USAT Collapses — Full Analysis (& Why I have Favored USATP)

As always, be sure to read my disclosures / disclaimers below!


Whew… I’ve gone LIVE on YouTube three times in the past 24-hours.

Yesterday’s 12:30 LIVE was a scheduled event to discuss SMSI, MRIN, GOOG, USAT, GAIA, TPCS, NBEV, TLRY, CGC, APHA, and HMMJ.

If you missed the live broadcast, you can see the entire replay here. If you only care about one or a few of those stocks, see my last blog post for a “table of contents” and direct links to my discussion of specific stocks in the video.

Among the stocks discussed was USAT.

In the video, I reiterated that I favor USATP and today exemplifies why. To be clear, I did NOT predict last night’s news or the stock’s reaction. What I’ve been saying is that the true value of USATP benefits from this turmoil, because USATP will pay shareholders about $44 per share (and growing by $1.50 per year) in the event that USAT 1) declares bankruptcy, 2) gets acquired, or 3) decides to buy back USATP.

#3 is not likely to happen at any point. However, recent events have greatly increased the odds that USAT goes bankrupt (though those odds are still very low, IMHO) or gets acquired sooner vs. later.

In reality, USATP should be rising on last night’s news, while USAT deserves to be falling (though nowhere near this much IMHO).

To help investors understand last night’s USAT news, I conducted two unscheduled LIVE broadcasts. One was a boring one of me working in real-time last night (which is great to watch if you want to learn more about what professional stock analysts do).

The other LIVE took place this AM, after I spoke to a USAT representative about the situation. It’s a long video providing 100% of my knowledge on the situation (just facts), followed by my take on how it might play out. There’s even a good exchange with a seemingly smart investor who couldn’t manage to handle the situation professionally.

You can find all of the videos on my YouTube channel.

For those seeking some additional insight into how these things tend to play out, you can check out past instances like PSIX and MXWL. In both cases, the stock paid off nicely for those who took advantage of the panic.



That doesn’t mean that the same thing will happen to USAT, but if the findings of the Board of Directors’ internal investigation proves mostly accurate (good chance), clear skies will eventually come and the stock should react similarly to past cases.

That’s a big “if”, but seems like a good bet. Still, I still favor the risk/reward of USATP for the previously-discussed reasons.

Beyond that, there was also the case of Saba Software (SABA), which went through an accounting issue that I closely tracked. To me, SABA’s situation seemed worse than USAT’s.

You can research that case via Google —

I had to go back and refresh my memory of the situation, but it appears that SABA never ended up issuing its restatements. Instead, it was bought out by a private company (which held no obligation to state or restate SABA’s results)… for $9 per share.

I found this old chart of SABA.


From it, you can see that SABA lost about half of its value, falling from $10 to around $5 in late 2011. However, as was the case with PSIX and MXWL, the stock soon rebounded (in this case rising 100% in 5 months).

Unlike other cases, SABA’s restatement dragged on for years. In April 2013, they announced that they would be delisted. Despite this, the stock did NOT fall back to its lows. In fact, it never even got back below $7.50.

SABA never got relisted.

However, due to the underlying value of the company, the shares performed well until its $9 buyout.

Again, this doesn’t guarantee anything in USAT’s case. There are indeed cases where things didn’t turn out well. However, when I researched Google for past cases, these are the first three I found (PSIX, MXWL, and SABA).

So, why did those stocks tank so badly before rebounding so sharply? Simple…

1. Panic. These things don’t happen every day… and when they do, it’s “scary”. Most investors haven’t been educated on how to assess these situations and simply bail out.

2. Institutional selling. When things like this happen, brokers will tend to suspend coverage until the smoke clears. Similarly, many investment institutions have rules against owning stocks in this sort of situation. Thus, they have no choice… they have to sell.

However, as the supply/demand dust settles, there are often savvy investor who realize that a stock often doesn’t reflect the value of the underlying company. They do the research, run the numbers, and take advantage of the panic. Basically, they “buy low”.


I can not predict how this situation will play out with surety. However, instead of reacting, I’ve researched… and my research lead me to believe that the risk/reward for USAT is attractive at these levels, but only enough so to warrant a small-to-modest position.

