<<Yes, a subterranean gang, harmful to America.>>
What a crock this statement is. VLNC is a company that has squandered over $170 million of other people's money on several unsuccessful attempts to commercialize a product.
The money they have spent on failed products has been an extremely unproductive use of capital. Unproductive except for lining the pockets of those like Lev Dawson who sold over $30 million worth of stock in the early 90's, and Carl Berg, who has taken more money out of the company than he has put in.
A company that has a reasonable chance of success does not have to go to the floorless bandits for money. And even many companies who don't have brilliant prospects can raise money on more favorable terms than VLNC. There are huge amounts of investment capital available that is being handed over to speculative companies ever day, at far more favorable terms than VLNC has demonstrated. Every day, there are IPOs (a much more favorable way of raising money than floorless preferred stock) issued for companies with little operating history. Billions of dollars a week is being handed out.
I would submit that it is this company's multi-year history of wasting money, repeated failure, and insiders profiting from the above, that is to blame for the poor financing, market skepticism, and large short interest. Along with the long history of hype by connected internet touts and other assorted boot salesmen.
Blaming the shorts for the history of repeated failure of this company is silly, IMO. The shorts did not show up in force until the company went to the floorless bandits to begin with. Had the deep pockets put back some of the money they have taken out - in the form of financing under reasonable terms - the shorts would not have attacked this stock with such ferocity in the first place.
To me, the shorts perform a Darwinistic function in the market. If VLNC succeeds in spite of this, more power to them. But IMO, they only have themselves to blame for their current situation. |
