"If HJOE would provide some transparency we could
Post# of 15187
Posted On: 02/10/2016 5:11:44 PM
Re: Steve Rogers #2630
"If HJOE would provide some transparency we could better estimate the revenue generated from SMS dealership fees. We know the cost per bottle to make. I assume at this level it's $.30 a bottle and HJOE sells these to SMS dealers at $1.25 a bottle for a .$95 gross profit per bottle"
let me ask you this - if believe they are moving product through dealers and they are signing more dealers - what would be the advantage of NOT sharing this revenue data and providing guidance? why might they not WANT to share that in general if they are being successful?
if you can reasonably answer those question with intelligent assumptions - the rest becomes significantly more easy.
if the dealer signs up are NOT actually happening and they are NOT moving product - where are they getting the money to pay attorneys to take on a case of that magnitude? if they cant pay them and there is no hope for the attorneys to make a return if they were being paid in stock - why would they take the case...?
one can verify the dealers either by going through their online sites or calling one of their locations and asking where they get their products/who their distributor is.
when dealing with the issues the company has had thrown at them - one has to consider all of the ramifications.
we all want transparency - however, if the company was completely transparent, the share count would have ballooned quickly to 5BB and the R/s would have been enacted and then it probably would have gone back to 2.5-3.5BB based on the debt and the way it was trading. would that transparency have helped the common shareholder...?
the company stock has always been extremely speculative. however, is it more or less risky than it was one year ago or two years ago? more or less than after the PLN lawsuit was announced? more or less than after they started running product again? after they signed SMS?
let me ask you this - if believe they are moving product through dealers and they are signing more dealers - what would be the advantage of NOT sharing this revenue data and providing guidance? why might they not WANT to share that in general if they are being successful?
if you can reasonably answer those question with intelligent assumptions - the rest becomes significantly more easy.
if the dealer signs up are NOT actually happening and they are NOT moving product - where are they getting the money to pay attorneys to take on a case of that magnitude? if they cant pay them and there is no hope for the attorneys to make a return if they were being paid in stock - why would they take the case...?
one can verify the dealers either by going through their online sites or calling one of their locations and asking where they get their products/who their distributor is.
when dealing with the issues the company has had thrown at them - one has to consider all of the ramifications.
we all want transparency - however, if the company was completely transparent, the share count would have ballooned quickly to 5BB and the R/s would have been enacted and then it probably would have gone back to 2.5-3.5BB based on the debt and the way it was trading. would that transparency have helped the common shareholder...?
the company stock has always been extremely speculative. however, is it more or less risky than it was one year ago or two years ago? more or less than after the PLN lawsuit was announced? more or less than after they started running product again? after they signed SMS?
(0)
(0)