As for anything else you are so called candid and honest about, if you could stick to genuine facts with your bashing, you might not look the conflicted fool so often.
You really don't have a clue how sales are progressing. Bashing with those fuzzy first few weeklies doesn't stop you from daily chicken little proclamations. I'll stay tuned for a month or few, thanks.
And thats just the surface - You recent whine about 'better a $14 secondary than a loan" ... well my little Economics Nobel Ollie Hardy Stan Laureate, step back from your gin bottle and ponder this; why would the quarterly-focussed hedge money that was piled on 20% here treat a follow-on any different than a GIA announcement ? They both would have meant the exact same thing ! So if the big fast money treated the stock the same way GIA did, and the secondary had a hard time, perhaps breaking down, that $100mm walking about money could have wound up costing more than a couple $100mm, after all the future re-sales (and typical warrants) were on the market. While $150mm is a steep cut, it is a known quantity. And if things play out well, a confidently timed secondary could settle that debt with room to spare. If things DON'T work out, then I guess it doesn't really matter anyway.
For all your claims of educated insight, you sure seem blind to any dimension of the argument but the bash.