Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
did you miss the last 4Q of declining revenues DESPITE the big lottery announcement...?
did you miss those declines AFTER the company required JIFU to have $4MM in revenues in 2013 to consummate the deal in order to get the 30MM shares?
did you miss that the lottery company only had to show 10K RMB in revenues to get 10MM shares and XCLL had to acquire a lottery license to get another 40MM shares? so - out of the total 80MM that can be had with 6 goals - two have been met where the company has only generated roughly $1.6K in revenues (6RMB to $1USD)
why did the company not sigifnicantly backload the shares structure to more heavily weight it on attaining the goals of RMB30-80MM/month in revenues?
how do you know this means they keep growing...?
once again - "The terms of the transaction were not disclosed." therefore, since this is a private company, you dont know what kind of revenues, if any, the company had or if it will be accretive to NUTT upon completion of the deal. further, shareholders have know idea what type of dilution will occur since terms are not disclosed. they have not disclosed terms for Crestmark increase, the last two capital infusions, the reason the Gardenburger deal was not consummated, executive/BOD compensation, etc. etc. etc.
rather amusing was the line further down in the PR:
"Both companies have similar views on uncompromising integrity and championing shareholder value with great products. "
apparently "Mac" doesnt know the long and contorted history behind MLOG/MOBL/NUTT. OR - he has integrity that is commensurate with his new partners/bosses.
that was inexcusable. their last two quarters - compensation went berserk and certainly wasnt commensurate with sales/stock performance. from what i understand from the filings - some of those monies were paid back as part of the settlement with the note holder when the previous mgmt team surrendered their stock.
that is incorrect.
the entire agreement with the partner set up to distribute in Japan was included in the associated 10Q filing after it was announced. the deal is still in effect per the 2Q14 filing where it is noted they are still waiting to clear Japanese regulatory hurdles related to regulated ingredients. i and others on here have provided some detailed information on the ingredients. as i have outlined prior - my guess is picamillon is the ingredient that is causing the holdup as it requires a prescription in Japan (and Russia) where it is a common OTC supplement in the US.
maybe the oversight was intentional but what does teh company really have to gain from that other than a very, very short lived spike in the stock price? again, since there has been ZERO inside selling - what would the end game be when they would have to know they would be crucified for the error/lie down the road. that doesnt make sense.
more than likely - it was an oversight from their partner that no one on the HJOE staff even vetted since the assumption was the local distributor already understood the R&R in the area. same as Canada. different rules on caffeine and they have to change the labels accordingly (they are also required to be bilingual ). there is nothing fabricated as, again, the entire agreement was and still is available online under their SEC filings.
well the rub is "all they deserve" because so far - they have a lot of shares THEY DID NOT DESERVE and/or legally obtain.
transparency "is" increasing. at the current rate of increase - we should finally see total mgmt compensation in the 3Q 2019 report.
massive quarter just reported.
company is still being VERY quiet about these results the last two quarters. only 10.5MM shares OS and a float around 4MM so it isnt going to attract the general traders but they remain very entrenched in a very solid turn around since the big Sprint revenues wound down two years ago.
apparently - you arent familar with the history of this company's failures or their lack of follow through. if you missed the 10Q - it wasnt reported - just filed. revenues down under $300K with again, no mention of Mach5, smartwatch, or lottery revenues.
however - they did satisfy the 10K RMB revenue requirement and lottery license to satisfy 50MM shares being transferred...
disclosure has increased but some of the key components are still missing. 70% of recent filing was boilerplate risk warnings about the business environment.
the actual "meat" of the report - i would certainly like more transparency on the following:
"In QIII of 2014,Bayberry Capital , Inc.was asked to procure a piece of manufacturing equipment on behalf of NuStar Manufacturing, LLC. This will be a pass - through transaction with NuStar indemnifying Bayberry Capital for any costs associated with the acquisition.
