RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Options So you must know why the options grants were dated DEC 1 st rather than 3 months later,,,Please share
qwerty22 wrote: Sorry sarcasm. Two years they couldn't boost the stock now it's a deliberate tactic to make their options sweeter. I'm not buying it.
palinc2000 wrote: Of course not,!!!Why do you ask?
qwerty22 wrote: Are we assuming not supporting the SP has been a two/three year tactic???
palinc2000 wrote:
Let me put it another way
It appears they want to grant options before the exercise price goes higher
I think it is all legal
ANALIAS00 wrote: That would be considered as 'deli d'initi' in my opinion
palinc2000]So it appears that they have NOT been trying to prop up the share price to get a lower exercise price on the options .....sickening sickening sickening !!!! Hard to accept quotethat Paul would be playing such game ,,,,I hope I am reading this wrong
SABBOBCAT wrote: I commented a while back (or meant to) about how they were dragging this out so they could keep the price low and grant a bunch of options... I was talking March, not December. I am excited because it signals something material must be coming shortly, but I am appalled by the blatant exploitation of shareholders.
They know shareholders were pissed after the OO and are now frustrated by the lack of communication and low share price, so that do they do? "Hey let's grant ourselves a ton of options 3 days into the new fiscal year (3-4 months earlier than normal) to pad our already generous options comp before finally releasing positive news”. This makes me sick as a shareholder that has seen nothing by disregard from management and IR over the last few years. It looks super GREASY and management should be ashamed.
[/quote]