Zim, your sentiment and message appears to be aligned with most of the board I'd say. 

Apart from it reading like a paid for soft management praise the issue is - this is an investment. You talk of hopes, and trust, and likely a fair share of sunk cost fallacy like the rest of us. 

One of management's main directives is to build shareholder value. Yes, we can trust and believe that management may have had shareholder's best interests at heart when they tweeted, and blogged, and engaged various outlets. Unfortunately, it appears that whatever they're doing clearly isn't working. Hence, part of the dissatisfaction and frustration. 

Sure you could argue that the wording and messaging in those engagements were lacking. And you can definitely argue that 95% of the spokespeople hired are D level and arguably F level spokespeople. Regardless, management has thus far failed in building shareholder value. That's not to say they didn't build a foundation for the future. But the potential positive (and hopefully explosive) future of this stock doesn't pay anyone's bills. 

How did LWLG do it? How did they build that institutional base? How did Celestial do it? Can we not emulate or hire one of them? Where are the board members and all their connections? 

Soft pumps, respecting efforts, and having some belief that our choice to invest in this company are fine. But management is doing some things right and some things wrong. Let's have it addressed.