Additionally, Messrs. Wright and Sackler have con sulting services agreements with the company through entities they control. Monthly charges under these agreement total $30,000"
there is still no compensation breakdown for insiders/officers. is this $30K/month IN ADDITION to salary and options? what consulting services are they providing that would be above and beyond their primary roles as CEO and COB? i can understand Wright as he is not a direct employee but Sackler as the CEO should have NO outside consulting agreements unless he is NOT a direct employee. regardless - if paid equally - that is $180K/year possibly on top of salary/officer compensation. that warrants significantly more transparency.
shares continue to go up:
Nutroganics Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
Financing Activities
Share data
June 30, 2014
September 30, 2014
Current
Fully Diluted
Common Shares Outstanding
32,690,513
32,740,51
33,020,513
141,047,935
Preferred Shares Outstanding
93,129,925
93,129,925
93,129,925
to that end - i still see a lot of long term value in the brand/distillery. just depends on whether the primary sharheholder wants to be in the business, do a secondary and spin it off, or just shut it down and take the loss.
the Wodka and Alibi brands resonated. i thought Dale had more integrity and panache in his approach. i thought he was in this for the long term. one good thing is he only left with salary paid and got no back end package and ended up agreeing to pay significant monies back to the company.
there largest creditor is also their largest shareholder. it is no secret that they were cash crunched. i dont know what the future holds. the creditor may go ahead and put it into BK and get what they can off the sales of the assets (distillery and brand(s) ) and write off the rest of the loss. or they may recapitalize and/or do a secondary to raise cash and square up with those like yourself and "relaunch" the brands.
unfortunately - they have gone dark which means shareholders are not going to know much.
however, if you are going to take issue with the company - direct your ire to the past mgmt that ended up paying themselves exorbitantly while they put the company in the current cash crunch. frankly, i missed the increases in their compensation and i was relying heavily on how i saw the brands doing on shelves and speaking with distributors and bartenders where they focused their marketing. by the time i realized compensation was seriously askew -i had already amassed a large position that the daily volume simply did not allow me to get out of.
want to provide some examples of who they left unpaid?
hard not to be cynical when your alias was born yesterday and you come out taking pot shots.
were the suppliers working with the company or did they have a threatening attitude to begin with...? when my company was forced into this situation by partners who embezzled - most of my suppliers understood and worked with me to do what they could to take back inventory and/or provide some flexibility to get both of us whole.
some did not and immediately started the document trail and legal threats. guess who didnt get paid and/or got paid last?
i certainly dont know the situation here and how they treated suppliers but i do know that it is usually a two way street and when you are left in the street and bleeding - if someone comes at you swinging - you are going to swing back. if someone offers to help - you work with them.
they still have one great product and may or may not have a good one with Alibi Whiskey. i wonder how much of the failure was due to arrogance and/or greed compared to misjudging the market/trying to vertically integrate too fast. Dale's pay started to balloon along with his wife and other upper mgmt.
if it was a matter of trying to do too much with the vertical integration and product repatriation - then the brand/value should remain intact and the company can retrench and move forward. the distillery should be able to provide ancillary revenues as wellas meeting the company's own production.
however, since the company has gone dark - we are going to get very limited information. at the current price point - the holding company could simply buy up the remaining float and take the company private and spin off/IPO later.
There is a really low OS count and majority of those are held by insiders. No need for a R/s. If the holdng company keeps this going - they may choose to increase the AS to raise capital rather than continue to self fund but there is no benefit to them for a R/s at this point.
how are you arriving to the $75K figure - similar to my approach?
more importantly - since you are very suspect of the company/stock - where do you see 4Q14 results? based on my same model, full three months of sales, and aggressive growth after the soft launch/NACS - i would expect them to be in the $350-650K for 4Q14 which would provide significant credibility for the $5MM 2015 target.
i think the revenues being reported will have a minimal impact on price/confidence compares to teh verbiage speaking directly to 4Q14 results and how these scale up for 2015.
ZACKSTER - as far as the R/s - i think it is very probable but certainly not inevitable. it depends on 3 factors:
1. long term investor confidence in 3Q14 numbers and forward guidance
2. short term, attractive (non dilutive) capital/bridge capital for production
3. on a more speculative note - PLN suit being settled favorably
a majority of this will depend on how much confidence these 3Q14 numbers and guidance going forward instill in current long term investors and attract new ones. at 500MM shares - they would not need to. the current OS and inside share structure could support the growth and allow for plenty of redistribution of shares as the company grows.
however, if long term investors arent convinced and willing to assign a premium today for results tomorrow - the share price will continue to suffer, the convertible debt will continue to take a significantly larger part of the available AS reserve, and the company may elect to increase AS to go after more convertible debt for short term financing.
those two things - long term investors' confidence and short term attractive financing will primarily determine whether they increase AS and then in the future conduct a R/s.
on a speculative note - Veal alluded they may buy back shares if the PLN suit is positive. i posted last week (might have been on yahoo where i primarily post) how that could affect OS. lets assume for the sake of hypotheticals they were awarded $5MM in damages and the cash was paid over 12 months by the insurance company. if they took only 20% of that to give back to shareholders as a nod for those who took the early risk - they could buy back 333MM shares at today's price which is above the OS. so - just taking $250K or 5% of a $5MM settlement would buyback 83MM which is just under the increased float in 2014. so - they could look at what was the total increase in OS and buyback a portion/all ofthat and still be way ahead on a capital standpoint.
