Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Artaflex Inc V.ATF



TSXV:ATF - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by musingon Dec 21, 2007 2:54am
82 Views
Post# 14056906

Not (in the know)

Not (in the know)Making the same arguments as the last go round and saying "no one is home", adds nothing to your original argument but it does vividly display your level of maturity and that you are devoid of persuasive abilitities. 

Yes, commercial lenders are fallible. They can and recently have made massive mistakes. I would suggest that the same is true of individuals. Now, based on the probabilities, given that we know very little about the institutional lender and very little about you, who should one follow into battle? Who to follow, an institution who is and remans invested in the same company that I'm invested in or an anonymous spammer who purports or implies that he isn't invested? .

And if your not invested, what are you doing here anyway? Are you an altruist trying to save us from ourselves?  If so, let me point out there are much better causes than investors in public companies.

And, yes, your right. Unless ATQ defaults in its obligations to the lender, its very, very unlikely that the lenders could call the loan. The problem with your theory, not in the know, is that ATQ did default. Now why didn't the lender pull the trigger? My view is that there is only one possible reason, namely the lender came to the conclusion that it is in its best financial interests to not pull the trigger. Now, the lender could be wrong but I'm willing to assume that in all probability its due diligence is far superior to yours or mine or almost any other individual retail investor. . 

Onto the last point , I suspect that what this is all about for you is Marti. That you hold some sort of grudge against him is clear as day. In any event, you have said nothing that provides any insight into the quality of ATQ  management. Again, we have assertion and not analysis or any evidence. If there is a management problem, we all know that the institutional lender would be all over that and has sufficient influence to insist on changes. If that were ever to happen, in all likelihood I'd support them. That's because I know that at this stage the institutional lenders have the same interest as I do, namely success of ATQ. Its clear that you have a different interest.

cheers, not (in the know) 


Bullboard Posts