Thoughtful post, John. Yes, there's probably many more companies lurking than posting, it really wouldn't take that long even on an active thread to check it out daily. And it's easy to see grounds for caution in posting, you and I can say anything we like, but they lay themselves open to a variety of accusations. As time passes, though, and we see more examples set, the guidelines will be clearer and it will become a normal part of IR, imho.
Re your thoughts on the selective dissemination of information; have you seen this; ctaonline.com .....kind of an amusing but right-on way of putting it? Yeah, I suppose SI is not considered a "public" enough forum to release info to, but personally I always check SI first instead of Canada Newswire or CCN, usually someone has posted a release if there is one, if not it's my thrill to be the one to put it up <g>. It's pretty hard to get more public than this, imho, and the perception will change. Anyway, there are always details and clarifications that would be useful while not being considered material information.
"- The quality of the discussion in some of these news groups is absolutely terrible..."
No kidding. They must be disgusted at times with the level of intelligence shown, eh. Most of us goof around at times, personally I rarely pass up a chance to get a laugh when there's an opening, and have asked some amazingly dumb questions. But still.....there are some fact-filled threads out there, with more lurkers than posters, and in the average thread there is value in between the fluff. Also, when an IR presence shows up, that in itself changes the tone, sort of a raising to legitimacy of what before had been a bullshit session. Or not? I don't know....
" Management does not have the time - often they are busy running the company."
You can see how they'd see it that way, but it shouldn't take that long...one thread, even an active one, only has a few dozen posts a day, and they don't have to answer every one, they don't have to do anything, it's not like they sign a contract and are committed. There's probably a mild danger, though, in establishing a presence and then dropping it, we haven't seen examples of that but I expect we will.
"I think the telephone is the best way for a one-on-one exchange with a company - especially if you take lots of notes. You get a much better sense of what the managers are like (i.e., is the president dull-witted or on the bit), and it allows more information to be exchanged in a short period of time."
Agreed, and I have phoned any smaller (sub-TSE 100) company I have ever invested in, it's a necessary step for sure. But one problem I have with phoning is that nothing is recorded (OK, except for notes) whereas here there is an electronic trail that gets archived for future reference, something that is handy for spotting inconsistencies or dispelling misconceptions. Also, too many IR people are hired for their ability to "give good phone" and precious little else. It'll always be part of the game, but imho the web is largely cheaper and better and will become a more powerful force.
Re Gravis; the scamsters will always be with us, eh. They're leery of this forum, though, because of that very same traceable electronic trail that benefits the responsible company. Btw...I never bought any Gravis, but I have a few Bresea if you'd like to do some trading <g>.
....cheers, John ......... marcos |
