RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:the lsat thing we needMy last post was about the burn rate and lack of return for shareholders.
Tinley hasn't been "hot" since the Hemplify days and they have burned through a lot of investor's dollars.
If the no alcohol skus are as hot as they say, that is where the investment dollars should be going.
Back in the Hemplify days we garnered a $2 shareprice, I think, for being one of the first CBD drinks and never got any purchase when we switched to the THC options.
I have concerns about the HD9 because it has stirred up the anti-buzz crowd who are running resistance and we could wind up with a warehouse full of the HD9 that will be destined for the garbage can.
We went through that once before over having to change our label that resulted in trashing the skus.
Tinley has always been able to see the homerun but never able to deliver it. Maybe should have kept with the Hemplify and worked on that image and presentation, although I think it got crushed with changing laws too.
Hopefully the latest investors do better than original investors in forcing meaningful news releases and financials that contain numbers to crunch.
That is a huge part of our loss of investor interest. Last I looked we are still a publicly traded company while investors are getting the privately run company treatment.
Any new moneys raised need to generate income, not grease the fatkats pockets.