RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:New Team??Nobody said it was better. I said they are not much different than a thousand other penny stocks. That what you are misrepresenting? But since you threw out the unsubstantiated opinion, I'll gladly trigger you with a response. And you can misrepresent that as defending nxo when in fact I'm disagreeing with your opinion. Again. The vast majority of the deficit in nxo arose from the writeoff of assets. You know this of course. The assets were paid for with stock, not cash. You also know this. Those are facts. Now, my opinion, is since the stock used to buy the assets was just as worthless as the assets they bought, the net is zippo. I doubt you can comprehend this, but others can. Maybe they can draw cartoons or use puppets to explain. Nxo used WAY,WAY overvalued shares of their stock to pay for assets that were WAY,WAY overvalued. So of course it had to be written off. By comparison, XTRA, (read all about it on sedar) raised cash from investors and strung 4 years in a row losing $20 million plus per year from operations. You decide which is better or worse. I'm suggesting they are both REALLY bad and there is no appreciable difference in where they ended up. But I'll also point out nxo lost it all on one really bad acquisition using their own, or your own, overpriced stock compared to Xtra which raised money from your pal and other shareholders, in actual cash, not overpriced stock, and blew up the balance sheet every year for 5 years. You pick. I say, there is no winner. Now somehow this will be gaslit into defending nxo. Sigh. Oh well.