I would have thought that the appropriate time to issue the PR would have been 9 or so, so the market could digest prior to opening. It would be really disappointing and bad form, not to mention another example of the lack of communication, if the company were to not issue a PR of some sort on this matter, having now gone on record to several of us that it was going to do so.
Having said that, there are plenty of potential catalysts for this company, not the least of which would be another contract win.
ulf / I agree. Unless the PR gives us a tap dance---let's hope they get the message and clarify. Even if the CEO gets bounced-----this company is just too strong to stop it's growth shot. Rated the Number One Most Efficient Enviromental stock---In China and USA. Rino---Earnings per employee $112,318 Revenue per employee $501,199 Maybe the CEO simply wanted to build his mansion early. But the folks who bought the hundred mill have got to be pissed---and I'm sure are letting him know it! IMHO
Space, I finally sent an e-mail to Matt Hayden this AM requesting that the company clarify it's positions on the number of issues raised during last Thursday's conference call. I would expect them to issue a press release some time over the next few days. If not, I'm going to have to re-think my investment.
I sold out of most of my position this morning. Better to take a 15% haircut now.
It really drives me nuts that the CEO took out a $3 MM interest-free loan right after they did that $100 secondary. The CEO now says he'll pay it back by May 15th.. and I'm supposed to believe him??
Doesn't matter what the PR says... what the CEO did was inexcusable and nothing in the PR can fix that.
As a side note, the BOT contracts bother me. For a small cap company to provide financing to the huge steel companies is too much risk for me. Paying up front for the equipment portion and not getting paid until a number of years out is too much risk.
Right there with you, Cody. At this point it is now a question for me of whether or not the Company follows through on its promises. If a company engages outside IR that person speaks for the company. If he has no authority and makes promises, that's a problem. If he has authority and makes promises and the company doesn't follow through, that's a problem. If he has authorit and makes promises and the company follows through, I feel good about the process. So, substantively, I'm not worried about the accounting (am a little concerned that the people doing it know what they are doing and how to communicate) or the long-term viability of the Company and the space it is operating in.
Just want to know that they are going to take shareholder concerns into account when they promise to do so. Had they responded that "they didn't think it was necessary to clarify", etc. I might have disagreed but I would not have set expectations on the basis of my email exchange with Matt.