Posted On: 08/30/2013 11:01:05 AM
Post# of 36729
Re: StephCurry #5727
D.Gold said it much better than what I could have written up. The only thing he didn't mention outright, but alluded to, is what I had found out in my groundbreaking DD when I called/emailed 12 collectives, and was able to actually talk to 7 live people, and had 3 email responses saying they will get back to me. 2 didn't both to return my calls or emails.
What I found out pertains to this part in SK3's Q2 filings:
collective for 5,000,000 shares of common stock
It is my belief, but not 100%, that the collective in question is Dharma. What that means is that YAK is now owned by SK3, and the company is not just a licensee with a small residual commission as the douchebags on iHub have been claiming.
If the YAK product line expands to other states, SK3 will go through the roof. $754K in patient medicine revenues per the Q2 Disclosure, and this only covers L.A. through San Fran and in 1 state. 20 states now have some form of legalization. On current patient medicine revenue alone SK3 should be worth 1 penny. With YAK in 20 states...just imagine.
What I found out pertains to this part in SK3's Q2 filings:
On June 30, 2013, the Issuer acquired the assets of an existing California medical marijuana
collective for 5,000,000 shares of common stock
It is my belief, but not 100%, that the collective in question is Dharma. What that means is that YAK is now owned by SK3, and the company is not just a licensee with a small residual commission as the douchebags on iHub have been claiming.
If the YAK product line expands to other states, SK3 will go through the roof. $754K in patient medicine revenues per the Q2 Disclosure, and this only covers L.A. through San Fran and in 1 state. 20 states now have some form of legalization. On current patient medicine revenue alone SK3 should be worth 1 penny. With YAK in 20 states...just imagine.
(0)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
