Your sarcasm or condescension win no points with m
Post# of 22940
Posted On: 09/15/2016 1:14:14 PM
Your sarcasm or condescension win no points with me.
I dont care if it was copied and pasted elsewhere - the points and concerns are and remain valid. No legitimate LIKES being or dealingdealing with the OTC but that is the reality. It should be paramount with EVERY communication form to investors. Every word, tweet, email, PR, license misstep, etc can and will be used against them. Period. That is the unfortunate reality. How they choose to deal with that reality or adjust and respond IS in their control.
No one argues there isnt tremendous potential. However almost EVERY OTC stock or scam can tout massive potential if only A, B, and C happen - which almost never does in the OTC world. Until the PR is released with specifics that dont leave enough wiggle room for an elephant to escape or the 8K filed that is clear, concise, and concrete - all of this is just potential. The reality is they have booked $109K of revenuez and have a burn rate of several $$ per Q (which also leaves some legitimate questions).
No one argues this isnt a giant puzzle where they must put several pieces in place at one time (need revenues to justify loans, need loans to ramp up business to build revenues, need precursors for both). That is business.
As far as your jab about being a world wide conglomerate - this isnt one. Yet. Maybe it will. Maybe it will just be another crash and burn OTC. However, wait until there is real legitimacy from the balance sheet and sustainable revenue streams from worldwide business streams before hailing it as such. Further, as I have said before, trying to discredit my concerns or posts with smug swipes and smears does NOT elevate your opinion let alone the legitimacy of the company. Rather, it turns people off and makes them wonder more about the usefullness of this board if active and spirited debate cant take place on the pros and cons.
For the other poster - what was the reason/argument for no PR on the BTL SLA...?
For me - the NAVAIR certs and Bill's prior success keep me invested and holding. However, both of those are "perishable commodities" in this realm. Like it or not - that is the reality. OTC is littered with shells of companies with exec mgmt teams with impressive resumes and successes along with their respective BODs.
I have never pushed Bill or IR on Boeing - I have pushed them on other viable production streams with smaller entities that can scale faster and bump revenues for cash flow (EIA can alleviate this IF successful)
I have never asked for PPS guidance or expectations and even cautioned AGAINST providing any. That fuels short term speculation and not long term investment.
I have asked for specifics on how OS ballooned that was opposite of what CEO was discussing prior to reconstruction.
I have asked for clarification on the "no toxic loans" and whether or not those loans have been satisfied through conversions and those holders still have held shares. Been a LOT of dumping. How ling will it go on?
At the current communication rate - the stock is being set up to be traded and not to invest long term. That is a shame. However, if it remains as such, I will not fight the market nd all of thise waiting for cheapies, checks to clear, dry powder, etc will have plenty of opportunity to accumulate. Unfortunately, you have ample opportunity NOW and few seem to be taking advantage of it despite the rhetoric.
Mag - if you are going to continue to snipe and smear - dont bother. If you want to address the certain concerns - lets debate. Start with the rationale for still leaving the investment world at large in the dark on $13.5MM/year of seemingly "guaranteed " revenues for 10 years for a company that looks like it will book maybe $250-500K this year and has just retooled itself for growth.
I dont care if it was copied and pasted elsewhere - the points and concerns are and remain valid. No legitimate LIKES being or dealingdealing with the OTC but that is the reality. It should be paramount with EVERY communication form to investors. Every word, tweet, email, PR, license misstep, etc can and will be used against them. Period. That is the unfortunate reality. How they choose to deal with that reality or adjust and respond IS in their control.
No one argues there isnt tremendous potential. However almost EVERY OTC stock or scam can tout massive potential if only A, B, and C happen - which almost never does in the OTC world. Until the PR is released with specifics that dont leave enough wiggle room for an elephant to escape or the 8K filed that is clear, concise, and concrete - all of this is just potential. The reality is they have booked $109K of revenuez and have a burn rate of several $$ per Q (which also leaves some legitimate questions).
No one argues this isnt a giant puzzle where they must put several pieces in place at one time (need revenues to justify loans, need loans to ramp up business to build revenues, need precursors for both). That is business.
As far as your jab about being a world wide conglomerate - this isnt one. Yet. Maybe it will. Maybe it will just be another crash and burn OTC. However, wait until there is real legitimacy from the balance sheet and sustainable revenue streams from worldwide business streams before hailing it as such. Further, as I have said before, trying to discredit my concerns or posts with smug swipes and smears does NOT elevate your opinion let alone the legitimacy of the company. Rather, it turns people off and makes them wonder more about the usefullness of this board if active and spirited debate cant take place on the pros and cons.
For the other poster - what was the reason/argument for no PR on the BTL SLA...?
For me - the NAVAIR certs and Bill's prior success keep me invested and holding. However, both of those are "perishable commodities" in this realm. Like it or not - that is the reality. OTC is littered with shells of companies with exec mgmt teams with impressive resumes and successes along with their respective BODs.
I have never pushed Bill or IR on Boeing - I have pushed them on other viable production streams with smaller entities that can scale faster and bump revenues for cash flow (EIA can alleviate this IF successful)
I have never asked for PPS guidance or expectations and even cautioned AGAINST providing any. That fuels short term speculation and not long term investment.
I have asked for specifics on how OS ballooned that was opposite of what CEO was discussing prior to reconstruction.
I have asked for clarification on the "no toxic loans" and whether or not those loans have been satisfied through conversions and those holders still have held shares. Been a LOT of dumping. How ling will it go on?
At the current communication rate - the stock is being set up to be traded and not to invest long term. That is a shame. However, if it remains as such, I will not fight the market nd all of thise waiting for cheapies, checks to clear, dry powder, etc will have plenty of opportunity to accumulate. Unfortunately, you have ample opportunity NOW and few seem to be taking advantage of it despite the rhetoric.
Mag - if you are going to continue to snipe and smear - dont bother. If you want to address the certain concerns - lets debate. Start with the rationale for still leaving the investment world at large in the dark on $13.5MM/year of seemingly "guaranteed " revenues for 10 years for a company that looks like it will book maybe $250-500K this year and has just retooled itself for growth.
(12)
(0)Trans-Pacific Aerospace (TPAC) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