so - somewhere amongst these occurrences is your answer. if i had very strong confidence there would NOT be a R/s - i would be buying more aggressively than i am now. however, if the AS is not managed with respect to long term shareholders/investors - they will move away from the stock and then there is a good chance the price will tank after the R/s like often occurs in situations such as this.
zackster - i doubt they will break out online sales vs distributors but you are correct - those would be attributable to revenue in the quarter.
there are 7200 bottles to a pallet and 12 bottles to a case. their rev/bottle provided by Veal was $1.15/bottle. the company has been providing social media updates in terms of pallets which i have used that as a UOM for estimates.
assuming their rev/bottle is higher for online sales (lets assume $1.50/bottle) they would need to have sold $30K/($1.50*12) = 1667 cases online to reach $30K in revenue. they were available online i think sometime mid to late August so lets assume 60 days of sales. that would be 28 cases/day online. is that realistic? i dont know. i have no way of estimating that. to me - it sounds high. however, there were a large # of replies to LTCG's FB page asking when it was available and where they could buy it. certainly would take well below 1% of his FB followers to hit that number.
but - if the rest was $85K - even a third of that $30K would be significant from a percentage standpoint. long term, online sales should be a very small percentage of overall sales as this will be primarily a sales decision driven at the register.
Impact on conversion will depend on two things:
1. Free cash flow from revenues/operators allowing to pay off early any available short term financing where applicable/allowable
2. How long term investors view the data/numbers and Bid up the price to reflect long term potential and/or likelihood of reaching $5MM in revenues.
if the company can produce sufficient cash flow to pay off short term debt where allowable and stillfund production for existing and new customers - the convertible debt can be mitigated. TCA settlement did not allow for that. for the two notes in early September - the first did and the second did not. those both had more favorable terms for HJOE than the original round of convertible notes. could be on the last note the lender felt there was a higher probability of HJOE being able to pay off early and specifically disallowed early pay off.
stock will continue to be highly volatile and a flippers haven in the short term until new long term investors feel the risk of more convertible debt has been drastically reduced and the company can self fund and/or attract traditional debt. right now, the convertible debt continues to win that battle.
for my previous model on revenue - here is how i came up with the $585K/quarter revenues with which i then worked backwards to get a realistic 3Q14 revenue #.
from Veal's comments on 9/3:
"Matthew Veal, CEO of Hangover Joe's Inc., stated, "We have had 30+ marketing initiatives in the last few months. We have found our most success in the convenience store area, at least for now. We believe that may change in the future as more sales data becomes available to larger potential customers. We have found so far most convenience stores to report selling an average of one bottle daily of Git-R-Done Energy per every 150 to 200 customers on a small sample basis, although this number may vary based on numerous factors, including advertising, placement, increases in exposure, and the like. This is very exciting news to us especially in light of the latest NACS/Nielsen Convenience Industry Store Count which reported that as of December 31, 2013 there were 151,282 convenience stores in America. The report went on to say that of the stores that meet NACS’s definition of a convenience store, 126,658 of those stores sell fuel and average around 1,100 customers per day. Further according to NACS, an average convenience store selling fuel has more than 400,000 customers per year and thus cumulatively, the U.S. convenience store industry alone serves nearly 160 million customers per day and 58 billion customers every year. Even without any consideration of the additional thousands of bodega type convenience stores there are in the U.S., this should make the huge growth potential our company has, very easy to see for anyone looking at our company. We have a number of test markets underway and have seen very good success in getting into stores in 30 different states. So far, we’ve had the most success at trade shows, but we do have a group of reps and brokers that are presenting us with several exciting opportunities. We will be continuing to do shows around the country and will be attending the Indian & Asian trade show in Miami, Florida, on September 08-10, 2014."