I have favored USATP since late-2017 and that doesn’t change with USAT’s decline (especially since USATP should be up on this news, in my professional opinion). However, we’re now at a point where I no longer consider it unwise to choose USAT vs. USATP.

USAT continues to have more risk, but it also has more potential reward over the next few months. It’s also more liquid, which is favorable to traders and folks with a shorter-term time horizon.

Net-net, I’m siding with USATP, but purchased a little USAT this morning (less than a 1% position in my portfolio) and may buy some more in light of the findings I’ve just presented. I’ve placed much larger orders to buy USATP at key levels.

Be sure to check out my videos to gain as full an understanding of the situation as possible. Hope this helps (information-wise and educationally). Cheers.



If you’ve missed my Live broadcasts on Marin Software (MRIN), you can see the first one here (discuss MRIN in greater depth at the 28 minute mark) and the latest one here (I discuss MRIN in greater depth at the 15 minute mark). Finally, I did an in-depth Q&A session on MRIN (at the 33-minute mark of this video)!


More Research:


To get my posts in real-time, just follow/subscribe to my free blog.

If you only want to receive my most critical reports, simply sign up for my MailChimp mailing list instead. If you’re on that list, you will only get key articles and occasional recaps of all the work I’ve recently done.


Disclosures / Disclaimers: I am long USATP, USAT, SMSI, MRIN, GAIA, TPCS, and HMMJ.  I am short NBEV and NBEV call options. However, this is not a solicitation to buy, sell, or otherwise transact any stock or its derivatives. Nor should it be construed as an endorsement of any particular investment or opinion of the stock’s current or future price. To be clear, I do not encourage or recommend for anyone to follow my lead on this or any other stocks, since I may enter, exit, or reverse a position at any time without notice, regardless of the facts or perceived implications of this article.

I am not a financial advisor. Nor am I providing any recommendations, price targets, or opinions about valuation regarding the companies discussed herein. Any disclosures regarding my holdings are true as of the time this article is written, but subject change without notice. I frequently trade my positions, often on an intraday basis. Thus, it is possible that I might be buying and/or selling the securities mentioned herein and/or its derivative at any time, regardless of (and possibly contrary to) the content of this article.

I undertake no responsibility to update my disclosures and they may therefore be inaccurate thereafter.  Likewise, any opinions are as of the date of publication, and are subject to change without notice and may not be updated. I believe that the sources of information I use are accurate but there can be no assurance that they are. All investments carry the risk of loss and the securities mentioned herein may entail a high level of risk. Investors considering an investment should perform their own research and consult with a qualified investment professional.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am receiving no compensation for it, nor do I have a business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. The information in this article is for informational purposes only and should not be regarded as investment advice or as a recommendation regarding any particular security or course of action.

The primary purpose of this blog/forum is to attract new contacts with professional industry expertise to share research and receive feedback (confirmation / refutation) regarding my investment theses.

51 thoughts on “USAT Collapses — Full Analysis (& Why I have Favored USATP)

  1. USATP should be up, but it’s not. I don’t like the inability to liquidate if you want or need to. That’s the biggest negative I see on USATP. Understand all the positives and why it makes sense for you.


    1. No arguments with that. I have no issue with its liquidity, especially since it’s intrinsic value rises $1.50 annually via its retained dividend feature.

      So, for $20, we get a $1.50 retained dividend (7.5% yield) + more than double our money (currently about $44) in the event of bankruptcy (unlikely) or acquisition (increasingly likely).

      I have NO PROBLEM “being stuck” in an asset like this. Virtually no real risk, this providing great risk/reward even if they don’t get acquired for another 10 years. 😎


    1. Don’t know and don’t care. Value is value. I’m not in USATP to trade it. The bid/ask spread and liquidity make USAT a better trading vehicle.

      Thus, I own both (with USATP being the larger position).


  2. Hey Mark;
    Thanks for all your insights on the latest videos! Appreciate them.
    At present, I can’t view them live b/c of work issues, but sure do view them after they are posted.

    Enjoy your time with the kids (coaching, that is).


