Where's your research to dispute Mark's research? Instead you would rather personally attack. This doesn't say much about you. Your problem is that you live in the past in regards to WATT and MARK. People who live in the past fail to see the future and that can be costly as you will likely find out. Mark challenged you to debate WATT. Instead you continue to attack instead. Again, doesn't say much about you or your research.
You must have a huge short position to have to write such a piece. You quote facts about Mark Gomes which he doesn’t dispute but he is open and transparent and goes to great lengths to explain the situation which happened 10 !! years ago. He is transparant why he believes WATT is a great buy and invites you to discuss your short report with him. Instead you just update your smear article. Both the unfortunate issue Mark Gomes encountered and the situation of WATT you describe in the other article is 100% rear view mirror. You don’t counter the CURRENT facts Mark Gomes uncovered with his research. Probably because you can’t and are stuck with a large short position. Good luck with that.
This is going to be a very closely watched Q1 earnings report for $WATT. Last quarter they reported revenue of $3M and a small profit - this came as a positive surprise. So the question is will the Q1 results support the "major ramp in the business and sustained profitability" or "just a pump and dump scheme." That's a dramatic setting for an earnings report!
Where's your research to dispute Mark's research? Instead you would rather personally attack. This doesn't say much about you. Your problem is that you live in the past in regards to WATT and MARK. People who live in the past fail to see the future and that can be costly as you will likely find out. Mark challenged you to debate WATT. Instead you continue to attack instead. Again, doesn't say much about you or your research.
You must have a huge short position to have to write such a piece. You quote facts about Mark Gomes which he doesn’t dispute but he is open and transparent and goes to great lengths to explain the situation which happened 10 !! years ago. He is transparant why he believes WATT is a great buy and invites you to discuss your short report with him. Instead you just update your smear article. Both the unfortunate issue Mark Gomes encountered and the situation of WATT you describe in the other article is 100% rear view mirror. You don’t counter the CURRENT facts Mark Gomes uncovered with his research. Probably because you can’t and are stuck with a large short position. Good luck with that.
This is going to be a very closely watched Q1 earnings report for $WATT. Last quarter they reported revenue of $3M and a small profit - this came as a positive surprise. So the question is will the Q1 results support the "major ramp in the business and sustained profitability" or "just a pump and dump scheme." That's a dramatic setting for an earnings report!