Whatever happened between Party and "Hayton" Friday is between them. It is "NO" way to contact investors or conduct investor relations in general.
It was Party's perogative to post the information that he and "Hayton" shared over coffee. I am sure he posted this as a "by the way" sort of thing. However, if "Hayton" did this knowing and counting on Party posting the information, then again I say it is very poor business/investor etiquette on "Hayton's" and the company's part.
I damned sure wouldn't share any conversations I had with Hayton on any board. I may PM those who requested my opinion but that would be the extent of it.
For God's sake Hayton, you have a good IR firm in Sitrick, let them do their job. Why do you want to stir up a mess like this. I am beginning to think it is your form of entertainment.
If you (Hayton) are going to have private sit downs with investors, then tell them not to post it publically. Privately, OK, but not publically. It only causes problems, annnnnd I think you know that.
Am I angry because he didn't contact me? LOLOLOLOLOLOL
No way man! The way things have been handled at ZULU/ESVS, I wouldn't beleive anything I was told. With the way this stock has been performing on promised information I would probably do just the opposite of what that information told me to do.
What this company needs to do is address all the issues publically in a straight forward manner.
If they don't have the information, then they should say so. They don't need to beat the bush by saying they are working on it.
Four words. "WE DON'T HAVE IT".
If they do have it and have failed to release it, then they should state the reason they don't want to release it.
Like Jack Nicholson would say,
"The freakin' truth man. The freakin' truth."
IMO: We are never going to find out fully what transpired during the first 3/4 of 1998. |
