There have been some comments on the other board about the negativity of these questions... As people out East like to say, "you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear."
Yes, there is an inherent negativity in many of these questions because they pertain to things that have not happened or have not been done. There is also an element of perception that is influenced by emotion, and sometimes you can read things later that sounded inflammatory at first glance and discover it was not as bad as the first impression.
The authors of the questions tried to be as neutral as possible in the language, but perhaps we did not do a good enough job, which is why they posted here for review and input. They can be improved before they are sent and we are open to any suggestions.
However, it was not our intent to ask questions about the many positive things the company has done since May 2018. Why would we do that when we are all aware and have discussed such developments at length? Moreover, there are many others whom already focus on only these positive things without balancing out their critical analysis of ZEN's performance with full consideration of deficiencies, so it was felt there was no need to somehow highlight the positive developments in our questions.
Some shareholders want to see only the positive, some only the negatives, and some want to evaluate the full picture - the authors of the questions are in the latter camp, and like I said, we already know about the positives.
As the critics of these questions have all pointed out, there are some issues that they raise that warrant answers or consideration, and perhaps that is what we should all focus on rather than personal battles and name-calling, or the tone of the questions - those are distractions.
Respectfully,
Benton |
