RE:What was their rationale??Inside the fence Toppert1, inside the fence, that's a lot more than what we know, wouldn't you agree?
Toppert1 wrote: If the future is indeed so promising, why did Pierre Carabin only invest $8,000 in the financing of stock AND warrants at eighty cents?
And why did Ben Naccarato only invest $10,000?
And why did Andre Mainella ony invest $24,000?
And why did Mark Paterson only invest $24,000?
And why did Paul Rajchgod only invest $35,000?
These were units of stock AND warrants.
for eighty cents.
Why???...
Because those were the limits of what each of them were prepared to lose.
Collectively, AS A GROUP, they invested $101,000.
If they figured that the maximum downside was 50%, that means that they figured the maximum possible money at risk, shared by all lof them combined, was $50,500.
A pittance compared to the losses people on this board have suffered.