Yup, when all else failed, attack the poster/s who posted contrarian viewpoints.
Always Ad Hominem.
I always wondered why they would defend management after such dismil performances. If you go through their postings and see for yourself, if they have EVER criticised Cath/FAR management (NOT even once), you might get an idea.
A few years ago, when Cath sold a large portion of her converted options at around 7 cents, causing the SP to fall from around 9 cents, back to 7 cents; these same individuals came out to defend her right to sell.
If it was any other public company, you would have shareholders demanding the sacking of the Managing Director who sold those shares, precipitating the share price crash!!!
But oh no, they still defended her, despite the fact that they as shareholders (supposedly) would have suffered massive losses.
Today, after 4 years, the SP is sitting at a dismal 5.9 cents, they are still defending her and FAR management.
You really have to wonder whether they are here to make money or defend management at all cost. Some holders like Bullant and Garrycleaner have waited for nearly 15 years, for a return.
I can guarrantee you that none of these people managing FAR will work for FREE for 15 years!!! So why should shareholders and potential shareholders do that?
Bottom line: FAR management are paid very well to add value to the company. If they ARE NOT doing that, why can't existing shareholders and potential shareholders criticise their performance and seek change before they invest their money?
In every other publicly listed company, the MD and the management team cops a pasting from the Press, sometimes the Gov, the Analysts, the Investment Houses, Shareholders and Potential Shareholders.
Why is FAR management is so special that they can't be criticised?
FAR Price at posting:
5.9¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
(20min delay)
