I thoroughly support Armin's position.
I know in my case, and probably his, this is not venting, just rational thinking. O'Hara and Lewis were either incompetent or criminal or both. I used the word criminal in another post, but unfortunately couldn't read any responses because the "last seven days" of posts only gives me several hours. "Criminal" is a very strong word, and I am not a lawyer. But, IMO, if they knew about these circumstances in advance (Sequent, charges, going concern, abbrogation of standard accounting practices, etc.) and knowingly misled shareholders ("scorcher," "no charges," etc.) then they are criminals, plain and simple. If they didn't know, or didn't conciously deceive shareholders, they are merely terrificly incompetent, and shouldn't go to jail.
Let me say that I am a very small stockholder in this company, and my losses are very sustainable, particularly in a quite diversified, but speculative portfolio. I have no real animus, but I am amazed, (particularly by Kerry Lee) that people take this crap. It's easy to be enthralled by technology, and Fiber Channel is exciting. But company's must be run. Ancor is not a seed level start up; it is at a stage that it must show business progress.They must make money or show real ability to do so to survive. This company has done no good work in business. For every step forward, they backtrack two, usually camoflaging apparent incompetence with purposefully disceptive optimism.
So where does one go from here. Obviously, this $10M is their only chance. It seems quite clear that without an immediate infusion, they will die. Just look at the balance sheet. Is this agreeable, Kerry? So, first, as an investor, I need to be 100% assured that this money is in the bank? How can this happen if the messenger is the guy whose credibility is broken? So I need an honest statement from the board of directors that this money is guaranteed, or there is a date by which they will know its guaranteed.
If this condition is met, then we can start talking about the prospects Kerry carries on about so much more knowledgably than I could.
However, with a guaranteed short term viability, a 40 M market cap, technological salvage value, then we can talk about the next condition I would need to invest in this company. That is revenue prospects -- show me the contracts (not ones with stringent performance contingencies and uncertainties). With these conditions addressed, Ancor is a screaming buy, with or without Brocade. Without them, salvage value is the best hope, but frankly I am sure that a buyer would not want the business it would get with the technology.
Kerry, your innuendo is as arch as Adam's but far less accurate. I'd like to know if you and others agree with these preconditions, and then perhaps speculate more concretely about near term announcements. I'd also like to know if shareholders think that Mr. O'Hara and Mr. Lewis knowingly misled shareholders, because I don't want call these gentlemen criminals without good cause. |