  3. TPCS earnings after the close. This is from General Dynamics 10K today regarding submarines:

    “The largest business unit in our Marine Systems segment is Electric Boat, the lead shipyard on all Navy nuclear-powered submarine programs, including both the Virginia-class attack submarine and the future Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine.
    We are the lead contractor on the Virginia-class submarine program. Designed to meet diverse global mission requirements, these submarines operate with highly advanced capabilities and stealth in both littoral and open-ocean environments. Since delivering the lead Virginia-class submarine, we have reduced the cost and time to deliver follow-on ships from 84 months to 66 months, while also improving mission capability and ship quality. The Navy procures Virginia-class submarines in multi-boat blocks at a two submarines-per-year construction rate. We have delivered 17 Virginia-class submarines from the first three blocks in conjunction with an industry partner that shares in the construction, and the remaining 11 submarines from the third and fourth blocks are under contract and scheduled for delivery through 2023.
    We are developing the Virginia Payload Module (VPM) for the fifth block of Virginia-class submarines, which is scheduled to begin construction in 2019 in support of the Navy’s fleet plans. This block of submarines will provide significant upgrades in size and performance. The VPM is an 84-foot hull section that adds four additional payload tubes, more than tripling the strike capacity of these submarines and providing unique capabilities to support special missions.
    We are the lead contractor for the design and construction of the Navy’s Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine, a 12-boat program the Navy considers its top priority. These submarines will provide strategic deterrent capabilities for decades and are scheduled to come online when the current Ohio-class fleet reaches its end of service life beginning in 2027. We are slated to begin construction on the lead boat in 2021 and deliver it to the Navy in support of the Ohio-class retirements. In 2018, the Navy awarded us a contract modification for advance procurement, advance construction and long-lead materials. We have developed a comprehensive resource master plan to ensure that we will have a fully trained workforce in place to support the increased demand for skilled trades for the Columbia program. We continue to invest in our facilities, optimizing the timing between investments and returns, while coordinating closely with the Navy on a $1.7 billion investment in our submarine yard to support construction.”


    Remember the subs and aircraft carriers are coming…Don’t miss the boat!


  4. Hi Mark,
    I am curious what you put in your model for their newly acquired product, which seems to be called ViewSpot. They paid $9.8M for it in total, and supposed to be bringing in cash immediately. I added it as a product to your model and tried to pro-rate conservatively what their return would be on that. I put in 150k for Q1 and just multiplied that out by a 1.2 factor each quarter. Came to 805k in 2019, 1.67M in 2020. Have you put it in your model, and if so what numbers did you use?
    Thanks man!


    1. Naturally!

      Technically, I haven’t added the new acquisition to my personal model. Reason? Investors gave this accretive acquisition no credit (negative credit, actually) and we’re not close to a level where I’d consider liquidating my position. So it’s a no brainer for me unless the stock spikes strongly before their earnings call.

      They said “accretive” which is good enough for me until then. Following Buffett’s lead, I don’t scrutinize quarterly numbers as tightly as most retail investors (if they were giving guidance, that would be a LITTLE different, because companies should be able to hit self-imposed goals — and THAT is the most telling / important thing about guidance from public companies).

      Anyways, the deal’s quantitative value is evident in its accretion and Tim’s approval of it. Qualitatively, knowing that they worked on that deal for many years is a plus. Knowing they are not yet in Sprint with that product is another plus. Until the stock gets SOME credit for that, I know that it’s value should be even higher than I previously believed. So, it’s kinda silly to model it out when Mgt will soon provide input to make that job easier.

      Basically, I WILL update my personal model… but after 25 years, I have a good-enough internal feel for changes to my models once I build the original. That’s one of the biggest benefits of building them in the first place!

      Beyond that, since I know the difference between my pre-M&A model and the sell-side model, I can just look at the sell-side model and ballpark it for now.

      If those sound like excuses to be “lazy” they basically are! Time (in life and the day) is limited. My preference since the Sept-Dec correction has been to find new stocks. I can refine my SMSI model when Mgt provides inputs on/after the Q4 call.

      As for your assumptions, they need to be more grounded by semi-reliable inputs. It’s more likely to grow slower with the current installed base and then spike sharply when they win a new account. Yet another reason it’s best to wait for the quarterly call.

      We’re not gaming quarters… we’re investing in the value of the company’s longer-term prospects. As the company starts to get more noticed, those prospects are what institutional investors and/or an acquirer will pay up for.

      Kudos for wanting to go through a professional exercise though. That’s why I gave a thorough answer / non-answer. 🤔😉

      Cheers Russ!

