CorporateExpress - thank you for the candid response. Per my last reply to rags - i have remained with a long term horizon though i did buy (as i stated) shares for a trading position.
I agree with most of what you conveyed. However, where i differ is in where risk captial comes into play and how it is employed. Every company is fighting for risk captial at these levels. PPS is critical as leverage to finance loans, leverage for future acquisitions, and to attract further, stable, long term investors. "Real" capital is employed where investors findthe potential for high reward at minimal risk. Revenues plays a critical role in that - completely agree. Profitable revenues is the second step. But the "believability" that the top line will eventuallylead to a sustainable bottom line and do so in a reasonable amount of time is what differentiates stocks/companies in the OTC. Here, a disproportionate amount of DD goes into "trusting" the company implicitly in a very sketchy world (the OTC). Bill brought that and seems to have maintained it (at least he has with me). Conversely, I believe IR has done the opposite. If thise that followed this board and Twitter truly trusted IRs ability to execute - do you really believe we would be sitting at 11 and 12 when they continue to stand behind their PPS prediction of 0.01 by EOY?
In prior CC - they committed to another $75K (give or take) of revenue in last quarter with some big caveats on the unknowns. However - lets assume it is $250K by EOY and they commit 10% to MRVB and they get their 10X factor (which I still question - I understand the math but if it was that easy - why even mess around with commodities and just trade full time..?) - that is $25K that has to be turned into $250K in 3 months. If they use the full amount to buyback stock at current price - they are looking at removing 227MM or roughly 6% of OS. Now - assuming they flip the buy/sell demand ratio - one wohld have to use a gradient to properly model the actual # of shares. But looking at where share count started at beginning of year (2.4-2.8 BB after correction..?) - that still doesnt bring them back to that level and the share price wasnt close to a penny. If total revenues are $350K at year end - P/s certainly wont justify that type of market cap (3.9 BB - 272MM )× $0.01= $36.2MM on just $350K in sales. Even with the promise of $30MM in 2017 - that wont justify the ratio.
Now - if they use 10% of the $10MM ExIM loan - that is $1MM plus the $250K. With no gradient - that takes roughly 1.6BB shares out of OS which brings it down to 2.54BB shares and at 0.01 - still gives market cap of $25.4MM - still too higb on less than $1MM in revenues. At $500K in revenues - that is still over 50. Possible...? Yes. Probably - not in the OTC.
So - a lot of things have to go right with a LOT of confidence needed by current and new investors to believe it will continue in the future nust to get to a penny. Right now - the strongest believers arent buying aggressively when the stock is on clearance. WhoWho is going to be buying aggressively (for the long term) when it is trading at 60 or 80 when it is looking dangerously overbought?
I am not saying PPS can or cant get to a penny by year end. What i am saying - there remains a lack of confidence in IRs "facts" to provide a pathway to make it happen. Further - to reduce OS to 400MM shares in 6-8 months (i think that was Jame's target on CC) seems even tougher to accomplish unless as you suggest they start moving shares back and forth from common to preferred and such.
The frustration i have (and it is shared with other long term, larger investors) is IR has no patience or tolerance with questioning or trying to understand the mechanics of how they get to the $0.01 target or 400MM shares when they absolutely struggle to give a revenue range 6-12 months out. To generate cash throug MRVB - it has to come from revenues or loans and the larger lian amounts are revenue dependent. If they are using EIA to boost revenues for the premium loans (larger amounts/favorable terms) - how are they going to make all of this come together in just 2-3short months to make the stock jump 10X in price...? can it happen? Certainly. This is the OTC and it could go to a nickel wit lh thenproper motivation from select MMs. But what is the realistic probability that itwill occur when IR and the company have to get all those pieces to fit just right at the same time to give it a fighting chance? I dont know. That is where risk/reward comes in.
For me - i am putting a lot of trust in Bill and his passion and previous execution. I think IR could (should) use that passion and trust to their advantage with the "installed" investor base rather than chase them away. Unless their vested interests arent aligned with long term holders and then we are back to the free for all wild west OTC. that incidentally was brought up by several investors early on in their start with IR and they got rather defensive about that as well.
i think the most positive thing i have heard/read this year (or specifically since reconstruction) was Bill's tweet about removing the "going concern" statement. Bill has always been rather conservative with such comments so he obviously feels they are close.
Finally - as it is late and I am typing on a 2"×4" keyboard - as long as the OS c9ntinues to increase - the PPS faces even further headwind and will keep new investors at bay (especially with the lack of PRs or 8Ks). Regardless of where they are coming from - it still doesnt instill confidence to buyers looking for a bottom or a clear reversal that things have finally turned the corner.
