Zeev, my interest is simple.
Did Mr. Carraway put real money in, or did he get his 18% interest for next to nothing - or on what other basis!
'Probably' is not a term I like to use in investments - 'fact' is. You keep writing about how things might have been, given your assumptions, when we should be dealing with how things were ACTUALLY done.
Here we have a CEO who has taken the company he is charged with managing to insolvency; kept its sole operating unit out of production for 1-1/2 years; been in charge while the company violated, and was caught violating, environmental and securities laws, and; during his watch sold three units, all of which are now the subject of litigation by the buyers.
I'd AT LEAST want to know what his REAL stake is in the company and how he got it...and possibly why he is still running the company other than for the fact that he owns the 18% interest that is in question.
On the plus side, he has put in $60,000 since 12/31/95 to help fund operations - as a loan.
I do not intend to imply that GRNO is a scam, I simply pointed out that if one possible scenario is that all is holy with the options, then there are also possible scenarios that paint a less pleasing picture.
Frankly I'd feel a lot better as an investor if I knew that Mr. Carraway acquired his stock for $1.50+/share, because then I know he has a downside risk...whereas at $0.11/share he's got not so much to lose.
Naturally my opinions are not shared by all - but I don't think that making up possible scenarios about what might have happened is at all productive - while the actual facts of what really happened are a perfect answer, if there's nothing to hide.
The truth is a perfect defense!
Thanks for the interesting dialog.
Bill Fuller |
