You are technically correct @Bear77 , the best kind of correct. Capital preservation, no matter how little, is of value.

In my case, there is a small, slim chance of some capital recovery with the CEO gone-gone. When I combine this with a holding size of 0.03% of my overall portfolio, and my appetite for risk, I am choosing to ignore the technical correct thing - thank you lizard brain bias!

Another way to think of this is whether the new management that steps in is able to extract value from whatever is left of in the company and try to ignore the potential of the assets. This part I'm still learning but it seems the best rule is whether the management had some corporate experience with a larger company or they grew a company from scratch from the clutches of death.

Sometimes moving on is hard to do. I'm going through that with some of my under-performing holdings which is not held in Strawman. Furthermore we are in a tricky period with tax loss selling round the corner where we may not get the best sale price. Hence I'm trying to avoid selling here unless it reaches a price that I'm happy to sell at.

I admit though I like the tech here. Feels similar to what SoundhoundAI is doing which is held by Nvidia and maybe a good yardstick to compare.

I feel you @reddogaustin , I'm in the same boat.

It's down so much the remaining capital is tiny and I don't need the tax loss this year, although as Bear says these can be carried forward.

I don't think DUB will ever recover, more likely it will get taken over for a song by someone who wants the core business and kicks out the useless management.