RE:sorry Concerned Shareholders Group, I'm not convincedWell said. I appreciate these type of analysis and insights over most of the nonsense uttered on this board.
The only thing I can give the CSH group credit for is putting the incumbent board on notice. Without the push from the CSH, the current board would've continued to ignore us. Scott was basically forced out for his role in destroying SH value. Scott is a smart guy but his priorities and loyalty to Passport was clear and is unacceptable.
We must not vote for the CSH group, they will ravage our cash reserve. They already stated they will look to recoup all of the costs that they've spent if elected which would've been fine if they could add value to the company but their plan is a joke.
I rather keep the current board and allow them to fully develop the software of Cocoon rewards, customizations, build brand awareness, increase user base and expand nationally.
If Cocoon turns out to be a hit, I'd avoid plant touching activities so they could uplist to a major exchange in the future.
If not then their best bet is BAMM. They have a good relationship with the CEO that they can leverage. BAMM's revenue grew from 5m to 16m in just 2 years. They were in 1 state before, now they are in 4 states and with no debt. I was pretty upset when Scott threw away 15m bamm shares to fund his projects. I believe they used to own 37m shares of Bamm at one point.
Anyways, I know everyone is hurting but let's be patient. Good luck yall.
RisingUp wrote: What a disappointing show by the Concerned Shareholders Group. It's pretty clear that it is a desperate move by the Green Therapeutics team to get back what they sold. I completely understand their exasperation, but to pivot Australis into a GTv2 is not the solution.
I really, really don't like the fact that GT is the only asset they are focused on continuing to develop. With the State issues around license transfers, I'm also not clear on what would need to be overcome to solve for those things.
I am very concerned about their thinking re: acquisition targets. And with TB on their team, that points to major dilution ahead and a general approach of throwing everything to the wall to see what sticks. It worked once, but the legacy of that management style haunts the entire sector right now. I don't think the market will go for it again, at least not for a few years. Nor should it.
At this point we need far more numbers and strategic business modelling than citing potential market size in Nevada. Their vision puts AUSA squarely behind the run-of-the-mill competition, which is better developed in that regard. I also have to say that, while I do appreciate their effort to engage on an area that is of great concern to many of us (they do deserve some kudos for making waves at critical time for the company - I remain grateful that the disruption put a stop to the Passport deal), based on the quality of their communications on matters of this importance, I'm not sure they could sell their way out of a paper bag.
Cocoon seems ready to go and would be a low maintenance revenue stream to build from. Cocoon also addresses problems that dispensaries need to solve right now, moreso than they need more inventory to sell.