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.
Below is the 15 month (5 fiscal quarter) weekly time-frame chart on SEWC. As the chart shows, when the stock popped back in July of 2014, it took far greater volume (in the billions of shares traded), reached an intra-day high of .0005, but never closed above .0004.
With far less trading volume recently, SEWC has already achieved higher closing prices (of .0005 and .0006). And has now entered blue sky territory, with share quantity on the bid usually outnumbering ask quantity. Additionally, while the bid has been at .0004 most of the morning today, not one share has been sold into that bid (thus far).
Taking all of this info into consideration, it looks as though there's a high probability of an upward breakout.
As always, simply my opinion.
SEWC
Here's my rationale for why I believe this ticker is about to go on a parabolic run.
DEWM is not your run-of-the-mill MJ/hemp industry OTC play. As stated on the new website of their hemp subsidiary (U.S. Hemp Corporation), they will be offering the following services to other corporate clients:
'The Hemp Incubator
-Brand Management and Marketing
-Go-To-Market, Marketing Communications and Sales Strategy
-Customer Insight and Market Research
-Naming and Identity
-Research & Development and Intellectual Property
-Food Science and Consumer Product Testing
-Organizational Development and Corporate Governance
-Business and Operating Plans, Growth Planning and Fundraising Strategies '
What this means, in real terms, is that DEWM shareholders should expect a nice flow of news releases, as Dewmar's subsidiary engages in deals/partenerships with many of the other MJ/Hemp companies. What more could you ask for on the OTC market, than to reside in an industry poised for huge growth, and to be associated with a growing list of other companies generating similar exciting buzz?
So based upon the type of business that DEWM's S.U. Hemp subsidiary engages in, DEWM offers a good chance at PR driven upside.
As always, simply my opinion.
DEWM
Just do it as a hobby for enjoyment, scubasteve11. Much thanks for the compliment. Very long GRCU.
I can relate to your point about calling the company to get any sort of update, since it would be more reassuring than hearing nothing, while waiting.
As tempting as it is, I usually avoid such action, for a couple of reasons. The first being that a publicly traded company is not permitted to share any sort of material, non-public info with an individual investor. So anything they share would have to be very general or insignificant.
And the second reason I usually avoid making that kind of call is because most of these OTC companies are thinly staffed. So I'd rather that the honest ones spend their time with an earnest effort to achieve the goals they've publicly articulated, rather than spending time communicating with individual investors. That's just my take on it.
As always, simply my opinion.
IMO, this ticker is about to go on a parabolic run. Here's my rationale...
DEWM is not your run-of-the-mill MJ/hemp industry OTC play. As stated on the new website of their hemp subsidiary, U.S. Hemp Coporation, they are engaged in the following:
'The Hemp Incubator
-Brand Management and Marketing
-Go-To-Market, Marketing Communications and Sales Strategy
-Customer Insight and Market Research
-Naming and Identity
-Research & Development and Intellectual Property
-Food Science and Consumer Product Testing
-Organizational Development and Corporate Governance
-Business and Operating Plans, Growth Planning and Fundraising Strategies '
What this means, in real terms, is that DEWM shareholders should expect a large number of future PRs, as Dewmar's subsidiary engages in deals/partenerships with many of the other MJ/Hemp companies.
So based upon the type of business that DEWM's S.U. Hemp subsidiary engages in, DEWM offers a good chance at PR driven upside.
As always, simply my opinion.
DEWM
Importance of a First Impression...
There's an old expression, 'You only get one chance to make a first impression'. Launching a new beverage line is a very big deal, especially for a company that has not previously been in the beverage business.
It is one of the most challenging businesses in the world (mainly due to fierce competition brought about by the the highly attractive product margins), but also one of the most rewarding, if the product gains traction.
Dr. Trent Jones is an educated man, and although he is a medical practitioner (in the field of chiropractic medicine), he also has a background in business operations.
As most here know, Dr. Trent Jones was only appointed CEO of Green Cures a couple of weeks ago (Jan 9th '15). He is well aware that even though Green Cures had experienced a number of delays in launching the Rico Suave hemp-infused energy beverage line before he came on board (which has undoubtedly led to shareholder disappointment and discontent), it would be unwise to officially launch the line before he was able to get all of the ducks in a row. Taking a bit longer to launch the beverage line (while extending the delays already experienced prior to him coming on board), is a matter of short term pain for long term gain.
What you do not want to do, as an incoming CEO, is bungle the launch of your first energy drink beverage line simply to hit an earlier date on the calendar. I remember receiving a fortune cookie fortune that read something like (paraphrasing) 'Those who act too swiftly can not move with grace'. I think that message applies here.
I'd like to make one other point. The images of the Rico Suave hemp-infused energy drink released by the company were not simply beverage containers with a branded label applied. They appeared, from the photo, to be professionally custom printed beverage cans. I am not in that industry, but printed cans (in relatively low production runs) have got to cost much more than printed labels applied to a generic beverage container. I believe that this type of investment in the product makes it even more important that Dr. Jones dot all of the I's and cross of the T's before launching this beverage line, even if it leads to some shareholder discontent in the short run.
