RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:The point is....You have too much invested, you're not thinking clear.
ScarletSpider wrote:
thank you for that I apparently missed it. But the company is well within its right to make all these arrangements. Unfortunately no company will consult shareholders while doing so. The only recourse shareholders have is when it comes to the agm and voting to keep or get rid of boards they exercise their rights to do so. Sadly when there are these internal dealings management proceeds with them in the "company's best interest" again meaning that once the board has discussed amongst itself what is the best course of action to take they go and take that action. That however has to be approved by the exchange and agreed to by the parties involved which is then documented in accordance to legal requirements by the exchange and given as in the case the press release here. Now the company feels that it is better to get licensing royalty payments as that is more or less what this appears to be and has clearly divested the noted amounts. Is this what shareholders signed up for? Most likely not and hence understandably the frustration. As a shareholders who has mainly gambled on penned I expect and by extension accept all this but having said that if companies keep making these type of dealings inevitably I don't touch them at all. So hoe does that help right now again it goes back to the very foundations as to the strong suggestion to take your orbits when they are there and take losses way sooner than seeing the share value take an eighty plus percent hit. Sadly this is not the only company this happens to or does and as for my lengthy post on disclaimers types like this is all covered. I am not defending this company and nit another xyz as all are given the sane blanketed protection . It has absolutely nothing to do with me protecting or agreeing with one company and not another. I have had pennies with products that all went belly up. Was I happy? Of course not but I place the blame and mismanagement of my own monies squarely on my own shoulders especially when all of these things are permitted by the exchange. Should companies go above and beyond expectations well that would be great and set then apart from those who don't differentiate themselves that way. Should the company have put this to a vote? If we speak in terms of differentiating that would be great but it was not under any legal obligations to do so..was this ethical well that depends on how one view things. If people are tying legality to ethics than it was fully ethical as the company as I have been persisting is well within exchange rules as per all disclaimers something we all said ok to when buying stocks on publicly companies. If again we don't like these types of transactions and dealings best to not touch stocks and if we chose to do so we need to protect our interest and hard earned dollars by properly and effectively managing our holdings. Having said that thanks foe this good to know. It looks to me that most of what has gone on here is going to the Chinese and Rich Power something I did also warn about very early. It is what it is and I just have to become more stringent in following my trigger point plans. I have made something very clear all that I hold companies have up to years end and then the first quarter next year to impress me for me to keep shares otherwise I will act in accordance to circumstances at the time. Regardless of how much ownership is left here as clearly it looks to be a licensing royalty agreement structure now I expect things to tangibly hit the markets and now if the pivot is most stake in the crypto I expect success there and booked revenue. Now again for me this is a $35 to $40 worth holding to me so unless I decide to pull what is left to pay for my bank fees I am best to keep holding for best value something anyone would do regardless of this whole noise hitting the nearest. The company was and is well within the legal requirements of what was and is asked. Again in knowing all this the question of ethics vs legality given the company has operated legally is still a moot point to me. The only thing is this and again if we call all this scam shady etc what are all of us agreeing to all the disclaimers in exchanges we are trading on. If you guys want to be very ethical stop buying under these set of circumstances which you strongly oppose otherwise as by your own actions and definition it equates to hypocrisy. I have accepted all of this so I have and said and acted in accordance. Folks if I strongly disagree with anything and I feel that strongly I remove myself entirely and cut things out. I have accepted the disclaimers and know I need to be careful as to gambling here all companies are the same and all these terms are a matter of perspective but again I hate the structure I either remove myself or make it a life battle not to go after the company that is not the problem but rather the exchanges themselves that no longer give these type of leeway. People can complain company after company after company but where are missing the root problem which is all of what is allowed. Attack the roots and if nothing than think whether or not you want to be part of a heavily rigged systemic structure. I am not sure what more I can say on this and will put this all to rest. Thanks once again and honestly good luck to all of you to go after this company and all your holdings...all I can say is be careful this is not the only company that does all this a big chance is you have others that are doing the same so be careful be smart take your profits and losses sooner and have a way to protect yourselves from all these circumstances well within the legal scope of the exchanges.