Nice guy....was very pleasant. He said he feels Rose is a good guy, but then again, he's paid to say that. He claimed they're trying to get more institutional interest but the lawsuit is holding things up (duh). How about just coming to a settlement and move on already? I'm going to write a letter to the BOD requesting and suggesting that they remove Rose from his position. I'd suggest everyone else do the same if you ever want to see this stock appreciate.
He said the EXACT same thing to me 2 yrs ago when the stock went from 15 to 3..great guy..lol...should I have sold when Rose did? Nah! Its a "long term investment"..please...he a paid hack who could care less what you do with the stock...
Well, it appears nothing changes with these guys. I agree that he's paid and I mentioned that to him, but it's nice when he gets back to you. Rose on the other hand, he HAS to go and we small shareholders NEED to band together to get him the F out.
That's a crock re the institutional interest and the lawsuit "holding things up". The lawsuit is not going away gang. The liability aspect has been affirmed, on appeal. It's real. It's a fact. The only remaining issue is damages.
Institutions do not buy one product...one contract....no pipeline...$3 stocks. Plain and simple. If insiders will not buy the stock at $3 how does "Todd" believe institutions will be persuaded to do so?
Good points golingin. I did say to him....after he mentioned that Rose hasn't disregarded the shareholders...that I find that comment ironic considering he isn't one of them! I mentioned how he sold in the teens and hasn't bought back a single share and how that doesn't show much support for the company.
I also told him that he is paid to have that opinion, as the IR firm, so I couldn't put a whole lot of weight on that.