using these numbers and those provided in the 10Q and 10Ks on absorbed cost and average selling revenue/bottle - i ran the following:
PR RELEASED ON 9/3/2014
Bottles/per customer 1
Customer/bottle 175 (between 150-200 customers)
Avg customer/Store 1100
# of states 30
stores/state 30 (assume 10 stores per state on initial roll out)
Bottle/store/day 6.3 Avg cust/customer/bottle
# of stores 900
Bottles/day 5,657.1
Bottles/quarter 509,142.9
Rev/Bottle $1.15 From 10K/10Q calculating per case
Absorbed cost/Bottle $0.47 From 10K/10Q calculating per case
GM/bottle $0.68
Costs/Q $239,297
Rev/Q $585,514
GM/Q $346,217
Rev/Y $2,342,057
GM/Y $1,384,869
per the last post - the $585K assumes a full quarter at that rate and would be "sales" - not "revenue" as can be booked per GAAP accounting.
there are several ways to estimate what actual revenues could be recorded in the quarter but this simply is just one.
there should be some teeth provided in the 10Q/correlating PR about not only significant revenues occurring again but more importantly, how these scale up to $5MM in 2015. this should be heavy on EXISTING contracts/sales and less so on "expecting".
they have a large credibility gap that will take one to two quarters of proven results to overcome. if they are able to get short term lending/finance production that is non dilutive and the scalability of the results posted for 3Q14 are believable - then further dilution should be kept to a minimum or eliminated.
for new investors - the risk/reward scenario continues to strengthen. for long term investors with higher cost bases, they will be more inclined to risk short term upside with waiting until dilution is over and then resume buying.
sales have been ugly but have not reflected revenues from new distillery which really only started the last part of 2Q14. it appears minimal transfer of branded products occurred to the distillery unless i misunderstood the last 10Q. the vertical integration was integral to their plan of driving down costs/improving GMs and controlling supply chain. were they successful bringing in the ancillary revenue sources by being the 3rd party packager?
the WODKA brand still seems to have a presence where it has been traditionally marketed. i dont really know about Alibi.
if either/both of those brands have staying power - it would be in the lenders best interest as the primary shareholder to drive the distillery, integrate production, and let the brands move. obviously needs a mgmt group that has the panache (pun obviously intended) and industry knowledge to make them move. it would be a 12-24 month process.
either way - long term shareholders should have an answer on viability in the next two quarters. however, it will depend on how and what they self report to pinksheets.com to keep them at some level of reporting status.
Revenue Estimate for 3Q14
just curious if anyone has run any estimates on expected revenues for 3Q14. i started a thread on Yahoo trying to get an idea of what others are expecting.
they started shipping product towards end of July/beginning of August which gives them roughly 2 months of limited production/sales on the soft launch. based on PR of 9/3 - i ran numbers that suggested they would be looking at $585K rev/Q based on the numbers Veal provided in the PR. i provided how i came up with the $585K/quarter in a prior post and that was for soft launch and did not consider future growth/added stores.
if that number is divided by 2/3 to account for two months of sales instead of 3 it gives us $390K. assuming roughly 1/3 of the sales would be revenues based on 30-60-90 terms - that would provide $129K revenues for the quarter. now - sales occurring later in the quarter would not be reflected at all in the revenues so cut it by 1/3 again and we have $86.5K in revenues for a very rough estimate.
along those lines - we should see Accounts Receivables (AR) be somewhere in the $150-350K range.
this does not take into consideration sales on recovery shot where the product was released for sale once the TCA agreement was reached (which had the prior recovery shot inventory locked out as they owned it per the terms of original agreement and it was not available for sale). i would expect those revenues to be minimal but if they are getting around $1.20/bottle (similar to recovery numbers reported) - there should have been 4-8 pallets of that product going out which should add $1.20*7200*6(avg) = $51.8K of which 1/3 of that might show up in revenues adding $17K to the $86.5K in recovery.
so - i am expecting somewhere around $60-100K in revenues being closer to the $85K on lower side and maybe $125K +/- $25K on the upside surprise.
anyone else run some numbers? what are you expecting?
these are rough and do not take into consideration any production that was provided at no cost for promotional items (such as NOLA pass outs or samples at trade shows). i consider this report as being critical to confirm soft launch data and provide a foundation for the company to approach $5MM in revenues per Adamson's comment on the 10/15 release after teh successful NACS show.
