You shouldn't be surprised at my civility. I only respond with my patented acid tongue <g> when provoked or addressed rudely.
Anyway, I am unable to address your points on class action suits because I have little experience. The only thing I can provide is a copy of the suit that has been announced, along with the lawyer propaganda. IMO, not much to worry about with this one - the allegations are that the prospectus should have had a more recent financial statement. What I would be (and am, since I am a stockholder of GMTC) is that a lawyer of substance takes a swing. Still, the lawyers will probably extract a settlement which they (the lawyers) do OK, but the little guys get diddly.
As to responding to you, I will have to go back and look, because I thought I have responded to everyone who has posted to me. It may be that you posted to tsg59. For some reason I get lumped together as the same person. I do look at the GMTC board every day (before AGTI). The problem is nobody is posting there. I agree that GMTC discussions more properly belong on the GMTC thread.
I can appreciate your wanting to protect the "little guy". I would submit to you (at the risk of being flamed, called the devil, being stoned <g>) that the little guy has been getting raped for some time here by the Silzer management team (look at the golden parachutes, stock option price changes, and what has transpired under his leadership). I think that his resignation has been the single most significant item to date. (Hopefully the financing statement will make it #2! <G>)
I also would submit to you that a company's worth usually is (and should) be judged by it's results. In the event there is downward movement in the stock because of too much undeserved negative commentary, someone loses (the little guy - there always is a buyer and a seller). On the same note, upward movement in the stock because of too much undeserved positive commentary, someone loses again. Again, more than likely the little guy. I suggest that both rah-rah and pooh-pooh is equally bad for the "little guy".
I think this is the last point you asked about... No, I am not duty bound to protect GMTC. BTW - what's duty???? <G> |
