/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>57490654
It is also the IS terrorist group's flag. I think they'd stand behind this new logo. I'm just helping a persecuted minority get their message across in different languages and mediums by making it a bit more cutesie. Is that not wholesome?

>>57490670
They seemed to not dislike my post. My self worth is saved for another day.
We both know why I used a phone, and we both know iPhones are the most popular phones in Japan.

>You don't have a dong you trans-gender sissy.
Ah so you are indeed a bigot...

>>51452766
Addict wants to sell to buy food and drugs.
Obviously can't sell becuase liquidity rugged, fair to be angry about, but saying it's retarded since people can't sell to buy food and drugs means it was a retarded risk to take. You never invest money you need immediately for necessities (not that drugs are one). Kevin claps back that the price floor is not retarded, but they are retarded. It was funny and I agree with him on that based on their specific justification for why the floor was bad, but I also think the floor was retarded (for other reasons) and he keeps saying it's "speculation" that people would buy now at the floor at 12c, but not at 60c, but that's Kevin being extremely biased. I would 100% buy at 12c floor, I even had orders ready at 15c when it shot up from 20c to 60c. It's completely retarded when he claims there's no difference if it's at floor A or floor B when one is "at company valuation from bull market" and the other is far below company valuation during bear. Of fucking course there would be more buyers if the price floor was lower, the risk/reward would be much better. The chance that the price recovers would be higher, and the potential rewards would be more as well. He's on pure biased cope mode claiming it's "speculation". It's a complete nobrainer and it honestly just annoys me that he refuses to acknowledge it, but likely it would be even worse for the company if he does so I get why he's doing it from a business standpoint.