RE:Cyndi's new videojazzlistener2 wrote: It would have been gutsy to ask Rowland why it was necessary to pay a 7% finder fee, plus warrants to bring in the instutional buyer. Any potential buyer couldn't care less who owned the shares. It would not factor into their break even charts or projected income analysis. Ask the tough question next time Cyndi.
She's about as good as it gets as interviewers go. Talk about a pro. Keep in mind these interviews aren't investigative journalism, they're pure promo.
Cornering Rowland about the finder's fees and warrants wouldn't have helped, he was having a tough enough time stumbling through conveying the reasoning for the private placement in the first place. The last thing we need is another Sagacity fiasco that tanks the share price, so pushing the issue wouldn't be in any shareholder's best interest. Everything about this pp is odd, the timing, the amount, the warrants. It just doesn't jive with a company that is potentially being looked at by buyers. Unless there is some very greasy stuff going on, which I don't believe there is.