I agree with most of what you conveyed. However, where i differ is in where risk captial comes into play and how it is employed. Every company is fighting for risk captial at these levels. PPS is critical as leverage to finance loans, leverage for future acquisitions, and to attract further, stable, long term investors. "Real" capital is employed where investors findthe potential for high reward at minimal risk. Revenues plays a critical role in that - completely agree. Profitable revenues is the second step. But the "believability" that the top line will eventuallylead to a sustainable bottom line and do so in a reasonable amount of time is what differentiates stocks/companies in the OTC. Here, a disproportionate amount of DD goes into "trusting" the company implicitly in a very sketchy world (the OTC). Bill brought that and seems to have maintained it (at least he has with me). Conversely, I believe IR has done the opposite. If thise that followed this board and Twitter truly trusted IRs ability to execute - do you really believe we would be sitting at 11 and 12 when they continue to stand behind their PPS prediction of 0.01 by EOY?
In prior CC - they committed to another $75K (give or take) of revenue in last quarter with some big caveats on the unknowns. However - lets assume it is $250K by EOY and they commit 10% to MRVB and they get their 10X factor (which I still question - I understand the math but if it was that easy - why even mess around with commodities and just trade full time..?) - that is $25K that has to be turned into $250K in 3 months. If they use the full amount to buyback stock at current price - they are looking at removing 227MM or roughly 6% of OS. Now - assuming they flip the buy/sell demand ratio - one wohld have to use a gradient to properly model the actual # of shares. But looking at where share count started at beginning of year (2.4-2.8 BB after correction..?) - that still doesnt bring them back to that level and the share price wasnt close to a penny. If total revenues are $350K at year end - P/s certainly wont justify that type of market cap (3.9 BB - 272MM )× $0.01= $36.2MM on just $350K in sales. Even with the promise of $30MM in 2017 - that wont justify the ratio.
Now - if they use 10% of the $10MM ExIM loan - that is $1MM plus the $250K. With no gradient - that takes roughly 1.6BB shares out of OS which brings it down to 2.54BB shares and at 0.01 - still gives market cap of $25.4MM - still too higb on less than $1MM in revenues. At $500K in revenues - that is still over 50. Possible...? Yes. Probably - not in the OTC.
So - a lot of things have to go right with a LOT of confidence needed by current and new investors to believe it will continue in the future nust to get to a penny. Right now - the strongest believers arent buying aggressively when the stock is on clearance. WhoWho is going to be buying aggressively (for the long term) when it is trading at 60 or 80 when it is looking dangerously overbought?
I am not saying PPS can or cant get to a penny by year end. What i am saying - there remains a lack of confidence in IRs "facts" to provide a pathway to make it happen. Further - to reduce OS to 400MM shares in 6-8 months (i think that was Jame's target on CC) seems even tougher to accomplish unless as you suggest they start moving shares back and forth from common to preferred and such.
The frustration i have (and it is shared with other long term, larger investors) is IR has no patience or tolerance with questioning or trying to understand the mechanics of how they get to the $0.01 target or 400MM shares when they absolutely struggle to give a revenue range 6-12 months out. To generate cash throug MRVB - it has to come from revenues or loans and the larger lian amounts are revenue dependent. If they are using EIA to boost revenues for the premium loans (larger amounts/favorable terms) - how are they going to make all of this come together in just 2-3short months to make the stock jump 10X in price...? can it happen? Certainly. This is the OTC and it could go to a nickel wit lh thenproper motivation from select MMs. But what is the realistic probability that itwill occur when IR and the company have to get all those pieces to fit just right at the same time to give it a fighting chance? I dont know. That is where risk/reward comes in.
For me - i am putting a lot of trust in Bill and his passion and previous execution. I think IR could (should) use that passion and trust to their advantage with the "installed" investor base rather than chase them away. Unless their vested interests arent aligned with long term holders and then we are back to the free for all wild west OTC. that incidentally was brought up by several investors early on in their start with IR and they got rather defensive about that as well.
i think the most positive thing i have heard/read this year (or specifically since reconstruction) was Bill's tweet about removing the "going concern" statement. Bill has always been rather conservative with such comments so he obviously feels they are close.
Finally - as it is late and I am typing on a 2"×4" keyboard - as long as the OS c9ntinues to increase - the PPS faces even further headwind and will keep new investors at bay (especially with the lack of PRs or 8Ks). Regardless of where they are coming from - it still doesnt instill confidence to buyers looking for a bottom or a clear reversal that things have finally turned the corner.
4