28K shares traded today - most of that in one trade at the ASK at $0.025. we certainly have a long way to go back towards anything respectable concerning price but that is the first time in months and months where buyers came in. 32K on the offer at $0.0223.
with no direction from the company and most of the news this year being decidedly negative (other than their main lender continuing to lend) - why would someone now start accumulating? now - it was only $625 in a trade amount but even for a trader - why take that risk when you may be looking at an extended time frame to make a return/unload?
the thing it makes the most sense to be is someone (like myself) who has been a long term investor making a purchase with the intent of selling those shares after 30 days and getting a tax write off on the original 25K purchased and lowering the cost basis for the rest of the shares.
if the buying/price continues to increase - maybe we will see something of substance about the future of the brands/company. they remain active on social media promoting the brands - primarily Wodka
blackmail...? where is the blackmail and who is perpetuating it?
selfish reasons? we are all here for selfish reasons. whether one is long or short, long term or short term, etc - everyone invests to make a return on their investments. with that being said - there is a MAJOR, fundamental difference in how people interact with others debating the merits of their positions and debating constructively on why and how they do. that is not being selfish - that is being objective. however, when someone purposely ignores facts and published results or willfully overlooks past behaviors, errors, and omissions to the future detriment of others - that can be considered fraudulent if used to make money off of others.
shenanigans...? you mean the ones that wright and mecc appeared to have pulled off by not reporting on material events, reorganizing the company and becoming 5% owners while in a dark period, or still not accounting for over 1.7MM shares that were owned by MOBL that would have absolutely been required to secure a vote for any type of reorganization - i agree that there have been shenanigans foisted upon the shareholders.
shares go lower to take advantage of mispricing? that is absurd. you should be building pricing momentum into stronger top and bottom line growth to ensure a stronger and more diverse base to grow from there as both exponentially increase when fundamentals turn into real time performance.
It would seem a sane and tactical plan if they were truly looking to move forward as has been suggested on here...
Crestmark investment still has not created any buying interest. where are the new buyers if this was such good news? maybe i missed where they separately released terms of the increased lending and original terms so shareholders can evaluate for themselves whether or not it is a good deal for the company/shareholders and not just a select few.
Covering loan costs come from cash flow NOT net profits. If banks only lent on net profits there would be limited need for banking. Not hard to make a lending decision when a company is flush with cash. Banks would also not survive on that type of lending as they have little leverage.
Cant do much DD when there is only very limited reporting available.
Company PRs are not the same as public filings.
Cant do much DD without full, transparent reporti g...
Better get some rest Jay - long week ahead of you.
that is not simply not true. banks look at the ability to pay back and the risk that they will not be able to. if the soft launch sales data shows consistent and specific sales through and the orders from NACS are sufficient to correlate with the soft launch data - then banks/lending institutions will put the past and existing "risk" in context with future potential/immediate revenues.
the open lawsuit with the 3rd party manufacturer at best is a "he said/she said" and it certainly appears that HJOE has the upper hand with respect to evidence and damages (based on having the court filings that are publicly available bounced off of three different attorneys. that being said - once in court - rational and objectivity go right out the window). the other suits are minimal and from non payment when the company was in a complete cash crunch. those will be shortly settled assuming the company ramps up revenues and will be a non issue (if those revenues come).
they arent going into the local bank to take out a $15MM loan but there are plenty of viable lenders that will evaluate the launch data and put the last two years in context. they would not have gotten the benefit of the doubt without that data.
where is the money coming from now to produce product?
do you believe they are not shipping any product out and all of these stores they are announcing do NOT have product in them?
while i appreciate your devil's advocate approach they will have open avenues for financing with strong launch data.
Full transparency. ..? LOL
VERY limited reporting from pinksheets.com
Still ZERO info on compensation of key insiders/mgmt.
Still ZERO info on capital raises with respect to terms
Still ZERO breakdown on revenues and where they are coming from (Nustar vs Silverbow)
Still ZERO communication on what happened to the Gardenbar acquisition.
Still ZERO respnse on whether all five "special advisers/consultants" are still employed/compensated by NUTT or what the terms are of their arrangement.
Still ZERO explanation of how the share structure of NUTT came about or how MLOG uar the votes to do a reverse merger WITHOUT shareholder vote (they certainly did NOT have the votes inside per 2004 filing). This entity may not even be legal.
Still ZERO info on the compensation of Sackler, Wright, BOD, and other c level employees not to mention the 5 special advisers announced in the last 12 months.
That is some REAL transparency. ..
You have said that before. And then you try to discredit one of my posts and get drawn into a debate on one or more points where you have no substance or able to substantiate claims or positions. Like your "source" that tells me I am wrong but you wont even begin to discuss all of the inconsistencies or issues with the reporting and share changes while they were in a dark period. Instead - you try to dismiss the whole thing as a waste of your time. Sure. Just like last time.
Company announced more "good news" this past week and the market continues to ignore it. The most likely reason...? There is NO trust in mgmt after the way they handled MLOG, MOBL, and the way NUTT was created.
