RE:Read till the very endIt is still as revelent as the day it was published. However, why am I not surprised that you have not become aware of this before. If my memory serves me correctly this was brought up years ago. You remained silent at that time.
It is not difficult to distinguish that there are different classes of co.s that become equal victims, as well as their shareholders.
However, what muddies the water further is a group of individuals who are non shareholders of any such listed co.s, and who also portray themselves as specialists that can also discern which co.s dserve to be victimized by such circumstances, and those that don`t. Added to this fact, there is no way of validating their credibility or intentions as it would make complete sense to believe they were also the predator.
We have seen their arguments on this forum numerous times. "The share price keeps falling, therefore it is only logical to assume the company, their management, and the poor quality of their products are entirely to blame."
The odds are poor enough as it is for start up Co.s to survive. With these added winds in their face the task is even harder.
The question I ask you TDMAN29 is: "Can you distinguish with complete accuracy which co.s liisted on the venture would be expected of having a good shot at success, if such practices as outlined in this article were prohibited from existing?"
In addition, have such distinguished experts as you, leo, and Royal ever considered devoting your time to change the rules as opposed to attack companies that are alredy victimized? Just think that if both leo and Royal, who both have been their thing here for well over 10 years each (and possibly more) had diverted their efforts to changing the rules then maybe, just maybe your fortunes here may have turned out different.