      Liked by 4 people

        1. And you are correct, it is mainly about the exercise. Playing with the numbers, seeing how they affect the valuation and such. Then the fun of seeing actually how close your numbers are when they actually post the results. 🙂


          1. Folks are asking why “someone” was / is buying 6 figures of SMSI in after hours last night and this morning.

            FYI, I focus on fundamentals, not trading action. The latter is MUCH more within my control to obtain.

            We’ve seen download numbers on the rise in recent weeks, but nothing specifically new YESTERDAY to explain the action. To me, it’s just someone that wants in.

            Figuring out who and why is likely close to impossible… and frankly I don’t care because it’s either 1) something we already know, like SMSI’s attractive risk/reward or 2) some insider info, which would make it illegal to trade SMSI if I found out… so I don’t want to find out 😂

            Sticking to my rule on this — when a stock does something weird, there’s USUALLY no major new reason behind it… and ALMOST ALWAYS nothing we can figure out, so it’s best to ignore and move on.

            Liked by 1 person

  5. Hi Mark
    So that was a very disappointing call by MRIN.
    The question is, if they will receive over 3 million this quarter from Google why are they still going to lose another 3.7 to $4.2 million in this quarter.
    Thank you for your input as always.


    1. Def some disappointments in there, but the product was JUST rolled out. Revs don’t ramp instantly.

      Guidance is always sandbagged, but it still should’ve been a little higher.

      GOOG was strong, but the core biz has to ramp up… and of course, not giving more color or Q&A is frustrating.

      Still a very cheap (and now cheaper) bet on their turnaround. I’ll call Mgt for more color tonight or in the AM.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. Of course.

      Looking at the guidance, sandbagging + Q1 seasonality can explain the 12.8M guide, so I’m only a little disappointed with that.

      GOOG was one of the bright spots. $3.9 million versus the 3 million they guided.

      They just need to transition customers to the new product, which is now underway.

      It’s clearly just too early for some folks’ tastes. I don’t fault anyone who prefers to see proof in the pudding first. I tend to be an early bird, but feel bad for anyone who’s feeling pain over this. I’ll surely be down 6-figures tomorrow, but used to it and know what I’m dealing with (both the risk and the potential reward).

      FYI, someone astutely noticed that about 1 million of the GOOG revs was not recognized yet. “3.9M cash coming. AR 3.9M. 900k Accrued expenses (as deferred revenue). 2.9M revenue recognized. A little confusing because on the one hand he says they earned 3.9M based on Q4 performance, yet they are recognizing 2.9M of it.”

      Overall, it’s nowhere near as bad as the reaction. It’s EV is cut in half to $12M at these levels.


      1. Most likely MRIN not including GOOG revenues in Q1 guide, only halfway through the quarter. Payment is calculated based on performance for the quarter, so they won’t really know until close to the end of March (they didn’t update Q4 guidance until 12/17 on a deal that started 10/1, and they were conservative at that). They didn’t get the final Q4 number until after the quarter closed ($900K deferred). If this is the case they could be doing $15mm and near breakeven. Just a thought.


        1. No… to be honest, I’m sure it’s included.

          They just like to sandbag guidance AND it’s a Q1, which is seasonally down from Q4. A couple of the insiders have investment banking experience and like to play it that way.

          Of course, GOOG was well above the $3M guidance in Q4, so I’m sure they kept that in their back pockets for this coming quarter.


          1. If I work the guidance numbers on high end (-$3.7mm NG, $12.8mm revs) back, assuming either $3mm or $3.9mm ($3mm + $900k deferred) Google for net $9.8mm or $8.9mm software revenues, respectively, using $12.65mm SG&A and $2.4mm Gaap adjustment from Q4, I get 32% and 30% gross margins on software sales vs 52% in Q4. Seems too low. If I use $11.9mm software at 47.5%GM plus $900k GOOG deferred using same SG&A and GAAP adjustment numbers, its 3.70mm non gaap loss. I’m assuming GOOG drops directly to bottom line. Simplistic so could be missing something.


    2. $MRIN doing Q4 analysis, I frankly don’t understand the magnitude of the AH reaction. See the numbers for yourself. I’ll discuss manana, but long story short, I saw NOTHING in the results that change the thesis. They just need to stabilize organic revs (which is of course a big factor, but not something that was undiscussed before).