Have a good rest of the weekend Jay.
individual research and due diligence.
most of what the naysayers is true (to some degree though it is often jilted).
if you have a long term interest in this company with respect to it being viable long term - do your own DD. the company has listed well over 500 stores carrying the energy and recovery product in places across the US. call/visit the stores that are near you (if you have any around). speak with the owner. speak with the store clerks. the store clerks will have a much different impression than the owners as they see people's reaction and will be more specific about people's reaction to the brand.
ask who the distributor is for the store and contact the distributor and ask about the brand. inform them that you are an investor, that you are interested in purchasing the product, and you want to know how the brand is doing, and how many stores they are in. you dont need to take much time or drill them with a bunch of follow up questions. i have found most to be willing to spend just a couple of minutes talking about it (ihave spoken to distributor reps, wholesalers, cstore operators, and clerks).
after doing that - make your own decision on whether the information coming from the company about their soft launch and prospects for 2015 match up with the feedback you get from your own research. if so, you will be able to put the dilution in perspective and determine whether you buy now amidst the dilution or wait until it is over.
i am long and continue to buy even though there will be more dilution. my own field research leads me to believe the brand resonates. i have sat in a store for 20-30 minutes and watched people respond/react to the bottles/display. i think the "healthy" aspect, combined with new/unique ingredients (besides the same caffeine and sugar approach), and tied in with the catch phrase (along with a lot of free marketing tied in with LTCG's other commercial endeavors and comedy shows) is coming in at the right time.
lot of things can go wrong: negative lawsuit outcomes. new lawsuits. FDA/states lumping them in with the rest of the energy sector. etc. however, if they approach/surpass $5MM in revenues next year - the dilution will still make the stock price attractive considering the multiple that will be assigned based o the growth. further, if the sales data is real (which my own DD suggests it is accurate), they will be able to secure traditional funding for the continued launch.
do your own DD. understand how dilution affects supply/demand and the resulting price. and understand that the majority of posters on here are NOT long term investors and profit on short term moves either way.
Like most of your replies or arguments - pure gibberish.
I have cited SEC R&Rs that show/suggest what was done (based on 2004 last filed report by MLOG and last quarter reported by NUTT) is against those regulatiins for dark periods.
I have ohtlined in details the discrepancies between shareholders then and now - specifically the missing shares from MOBL and the increase by wright and mecc.
I have provided several links to what appears to be successful lawsuits by MLOG that have never been reported on as material events.
Mecc and wright reorganized MLOG in a dark period and became majority owners.
They were in possession and in control of major, transformative information at that time that wasnt disclosed.
They reported they would release financials for MLOG prior to NUTT reverse merger - never happened.
Again - my sources are pubkic filings and PRs.
Have a good weekend Jay.
"my sources tell me your suppositions on the mlog happenings are all wrong"
your sources...? that is almost too juvenile to even respond to. seriously?
my sources are public filings. conversations with wright/mecc. refusal to respond to formal and informal requests/demands. speaking with securities attorney on goings on during a dark period. financial impact of IP settlements discussed with same attorney based on court filings requesting same venue and fast tracking case due to past precedent/rulings.
if your sources aren't someone inside - they are useless. if they are someone inside, you have bigger problems by posting statements like this in a public forum.
how would you know the MLOG facts are wrong since they havent filed financials...? please feel free to correct me and inform the board of where i am wrong. make sure you substantiate it with filing information and not 3rd party information.
how do you know i have a loss on MLOG shares? when have i ever shared my cost basis with the board? further, i dont know what my MLOG shares are worth since the company has not put a value to the shares (by way of a year end report) and have not provided a conduit to sell/disperse them.
i do have a cost basis for NUTT shares and i have been above water on the vast majority of my shares the entire time NUTT has been in existence. most of my MLOG shares were being accumulated in the $0.02-$0.08 range and escalated when it was apparent they were getting favorable settlements on their IP suits.
same offer on BID and ASK as when the market opened. this fantastic "news" failed to spark interest on either side.
with this - you should be getting more aggressive on your BID to increase your holdings before others find out about this gem and start raising it up.
why? did you read through the 10K that was just filed yesterday adn still puts the company two quarters behind in filing?
