RE:priceOh Dmac, it's a delightful day for me when my ignore pile gets reset. I get to see you cherry picking and choosing little tid bits like this out of peoples posts and leaving other little significant tid bits that don't work to your advantage out of the equation. Try and read a full sentence once in a while, if not just search up "Job Description of CEO" and you'll see the only ties a CEO has to the stock directly is through it board members and the correct filing of documents to the IIROC...
Also, if you're going to come at me with cherry picked quotes, make it look like you're putting a bit of effort into being a vertebrate and quote the whole thing...
donaldmac wrote: "The job of the CEO or President of any company has nothing to do with their stock holders" Ok this must hav e been a miss print, you did not really say that did you.
Go0B3r wrote: To say someone is clueless is to say that you know better. Why don't you clue us in how you'd like to see Nav or John "resonate" with the investment community?
The job of the CEO or President of any company has nothing to do with their stock holders and everything to do with the direction they want to take the company, and then achieving it. It is the stockholders job to see the main goal and invest into it... As for Bayfield, they've already proved their stand in the company just by the amount of news and media coverage that has come out with in the last few months.
theTransporter wrote: It's just the same bullsh1t from this company due to lack of an experienced CEO.
They have a solid business plan that they are executing on successfully, they just seem so clueless as to how to make their potential resignate with the investment community.
End the day, there is a lack of awareness and education in the market and that falls on the responsiblity of the CEO and PR guys from Bayfield who have proven to be fuc.king useless!!!