RE:RE:RE:Funny thing....tomchoco wrote: Some posters have a negative opinion on the former CEO and some respect him. Could you tell me why you are negative on him. I have only been in this stock for a few months so I am vaguely aware of why he was asked to step down. He did come off as very capable during the past interviews about the company. Thanks.
They nabbed him on bs disclosure and forward statements picking apart mda back to 2007. Likely some uptight investors that were here for the money not investment in a company they believe in and understood the obstacles that faced it.
Maybe frost and minions or a similar group tried to strong arm Roger to take hold of this company then got him in over his head with alleged bullies but pushed back, then as a result Frost or similarly influential people had their buds at the commission walk him off the plank. Perhaps it was a short tactical play. All in all I think these are just reflections of the games played on a) this exchange b)against companies that threaten big pharma or players in it
Others are not happy with his ability to lead an emerging company on the verge of breakthrough and manage shareholder value. Inexperienced. tsxv/manipulation. Navigating needs for capital, deal making, promotion. While it seems like forever for longs, things really have evolved quickly to a whole new ball game. I have no problem with slow and steady... I think the dilution has been reasonable,, some of the warrant terms were garbage but we're a Small share count imo and retardedly undervalued market cap, like insanely undervalued/held down, for where we are at. I'm pro Roger. When this breaks through and people make their bucks, maybe then, theyll remember we're here because of Roger. I imagine the biggest challenge was not being taken over by sharks land crooks and creating commercial viability as to not be buried by big pharma. Create something they want and can profit from and keep your head above water long enough for them to come bidding.