Agreed, it did not sit very well with me hearing t

Agreed, it did not sit very well with me hearing that line about not moving forward with the CannaCig/Cumulus product line after so much time, money (dilution) and effort went into developing and launching those products. Rapid Fire Marketing Inc is a MARKETING company so IMO the CEO should recognize that fact and continue to build a business model around bringing on clients and provide marketing services. Forget the DTC "services", forget the MJ farming consultation, forget BionicCigs, forget about all the dead ends and failed business models, management needs to set up one or a few solid businesses for the company and focus on quality and get those sales and revenues rolling. IMO this is the problem for most micro cap development companies, they can never seem to get a grip on who they are or what they do. They over spend, dilute and scare their investors away and engage in a downward spiral of toxic financing because they do not successfully incorporate a solid business model from a decent vision. They are typically indecisive about their operations, leaping from one business to the next and can never seem to generate a "real" business, its all just jumping from one sinking stone to the next until they are dead in the water.

As for your other concern about reverse splits, I myself do not evaluate the chances of a particular company making the decision to R/S or not based on what the majority of other micro cap companies do or have done in history. You may happen to use such "odds" to affect your investment decisions but it does not affect mine. Those other micro caps in history which stated no R/S would come but then there was an R/S have nothing to do with RFMK. That is the way I see it, plain and simple. You can choose to call that "naive" or whistling past the graveyard or whatever, but seriously, this is a speculative pinky "start up", obviously if one is not aware of the extreme risk in these then they have no business having money vested in it. I also do not subscribe to the notion that an R/S is ALWAYS bad for shareholders. Actually a split or a reverse split should really have no impact on anything, the share price moves down or up depending on the number of shares and so nothing really changes. Now, of course, if the R/S is done to "make room" for more dilution in the future and it keeps happening then sure, it can be a total nightmare for long term shareholders, just look at DGTL* as an example, it has been R/S after R/S for years followed by constant subscription events in which the number of newly issued shares doubles so extremely dilutive to those holding long. However, even in that situation, the company is getting funding for those newly issued shares so while the share base increases, so do the assets on the company balance sheet, so it's not all bad, but in the end, either the company is profitable or it isn't, nothing will change that other than a CEO at the helm of whom is doing things that good for the company and shareholders. It is very simple, no matter what share structure changes or funding the company goes through over time, the real basis for the creation of shareholder value is derived from sales and revenues. If the company can become profitable and shareholders see ongoing profitability then the sky is the limit for the PPS, otherwise there is not much alternative to the usual downward spiral for most of the speculative micro cap "start ups". Stating that the majority of pinky micro caps are just share selling machines and they all R/S and lose value for shareholders is not saying much, IMO. It is a given. All that is stating is the fact that most "start ups" do not become profitable and most are failures, only a few succeed. I cannot imagine many investors out there rolling the dice to randomely pick from a list of hundreds of micro cap pinky tickers to invest into, if this was their methodology, then I would agree that your perspective as to the "odds" for RFMK becoming a success or failure relies on it's chances (Bayes perhaps?) against the group dynamic, but for stock pickers and long term investors, such as myself, I do not see how RFMK's story in any way shape or form has any dependency on any other PK stock. I invested in RFMK for the long term for specific reasons. I can say that the last R/S was many years ago and it does not appear that there is any indication that the CEO is pondering an R/S. Actually to the contrary, he adamantly states he will not R/S, therefore any claims that RFMK will R/S in the near future is total speculation in my opinion.

As for the Ironridge deal, the first (initial) part of the funding for $700k of debt for common shares looks to basically be complete. It is a guess but if one were to look back on the dilution over the last six months and the PPS, it appears it is possible that Ironridge could have by now churned enough of their ongoing 9.9% stake to make back their original $700k investment in RFMK's debt. This means we should really only be discussing the SECOND part of the funding deal on which we do not have many details. All we know is that allegedly 150 pref shares were given to Ironridge for $50k/month for the next two years or so. Nobody knows the details of that arrangement or has seen the contract so who knows what was the possible legal framework implemented around the potentialities for cancelation of the agreement. Just my opinion but I would think that some level of sales/revenues coming into the company would really have no bearing on the duration of the funding contract. But this is the main problem, it's all just guesswork on our part because we shareholders of whom OWN this company still have no transparency and do not know exactly what is going on as to the details of RFMKs business or internal financials.

I agree with the notion that the focus should be MARKETING along with building a distributor network to add suppliers and ramp up sales. A company constantly engaged in developing brand new products all the time first better be able to sustain themselves without ongoing dilution or it could find investors jumping ship faster than they can spin the next new big thing coming soon. If the CEO wishes to build a "real company" then I would think he would be focused on MARKETING to generate SALES, first, then and only then once profitability was attained, the product line could be expanded. Though I do understand the need for the company to separate itself from the competition in such a new and tightly contested industry.

I guess we will see what happens...

Do or do not, there is no try.

$RFMK!