      In the meanwhile, the EV drops in half to $14M on $50-60M in revs / $25M in annual R&D, with cash flow looking like it will surely turn positive in Q1, based on the math, using their sandbagged-as-always guidance.

      They did a HORRIBLE job of highlighting the financial highlights of the Q, as I discovered by comparing Q3 cash flow and income statement to Q4. So bad, makes me wonder if they wanted to tank the stock for some reason (stock awards or strike price on new compensation options). Gotta check the annual timing of those awards, if any 🤔


      1. Went a bit through their and your spreadsheets…

        So .. if you put back the $3.9M from Google (earned in 4Q but paid in 1Q) they are CF positive, hu?
        Hence they use that as a buffer to make subsequent qtrs all looking nice, evening out delayed payments.

        But then, why such a funny Non-GAAP net loss guidance, which should be more close to zero?
        As they say, break even within 2019 ..

        Now the cat is out, we may see them buying themselves 🙂

        What is very noticeable and nice: Costs down and Gross Profits up 2018. If this trend continues ..
        If only their weird guidance, but even their low key $12M could keep GP in line w/ these revenue shares.
        However, a great 4Q18 this was, considering the $3.9M.

        From the psychology of the trade, the 180k in AH brought the price down and for some reason, soft attempts to recover were defeated with small volume sells.
        FUD spread, P&D etc .. understandable based on the relative short term rise lately.
        The educated look into the actual performance should reverse course and recover the stock,
        where the former might be done this weekend.

        Interesting confusion due to presentation (or lack thereof) and guidance.
        But saw similar actions w/ AMD and other stocks, most recovered the ER down play rather quickly.

        Thank you for the detailed spreadsheet.


        1. Sounds right, but I don’t worry about trading action. If I believe my asset is worth something, it is (because I won’t be inclined to sell until someone is willing to pay up).

          Over time, companies achieve fair value (higher or lower), so I just have to be right about the company’s future and wait.

          It’s not about quarters or charts. It’s about DCF, which is a long-term thing.

          #BuffettStyle 💯


  6. Thanks and will look forward to hear about your call tomorrow. If the fact they did not take questions tonight hopefully they will answer the phone.


  7. Hey Mark;
    Does it concern you that the customer churn still exceeds new bookings?
    As stated above, very disappointing call. Didn’t give guidance for full year (unless I missed it). IMO, minimal enthusiasm that they WILL turn the company around in 2019.

    Looking forward to your insights on this! Have a great evening!


    1. As I’m going through the feedback, I noticed that someone called MRIN “dead”.

      For the record, whether MRIN turns out to be a winner or not, they didn’t “die” last night. To be clear, the news and call were certainly disappointing.

      However, they beat their Q4 numbers (which I predicted) and talked positively about their progress. What killed the stock was that management disappointed people with their Q1 guidance (which incidentally didn’t “miss” Street expectations, because there were none).

      I understand that people are disappointed. THAT is understandable. I was hoping for a bit more elaboration on the Google deal and commentary regarding when the new product will turn revenues around… but they didn’t come close to dying. In fact, a lot of positives came from that call (more on that later).

      First, let me clear to those of you who have been led to believe that a stock is judged by its chart — behind each stock is a COMPANY, not a ball on a roulette wheel that has just come to a stop.

      In roulette, once the play is over, it’s over. Win or lose, the play is dead.

      MRIN is a stock, but MARIN SOFTWARE is a company in the midst of a turnaround. Turnarounds happen over the course of years, not months. THIS turnaround is already 4+ years in process and giving us reason to be optimistic.

      I’m scheduling a call with management and will go live to discuss all of this in greater depth ASAP thereafter.

      In the meantime, if it helps matters at all, I “lost” 6-figures on the news, but don’t view it as a loss — just a reduction in the value of my investment. I was buying last night in the low 4s.

      I DO feel bad that the company didn’t issue better guidance for everyone, but that’s one quarter’s guidance within MRIN’s turnaround. It shouldn’t have had this impact on the stock IMHO…

      …but I’ve been the guy covering this most closely, so I do feel bad for those who didn’t fully comprehend that MRIN is a turnaround play in the works. I do believe I was clear on that, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

      Anyways, like all stocks, MRIN possesses risk and potential reward (which I STILL believe is greatly skewed in favor of those who are long). They are not “dead”. They are simply working through a turnaround (and in my opinion, doing a better job of it than the stock reflects).

