RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Molson CoorsI think too many are looking at FIRE through the same lens as the rest of the companies in the sector...FIRE has provided a couple of partners with a small amount of product, which was very good to be able to sample a few strains of product but the business model is designed for the rec market....the sales to date are more practice, trial runs in prep for legalization.
We will not see the company's ability to achieve the level of performance anticipated until we get closer to Oct 17th and customers start ramping up and purchasing stock for the market open... after a couple of months, post Oct 17th, we will start to have a better picture of the success and potential to be realized going forward.
There was a reverse split ~4yrs ago, I bought in after the split...TH, haven't got a clue what his story is, whether he lost money or not....but if I got took a loss on a stack and was not going to hold a position in that company in the future, the last thing I would be doing is whining on a BB about it for years after, JMHO....Opt
tongyboi wrote: Yea, Fire looks good to me. Just peculiar they are this low being one of the earlier license receivers. Hopefully, if there is a buyout, it will benefit us in some way.
I heard Fire did a reverse split before? Is this true? Did TomHarley lose a lot of money during this? I'm just trying to hear both sides of the story.