I heartily concur, JBINWC Pardon me but a dyslectic tendency sees that as OBWANKNOHBE for some reason!
Lawsuits, generally speaking refer to revenues not ours. At best, as this thread has said several times, we would be millions to share the ‘mils' and nothing more. It is imperative at this point to return to ground zero, and determine without hype just what SOE has to offer the marketplace.
Hopefully this company has phoenix like qualities if we keep the napalm to a minimum. If as was also posted, the 'RAT' relationship is not vermin driven but instead a viable entity, are the SOE flagship types mending fences, developing bonds, or is it gonna be sameosameo?
Maybe it is wishful thinking, but if Mr. Huttoe indeed has legal representation, SOE stockholders are far better off than IOS shareholders were 20 years ago. I seems that at least his present wherabouts are known by someone, and it is possible he might even be accessible. I did not note the word ‘warrant' or ‘arrest' or even Bronco! Apparently his main restraint is to surrender his passport.
It would appear that SOE does not have the magical 40-60 million in projected sales for '97, which I think you will agree was the basis for continued belief in the SOE Phnom. Indeed, for a while there every other posting was ‘doing the math' to determine PE as well as stockholder equity. With that said, I refer back to the second paragraph, which I believe is critical to SOE and stockholder survival.
Does SOE have outstanding operational debt? I believe they posted a loss on small revenues, and this is no biggie what with all the stock ‘issued', however now there are pressing questions such as where do they get the funds to maintain their daily ‘nut'. What actual revenues are coming in, and the worst question of all; how many units of whatever have actually seen a shipping label?
Satisfactory answers to most of the above should make or break SOE….and us. |
