@edwardsylvan $SEGI how do you look yourself in the mirror knowing you had Chip Gnassi, Floyd Mayweather, cameron Jordan, Francisco Garcia, master p, James Lindsay, etc all believe in you just to be where you’re at today. One of the biggest what ifs in otc history.
@edwardsylvan Claiming “I’m not them” isn’t a strategy, it’s a statement of intent. Markets don’t price intent, they price risk. Reverse splits aren’t feared because CEOs misunderstand them. They’re feared because too many CEOs say exactly this and then prove investors right. Execution is 🔑
@edwardsylvan A rights offering makes sense as a way to protect long-term shareholders while raising capital. I’d also support clearer milestones tied to any dilution, specific revenue, distribution, or viewership targets, so capital deployment is measurable. $SEGI
@sycamorefilms@edwardsylvan Opportunity is important, but so is accountability. Long term shareholders didn’t lose value overnight, it was lost over time through poor execution. The focus now has to be rebuilding per-share value, not just activity. $SEGI
@edwardsylvan@Ry6360597031361 Agreed dilution isn’t the issue, execution and funding continuity are. The key question is whether REG A+ provides enough runway to carry current projects all the way to monetization and avoid the year-2 gap that stalled prior deals. If so, dilution at the right price is a tool.
@edwardsylvan@Iam90dRick Getting off OTC requires audited financials and execution, not just intent. Can you clarify which exchange you’re targeting and when shareholders should expect audited statements and concrete milestones? @edwardsylvan $SEGI
@edwardsylvan Appreciate the transparency. Can you clarify why Reg A+ Tier 1 was chosen over private or strategic capital, and how you’re thinking about dilution and ROI for existing shareholders? Specifically, what milestones should investors expect this raise to fund and over what timeline?