Dean -- I took the 'No' vote and bought some in here at a discount. I wouldn't be so glib about the connection with the mother company DSX ... bad news there does affect DCIX. DCIX is incorporated under the Marshall Islands, but I don't think they run it out of the same office as DSX because there is no relationship or connection.
Why extend the Framework Agreement with Rosneft until 2017, if SDRL is going to buy them out? Maybe collapse of the Framework Agreement is the trigger to a buyout?
I'm not sure that was the only reason. Seems the Saudis don't like the Iranians either. I wonder if an acceptable deal on Iran's nuke program won't help out a bit?
Some impending news must be known to a reasonable certainty to make this bet on a positive outcome that will lift the stock price past .55. The nature of that good news is the big question.
Avi -- I think the ball is in your court regarding adding value to the SANW message board. We've read your posts. We've researched your claims. We find your posts wanting. In many cases the information was false and misleading. Lots of emotion on your part. Little factual basis.
Avi -- Sure, if I cared about Irvine Sensors I might take a peek, but the last I checked this was the SANW board and Pioneer effectively has this company on a string. I wondered why, so I did a little searching:
Monsanto ends patent conflict with DuPont Pioneer over seed technologies
DuPont Pioneer and Monsanto agreed to settle and drop their seed technology patent infringement cases against each other. The deal will allow both firms to focus on developing new farming solutions, said Monsanto President and COO Brett Begemann and DuPont Pioneer President Paul Schickler. The lawsuits were filed in U.S. District Court in St. Louis.
You DID buy at 10 dollars a share. Hey, I was just kidding, but it appears it was true in your case. Sorry about your misfortune.
Avi -- same old nonsense? You're better than that... Get some relevant dirt on ... something. Tired of the same discredited drivel. Did you get the information on the cost of the accounting firm at least? Geez, can't get good help these days.
While it barely qualifies as a penny stock ( $5 30% of share... Oh, wait. You bought this at $ 10 years ago, and are now underwater? Why didn't you say so?
Sounds like Avi lost his place on the page... Please do keep up. The stock is going to have some trouble (has had trouble) crossing 5 bucks/share due to the debt conversion that potentially kicks in after 1 July. Such conversion causes dilution, which causes the shares to trade range-bound. Going forward as debt is paid down this should be a weaker lid on the price. The business relationship with Pioneer has taken a lot of the risk from current operations out of the stock.
Oh, let's guess. He was their agent for getting their Incorporation done under the laws of CA. Just because he worked for the SEC for 5 years and runs a law practice, doesn't mean he isn't qualified to do this. And yes, like many companies, they made him a director because it was cheaper to compensate him that way. Close?
Avi -- If you want to make a case against the auditors, then find out how much they are paid. If they pay way more for them then they should, well further DD is needed. If they pay the going rate, then move on. You get what you pay for.
Basis — Inadequate evidence for oncogenicity in animals. Glyphosate was originally classified as C, possible human carcinogen, on the basis of increased incidence of renal tumors in mice. Following independent review of the slides the classification was changed to D on the basis of a lack of statistical significance and uncertainty as to a treatment-related effect.
__II.A.2. Human Carcinogenicity Data
For the newbees: Avi tends to post mis-leading and non-factual information. He dislikes certain people in the company. Whatever the merits of his insights, which are believed genuine, there is much evidence to suggest that the risk of glyphosate as a carcinogen in humans is not substantiated. But don't listen to me. The EPA has commissioned extensive research and here are some results:
II. Carcinogenicity Assessment for Lifetime Exposure
Substance Name — Glyphosate
CASRN — 1071-83-6
Last Revised — 10/01/1993
Section II provides information on three aspects of the carcinogenic assessment for the substance in question; the weight-of-evidence judgment of the likelihood that the substance is a human carcinogen, and quantitative estimates of risk from oral exposure and from inhalation exposure. The quantitative risk estimates are presented in three ways. The slope factor is the result of application of a low-dose extrapolation procedure and is presented as the risk per (mg/kg)/day. The unit risk is the quantitative estimate in terms of either risk per ug/L drinking water or risk per ug/cu.m air breathed. The third form in which risk is presented is a drinking water or air concentration providing cancer risks of 1 in 10,000, 1 in 100,000 or 1 in 1,000,000. The rationale and methods used to develop the carcinogenicity information in IRIS are described in The Risk Assessment Guidelines of 1986 (EPA/600/8-87/045) and in the IRIS Background Document. IRIS summaries developed since the publication of EPA's more recent Proposed Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment also utilize those Guidelines where indicated (Federal Register 61(79):17960-18011, April 23, 1996). Users are referred to Section I of this IRIS file for information on long-term toxic effects other than carcinogenicity.
_II.A. Evidence for Human Carcinogenicity
__II.A.1. Weight-of-Evidence Characterization
Classification — D; not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity
Basis — Inadequate evidence