RE:RE:Quarterly FS & insufficient RP disclosureDefinitely thought about you when I saw and wrote this Hawk. You did waved red flags.
For me it's now a legitimate question to ask of the company, to provide more transparent information and disclosure about individual directors transactions with the company.
And payment for services in options I can see, as I said. In all cases to me it is value for service and preservation of cash. Not lost on the price impact due to an increase in freely tradeable shares in the market...
As problematic all that is .. I'm betting on IP to continue to achieve milestones in geo spatial enabled AR. IP IS getting "out there" and winning customers and entering into beneficial strategic relationships.
HawkII wrote: "Consultant" payments with $0.05 options lol. Don't say I didn't warn you. Every quarter expect a new surprise.
BarstoolSage wrote: I think there is insufficient discloure here. In the related party note other names are named, but not the individual names of directors being compensated by immediately vesting options .
I can see using these kinds of things are smart as long as there is value for service, and I can see certain supplier relationships need not be disclosed when issuing such options but individual directors who are paid in options and who have subscriptions for debentures where interest is paid on immediateky vested interest shares to me is fair information for shareholders of a publicly traded company
Now this is a Notice to Reader, so not audited.
I expect this is a legitimate enquiry of the company.
Don't think it a cause for alarm or reason to reassess risk here. I'm simply asking for the sake of fair and full disclosure of related party transactions