This is exactly Matthew Berg's analysis/argument.
Post# of 9964
The fallacy of this argument is:
1) Ignores company growth - assumes Dan is worthless and sitting around
2) Completely ignores sales in all other states and events
3) Completely ignores sales from online (clearly growing)
4) Assumes any money from dilution is not spent on company and in her pocket
5) Assumes costs remain constant. Actually, costs will go down such as marketing can be reused. Licenses cheaper to renew than research from scratch. Less travel for sales presentations, bigger shipments - economies of scale.etc.
6) Ignores how close we are to a national retailer like Safeway + Kroger
7) Ignores how many stores in CA for next Costco rollout (CA has over 120 Costco stores)
8 ) Ignores simple math for Costco. 30 stores x 48 bottles per month [ just a case a week!] per month * 23.99 per bottle = $34500 gross. ($414K gross - more than half of payroll after taxes). We should make it to another 2 dozen stores easily.
9 ) Ignores huge 50% line of credit received for international.
If we don't do anything but 12 Costco. yes.. we're done. Management is too expensive.
Yes, we need more stores, but if figure (1) thru ( 9 ).. We should do OK. As long as Margrit does not scam us. (resign, R/S, or cut and run or fail to ship! LIE).
Free to argue.