$2000 in cash. not $2000K or $2000MM. just $2,000.00.
one machine in inventory that isnt completed and still designated as R&D phase.
all remaining inventory/raw materials were written off at the end of the last year (when they were evicted and probably forced to surrender them - not that they had any real intrinsic value).
as of the end of 2013 - closing in on $6MM in debt. multiple legal battles going on over rent/leases, non payment on debt obligations, share conversions, etc.
runaway dilution. from 300MM to 1.44BB and more than likely will push the 2BB AS ceiling before the end of the year.
have no money to buy parts to make a machine even if they got an order as the one they have is still considered in R&D phase.
if they did get an order - they would have to sell 500MM shares to raise the $150K needed for raw materials. this doesnt include labor/freight/etc. also doesnt account for the discount to market. if the normal 50% discount applies - that number goes to 1BB shares. since they only have 550MM left in AS as of 6/4/14 - that isnt going to happen with current share structure.
now - the share price may spike up and down between the end of the year and one may be able to get one or two MM shares with a $0.0001 gain if lucky - but there is no long term future. this company has been nothing but a shell for several years.
what "growing" demand...? and why does the company feel the need to capitalize the word in the PR? that has the impression they are arguing with someone on a message board with no facts instead of openly communicating with the shareholders. if they are going to be so adamant they are growing by CAPITALIZING the word - tell the shareholders where the growth is coming from. such as - is it Honeybow? is it the facility?
more importantly - once again they have not (and probably will not) disclose terms of the capital deal. Crestmark only cares about getting a return on their investment. they do not care if NUTT sells honey or creates money out of thin air as long as they get back.
is this convertible debt that will end up being highly dilutive?
is this high interest debt?
what is the payback terms? 6 months, 12months? 5 years? 10 years? how committed are they to the long term success.
that could be the weakest PR the company has put out yet and the market seems to agree with me. why spend the money to force something that useless through the newswires channels? it isnt free to disseminate information. if you are going to spend shareholder money - MAKE IT MATTER!
and i will save you a response - yes i have a very negative bias and they will have to really knock my socks off with impressive top and bottom line results that are independently verifiable and reported publicly with the SEC before i will trust any of their PRs. their past actions have given them no room for benefit of the doubt.
and with ZERO shares traded since the announcement and since their last adviser hire - the market also seems to agree with me that there is nothing substantive here.
look at ratios of $5M revenues on 250MM shares outstanding at $0.10 share price. that is a $25MM market cap on 5x sales. very respectable. would i rather have $5MM revenues on 100MM shares OS? certainly. but the dilution isnt the end of the world if they execute.
further, if sales/revenues start ramping up - share price will increase which will dampen the dilution from remaining convertible debt.
the company has to apply all capital into making product and selling it. if they get a windfall (ie - positive settlement) then it is debatable on buying back stock. if the price is still at or below a penny and they get a $5-10MM settlement - i would agree with using $1-2MM of available cash to give back to shareholders. while i normally wouldnt agree with buying back in a high growth/capital limited company, it would be in effect putting the company back to where it was prior to the derailment and would be a very strong sign to investors.
i look at any settlements as windfalls as courts are totally unpredictable and if anyone has spent any time dealign with lawsuits - you quickly realize the law has little to do with the law or objective fairness. it is about political and legal maneuvering, cash preservation, and the luck of the draw when it comes to the judge.
as i said in previous post - investment all comes down to premise. if you believe that mgmt is being straight with shareholders then you have to accept that $5MM in revenues is obtainable and likely and run the numbers accordingly.
actually - the company is not "asking" for 6 months. they have thanked their shareholders for their loyalty and patience and said the results will speak for themselves.
the 6 months comes from when the results will be concrete and able to be trended based on two quarters of verifiable and full quarters of revenues.
i looked at 3Q13 as being a critical quarter due to decline in revenues in 1H13. however, at the time, the mfg issue wasnt known. once it was a known entity - it provided credence for the revenue decline as one can not sell what isnt available to be sold. it also provided credence on why the company had to resort to toxic debt/lenders of last resort. they can point to the mfg issuer to blame but that does not provide any physical security to new lenders and is further complicated by the TCA arrangement which had all of the existing inventory secured under that agreement. was it a bad agreement? yes. did it seem bad at the time when they needed short term financing for expansion when the cash flow was viable? no. would it have been an issue if the cash flow wasnt interrupted by the mfg interruption and the ensuing lack of revenues caused by it? arguably and objectively - no.
so - again - the whole investment argument/debate goes back to those two fundamental questions on premise.
you obviously do not believe the brand/company is viable and that mgmt is incompetent/not invested. your first opinion is not able to be debated. the second can be debated based on actual compensation/benefit derived by the insiders/mgmt the last two years the company has been going as a concern. since they had no money, they had deferred salaries, no bonuses/options, etc was reported, and the money that was coming in was used for LTCG and WB licensing (which was reported) and into new product runs (which was reported and is independently verifiable), it was NOT going into their pockets. so - what would be their gain by continuing the charade if no personal benefit is achievable...?
now why didnt i think of that...?
how do you supposed i do that? because they have ignored informal and formal requests via mail, email, and fax and only seem to respond to legal demands.
