Post by
bailmeout on Aug 26, 2016 7:25pm
Anyone else see a link to the release 3 weeks ago..
What was the need to send out the overly negative toned letter three weeks back. They knew at that time the deal was being done. There was no need to say anything..unless they wanted to rape a few more retailers of their shares. If they said nothing they would still be sitting at .075 cents without the huge drop to as low as .045 that shook out MILLIONS of shares. Their previous release was May. You dont think they could have just waited 3 weeks to release the deal. They wanted 1 last play on the retail holders. imo the BOD is making big on this deal on the backs of the many who have been with this company for about 5x as long as them...sad but true. Someone may want to bring that up at the rubber stamp meeting.
Comment by
rusty4998 on Aug 27, 2016 10:01am
I wondered the same thing. Another theory: Possibly because of the negativity of that release it was put out to make it more acceptable for shareholders to take what I consider to be a lousy deal. All IMHO
Comment by
rgonlyfactspls on Aug 28, 2016 9:29pm
Bail, a gut wrenching revelation from TST Management/BOD for sure...re: MCNA a non asset. Timely (for the acceptance of this deal) and EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE/ SUSPECT. rg