      More later. Cheers.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Ideas about their cash position and burn? 3 quarters left to turnaround?
        Some multiples still point out they are cheap, as long they can pick up growth (again)?
        Interesting volatility, could be just earnings drop as seen last months and then full recovery in days.


        1. That’s what we’re trying to figure out. GOOG payments will stem the cash burn. If/when revs just STABILIZE, they should be sustainably cf positive leading investors to assign a revenue multiple.

          Right now, each multiple of revenue = about $9 per share (then you have to add the $2 of cash to that calculation)… but investors clearly are not willing to assign rev multiples yet.

          Therein lies the risk vs. reward — if/when on cash flow and if/when investors assign valuation metrics to it.


          1. Yes, exactly my thoughts. Got to the $9 per share as well, just for P/S 1.
            So the real bummer here was the guidance for 1Q19 w/ 3.7M loss non-GAAP?
            4Q was just $0.6M. Is this the sandbagging game to make sure for a positive surprise?
            I expected a drop of 15% max on this for a short time, not over 30%. So I bought some at closing..
            Also expecting them to remedy situation in the next days.
            Good luck.


          2. Bottoms (and tops) are never easy to determine. I just run the numbers and buy things that I find attractive from a risk / reward perspective. If it gets cheaper before it goes up, that’s just part of being an investor. Cheers!


          3. Hi, Mark or others:
            How do you get “about $9 per share”? It is seen the share count is about 5.8M. I can’t get $9 per share. Can you or others help me?


  8. Agree with Mark on MRIN that the thesis is still intact. As famous investor WB sort of once said…”if I liked it at$6 then I like it better at $4!” Cheers and doubled down @$4.45

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I saw similar volatility with TEUM, but I don’t like that company at all. TEUM is too ‘loud’ on their projections and under delivers grossly on their ‘backlog’ I think. So too much pumping from their CEO.
      MRIN looks quite the opposite, even thought they guided sequentially below last quarter, but then again, it could be strategy to make a nice beating with same or slightly better results.
      Maybe we will see this with increase in ownership in the next days, would be hilarious.
      Since this is a very low floater, one could expected a “gap-close” play to $6.20’sh, just because of it.
      Then we see what really happens.


      1. I never know how stock will trade, but I feel great about the valuation. Over time, that’s what matters most, but we’ll see how things play out over the next few days and weeks. 😎

        p.s. BTW, to those who have kindly reached out to me, I don’t see most of the “nasty things being said” on StockTwits. I guess I already have those people blocked ☺️ but my thanks to those of you who have been throwing your support behind me. It’s not necessary, but certainly appreciated. I have confidence in my work and intent, so malicious people’s words don’t bother me at all. I actually feel bad for them.

        As for any SEC threats, I don’t pay those folks any mind either. I’ve learned a lot from my compliance attorney and the SEC. My bases are covered. I’m just a retired analyst blogging my opinion (expressing my first amendment rights), NOT an investment advisor, as my disclosures state.

        So again, thanks! 🙏🏼😇🙏🏼

        In more important news, I just had a long call with management, which basically confirmed my comments of the past 24 hours. I’ll provide details once I finish analyzing my notes.

        Have a great weekend. Cheers!

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Mark;
          Thanks for all your encouraging insights on MRIN. One will never get rid of the trolls who never are happy or willing to say nice things about anyone. Best to block them as you have and go on with life – it’s to short.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. Excellent, looking forward to the call results.

          Just saw on ST a few notes, like stock dropped on just 180k shares yesterday in AH
          and yes, today just ~1M traded. So that usually implies this drop is meaningless I guess.
          Confirmed these numbers on my chart, just bounced off the Weekly 20ma.

          Non-GAAP Cash Burn: Last 4Q guidance bottom – 4Q PR = $1.8M less.
          Assuming the revenues still coming in, one needs color to understand the over guided cash burn?

          Why don’t the have a Q&A w/ retail included in their CC? Only this venue allows a ‘real’ contact with company.
          But good you called them. They are open to such phone calls?
          Great job.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. p.s. yes, they’re VERY open to investor phone calls. In fact, if you call them and ask for Q&A as part of your discussion, they are more likely to reinstitute it. 😉


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s