RE:RE:RE:Pezgoof, I have never made fun of stuttering. It is funny to see that Stockings/Stutters have no interest in the company but continue to attack for their own pleasure. He still shows no focus on the business, no interest in the shares ... yet here he is all the same.
A little truth from him would go a long way I'm sure - then - a little more listening and a lot less talk would serve him well. He really don't get it and would never admit to that.
I love the absolute connection he makes between public speaking and share price ... yet ... there is a more fundemental reason for the exit of retail shareholders. There is a pattern in pharma between shareholder interest and trial schedules/progress. There's also a direct relationship between analyst's message and retail buying behavior.
Yet - searching for a reason only goes as deep as once can see - no further. Simply love the psychology of today's wanna-be investor, which I'm sure is passed down through the decades.
---------------
As a retail investor, the most important questions for any company ... are ... can I contact management and get a response to my questions? Is management willing to engage? Do they come across in an honest and caring way?
If the answer is "NO" to any one of those questions, that company has already lost me as a potential investor. And my friends, this first hurdle of investing is failed by >99% of the companies I try to pursue.
The weeding out process gets more complex and more interesting from that point forward but one thing is for sure ... I wouldn't let any amount of stuttering get in the way of my interest in the company. Would I let a CEO know if there was something they did that was rather annoying and they could learn from? Already have. And I know my comments were well received and improved on.
In this case - wrt Dan searching for appropriate words ... grow up! I suggest you look at a few other (more important traits) to guide your understanding of a business, their IP and their go-forward strategy. And if you're going to make fun of his legal background - I think you might want to ask how that background could help a business that's heavily indebted to IP generation. If you're going to make fun of his military background, I think you should ask about his oath and his commitment to his team before you draw other off-the-wall conclusions.
Just saying there are different ways to look at any scenario. Just make sure you draw the right conclusions. Being wrong can cause you to miss opportunities.
I'm not saying I'm right - I'm just saying think about your approach. Listen before you speak. Speak with understanding. Don't jump too quickly to assume you have the answers - we know you don't.
Inthepez wrote: I guess this wouldn't be the first time someone spoke to themselves using 2 different forums. Reminds me of the dumpster messaging Czechcashings and then lying about it. deja vu LOL!
get back on your medication stutters for brains, stockingslover or whatever you call yourself! Lol
StockingUp21 wrote:
like putting pez as a teacher in anger management classes. Or pez as a kindergarten teacher when he is a smart as a kindergarten student
Stutters wrote:
I do however think that he should let someone else speak for the company as he is (in my opinion) a horrible public speaker and this in turn effects the share price and chance of any future success.