he knows best how to grow it, as he has already proved to everyone. Innova makes tests, and that's their forte. They hired Dr Malan after QMC had hired him, proving that Squires was first to see Malan's importance to the future of both Innova and QMC.
Finally, one of your biggest failures is to not consider the future. I admit that at some point Squires turns over running QMCH to some capable CEO, That's Squires plan. That will free him to develop the next disruptive quantum dot vertical industries. That's his vision. Without him I would doubt they would be accomplished. Two main ones are Solar and QDLED in both SSL and Displays. You want to give all that future away, and get back nothing, absolutely nothing in return. Your paper pusher can't do it, not in 10,000 years.
IMO, All indications are that Pasaca will keep Squires as CEO, and my guess, later as Chairman, and perhaps onto Pasaca's board. Clearly they want him to run QMC. Of course, they will keep Squires but take action to protect their investment by both installing 3 of their own onto QMC's Board of Directors and a Pasaca consulting contract to help get to uplisting. I would bet that once QMC is current in their SEC reports, they'll never be late again.
Did you do any DD, Mr. Sockmelier? It's easy to place blame and say "no excuses" by not considering any other factors but except for traders, who mainly consider price alone, this is one CEO and one stock you have to look at in the entirety.
You'll probably blow this whole post off because it seems to me you'll just say you don't give a damn, because some people nowadays have to act like sharks all the time, and boast of how well they've done, which in most cases is a lie, and have lost a part of their humanity in doing so. In the words of Mr.T, " I pity the Fool".
This is probably a strange concept to you, or maybe my standards are too high, but I consider the failure to admit you are wrong to be a character flaw, not something to boast about. There are no excuses for that. You have no excuses.
If course, I'm jumping to a conclusion about you, just as you did about Mr. Squires. See what I did there?
