RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Zero trades in 2 hours hi Doggy, totally understand your frustration, especiaily if you have a lot invested in the company.
Without doing any extensive research I'll try to address some of your points:
- shareholders with cost-basis below current price: there would be more than a few and they may be more likely to support a long-term view
- news flow: company did do some news flow related to new products, customers/sectors and supply etc, maybe you could plot it on a timeline and see if it's enough "flow", but at the same time there is pretty simple rule, release news (cost time & money) when it's a material new development, not necessarily when the baseline expectations are being met. Now we enter almost into philosophy of being a shareholder. I would argue effective capital allocation, devliering underlying business results and some home-run releases here and there is enough, especially considering that there are quarterly reporting requirements. For one I am pretty happy with the timing and content of the big news items this year. Share price is another matter.
- grants: plz let me know if this isn't the case -- but I believe the grants were covered in detail in prior financial reports & news in the periods they were awarded, and it's a small amount relative to market cap and to be used in a specific context. So maybe it's worth another news release for marketing purposes, but again this was already covered and would have already been priced in by the market. Now I love a good grant, and I hope there will be more.
- you as a happy shareholder: I understand, and I hope it works out in your favor. At the same time is it really reasonable to hold a CEO responsible for this sort of market fluctuation? I mean he is accountable for business performance, and to some extent stock performance, but I'd argue it's more fair to focus on aspects that are more directly under his control over this time frame (e.g. business results!). Next quarters will shed light on this.
- $200M shelf offering: combination of funding methods available, obviously if funds are raised in the end they would try to minimize equity dillution at low prices. This structure seems to give a lot of flexibility to avoid the situation you describe
Cheers!