Ditto to Taylorm
We've been over this territory so many times, but I'll try once more.
Most of you already know what I'm going to say. It's nothing new, so you may want to skip it.
What I'd really like now is a post from Roger Budgell. I think he has a good understanding of what follows.
I feel badly when personal squabbles erupt here and someone is offended. I think all shareholders should feel this is a place where they can communicate with other shareholders.
However, this is an incredibly public place. Anything printed here could be read by hundreds of people, and is potentially reproducible anywhere. My guide is that if I'm not comfortable seeing what I've written here in a newspaper tomorrow, I won't write it. All shareholders know that Sungold is a gaming development company, which by definition is involved in complex, politically, and financially sensitive negotiations. Unfortunately, those negotiations can be impacted by public statements like this, and also by so-called private e-mails, as I have found out.
The company is in the difficult spot of having to give shareholders enough information to go on and feel hopeful about, without jeopardizing the company's work. Perhaps they could be more realistic about when developments will happen, but I imagine there are many times when things just don't happen as quickly as they expect. As shareholders, we also have the responsibility to understand what they are saying and not read our own hopes into their words. On the other hand, we can also be sure that there are negotiations and developments occurring which we know nothing about. When the Michigan JV is signed, which could be any day now, it will just suddenly appear as an announcement. I'm sure we won't see much complaining on the thread when that happens.
(as an aside, I know that there were some powerful people present at the AGM who support Sungold's projects, who were not introduced, and who will have a lot of influence over the company's future - the company, to its credit IMO, had the discretion not to announce their presence - preferring long-term benefits over short-term perceptual gains)
Of course we have all had frustrations and unmet expectations, especially when the stock hits air pockets. I agree entirely with Taylorm that private messages, or e-mails should be used for rumours, frustrations, and for settling personal squabbles. Yes I know this means that the thread can become dry and boring at times. I would rather cope with a boring thread than have messages posted here that damage the company or scare shareholders.
One note on the recent posts from sfh. Since he brought up the topic of e-mails, I wonder if he knows how many e-mails I got from shareholders scared that there had been insider trading. He probably doesn't know that his comment about insider trading (with an url that did not work for non-subscribers to Stockwatch), in the context of an angry statement about the company, was interpreted by many people to mean the worst. The comment about the IT report may have been innocent enough in itself, but when presented in that context, without interpretation, it scared a lot of people, and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the increased volume at the end of the week was related to that. When a tornado goes through town, there's a lot of collateral damage. IMO, the reality is that there are many people who would like to see this company, and its shareholders damaged. They are happy to benefit from damage, regardless of who causes it. I don't think shareholders should have to worry about damage caused, however unwittingly, by other shareholders.
This is just the opinion of one contributor. As S.M. posted recently, no one controls this thread. However, as I said, we've been over this territory a few times, and there are a number of us who have made the mistake in the past of using this as a forum to vent our frustrations, and who have learned by hard experience to exercise restraint. I think that sometimes private messages, e-mails, or phone calls are better.
Even though I feel that sfh was directly attempting to insult the regular contributors to this thread, by calling them Amway-type hypers, I extend my apology to him or anyone else who may have felt they were being criticized. If I have been the one criticizing, my intention was only to criticize what was posted - not the contributor. I'm asking only that people consider the responsibilities of publishing a public document. IMO, if contributors keep this in mind, this forum can only benefit from wide participation, and diverse points of view.
I'm not sure why I bother to make these posts. The reality is that the outcomes of the company's projects will occur in time regardless of what is said on SI or elsewhere. Those who believe in the company, and are on the bus, will benefit when the Michigan deal is signed. They will benefit as Richmond Downs becomes a reality. They will benefit from developments in South Korea, and any other projects the company may choose to initiate. |