"working their butts off"...? how do you quantify that? have you been shadowing them throughout the day to witness the exact time and energy they are expending to make this a success?
what is wright doing on a day to day basis for NUTT to constitute working his butt off? he isnt even involved in the day to day. he has his own financial business. what is sackler doing to increase plant throughput/drive sales of existing lines? what is he doing on a day to day basis to maximize full line efficiency at the production facility they purchased? are they running all lines 24/7? two shifts? if not - why? who is doing the sales to bring in new customers to get full utilization of the physical asset?
what about the honey business? have any economies of scale been able to be secured through having their own production environment? have they been able to distribute to a wider audience by the national reach/exposure of being a publicly traded company?
what other acquisitions have they secured/working on that would match current, unused production capacity with known brands where they could immediately get a margin lift by producing in house?
if you arent willing to discuss questions above or have no answers, dont tell this board that they are working their butts off. further, MLOG IS a private company but they are NOT gone. i still remain a large shareholder of a company that refuses to acknowledge shareholders or provide any accounting of their activities.
Establishing a premise to invest/trade in this stock
before one gets involved in this stock - one key premise for further investing/trading should be established. it all surrounds two key questions that are obviously, consummately intertwined:
do you believe the mgmt/insiders are vested in long term success?
do you believe the 3rd party manufacturing issue was a fundamental turning point that derailed the revenues/success the company seemed to have in 2012 with the recovery shot?
if you do not have a basis for the above - you should not be invested long term and should continue to view/trade this as a short term play taking advantage of the dilution and swings created by large players who can manipulate the volume and get themselves in and out at the (potential) expense of small retail investors/traders and those long term investors that are accumulating.
if one does not accept/believe that mgmt is vested - the rest of the debate is moot because the balance sheet is a wreck, they remain hampered by credit/financing, and they still have no verifiable/reported revenues for 2014 (unless one wants to include <$1000). however, if you accept the premise that this was a cash strapped start up with tight cash flow that was derailed by a virtual complete stoppage of supply by their supplier and the resulting interruption caused cataclysmic ripple effects (TCA default, couldn't pay suppliers, all remaining inventory that wasnt secured by TCA agreement had to go to meet large distributor contracts (such as 7/11) and left no inventory to sell to produce cash flow to continue to produce) - then the convertible/toxic debt, zero revenues, and wreck of a balance sheet can be put into context. when comparing where they were to where the soft launch results suggest they will go (and should be confirmed by 3Q results/4Q guidance) - then one has the basis for a long term position.
but - if one believes this is nothing more than a scam and/or a failed idea/enterprise - arguing the numbers, potential, valuation models, etc is pointless. debating the merits of the former stock with someone who has a two or four week investment horizon is also fruitless as there is very little the company can do to secure confidence to the level that more and larger long term investors come in to absorb supply and level out the volatility that will allow the price to substantially and fundamentally rise.
for most - this will only happen once they see definitive, reported revenues and can verify a trend. one data point will not make a trend. the 3Q results will not be an effective data point due to billing terms/soft launch start. the first effective point will be 4Q results which should coincide with guidance being provided for 1Q15 since the report will coincide with the end of the 1Q15 reporting period.
therefore - there really is a minimum of 5-6 months before a trend can be conclusively be shown. however, early adopters will be verifying on their own DD at the end user level and will continue to accumulate and provide that stability that will cause the price to move up before that trend can be positively confirmed through company filings. that is normal market mechanics and risk/reward tolerance in play.
in the meantime, MMs, hedge funds, well financed traders, etc will continue to create swings playing on fear and greed until the converted shares become more closely held by those with a longer investment horizon (6-24 months).
my numbers/models are sound and objective and will eventually resemble the future price of the stock IF, and this remains a big IF, the soft launch results are scalable and the company approaches/exceeds $5MM in revenues.
again - this is all academic to debate if one does not believe the insiders/mgmt have a long term vested interest and the supplier issue was fabricated to explain a failed launch/market acceptance of the recovery shot.
if they have nothing to hide - why not release financials for MLOG for the period 2004-2013?
i am certainly not the only shareholder who is requesting/demanding this information. several are considerably larger holders than myself.