As always, simply my opinion.
GRCU
Glad that you enjoyed it, Rick. I was laughing when I was creating it as well. I honestly think we've turned the corner here, and that we'll see significant upside in the near future.
As always, simply my opinion.
Of course, but with one caveat. The best we can do here is present the recipient with a virtual, comic strip version of that prestigious award.
Thanks scubasteve11. Looks as though GRCU may very well resume the uptrend this week (as RickN's algorithm had predicted).
Below is the 15 month (5 fiscal quarter) weekly time-frame chart on SEWC. As the chart shows, when the stock popped back in July of 2014, it took far greater volume (in the billions of shares traded), reached an intra-day high of .0005, but never closed above .0004.
With far less trading volume, SEWC has already achieved a higher closing price (of .0005 yesterday). And has now entered blue sky territory, with share quantity on the bid quickly outnumbering ask quantity.
Taking all of this info into consideration, it looks as though there's a high probability of an upward breakout.
As always, simply my opinion.
SEWC
Understood. I've thanked him now, but marked him when he posted another sticky of mine here, on the STTK board, on a previous date.
Much thanks, powerbattles.
p.s. I have mm'ed you for your effort, and assistance.
Much thanks, love your neighbor.
Thanks for the compliment, powerbattles. It has been suggested by several that it would make a good sticky here, but none have seen to it. Perhaps you could suggest the idea directly to one of the mods.
Thanks for the compliment, WeedMaster. With the business model here, this company has the potential to scale their operation very quickly.
You're welcome. I figured that if you knew the method to correct an error in the post, you would prefer to do that instead of adding another post.
Best of luck to you on your trading and investing, 805RichieRich.
iHub provides a 15 minute timeframe to update/correct the original post. So if you find the typo quick enough, all you'll need to do is reopen that post and click the 'edit msg' link near the top right corner, fix the error, and then repost it (by clicking the 'update message' link. Hope this is helpful.
Thank you for the compliment, RickNagra.
Something should be noted regarding the Claytrader charts (which, incidentally, I personally find very helpful, along with his analysis).
As most know, at times he'll use a 60 minute timeframe for the chart intervals, and at other times he'll use the daily timeframe. For the most recent GRCU chart where he performed analysis (which he posted yesterday evening and this morning), his decision was to use the 60 minute timeframe.
The decision to publish a chart representing 60 minute intervals as apposed to the daily time frame totally changes the support or resistance values represented by the 50 period moving average and the 200 period moving average.
And as we know, those particular moving averages are considered highly important (in terms or providing key support and resistance levels) by those following the charts. As you can see below in the charts I've provided, the moving avg support levels are different (the 50 period moving avg is represented by the purpole line on each chart). On the 60 minute interval chart below, we've broken below the 50 period simple moving avg, but on the daily timeframe chart, we are holding (at the moment) above that level. This is why the chart timeframe interval becomes an important factor in assessing the key support and resistance.
I just wanted to also note that there's nothing improper about making the decision to use one chart over the other, but that choice does impact the perception of the strength of the stock.
As always, simply my opinion.
GRCU
Still moving up the breakout boards... SEWC now at #5.
SEWC moving up the breakout boards... currently number 7. Also one of the top volume stocks today. More eyes will be upon this shortly.
As always, simply my opinion.
SEWC
Thank you for the compliment, Goodspeed65.
IMO, your posts on the GRCU board have always provided a great deal of substance and insight.
I agree with your point that the real big news will be the actual beverage line launch... no doubt about it.
But just keep in mind that old saying about buying on the rumor, and selling on the news. Since there are so often unfulfilled 'forward looking plans' within the OTC pinks, every plan is sort of diluted down to a rumor until something substantial confirms that it will actually take place.
So again, I really think that if Dr. Jones is an intelligent man (which the research and DD seems to indicate), he would not have begun his journey here by putting pen to paper with the statement about the upcoming Rico Suave launch, if he did not see real hard proof, with his own eyes, that it would be happening. And that strengthens the probability that the plan (or rumor at this stage) will actually happen.
I appreciate your input. And as always, simply my opinion.
I respectfully disagree, RookieStockPicker. When an incoming CEO reiterates information such as the upcoming Rico Suave hemp-infused beverage launch, it is meaningful, and here's why.
Since the launch of the those beverages has already been delayed, there are undoubtedly those who think it may never occur (since it's often difficult to know what an OTC pink company really intends to accomplish). I don't think that Dr. Jones would have reiterated the intent to launch that beverage line unless he verified the ability to do so internally and externally. And I draw this conclusion because it would be a critical mistake.
As to why no hard date was provided in today's GRCU shareholder letter, I think the reason is fairly obvious. If a hard date was provided, and then the typical delays associated with a product launch were to occur, that would also strike an unnecessary blow to the new CEO's credibility.
As always, simply my opinion.
Thanks for the compliment, stockmama22... glad the explanation was helpful.
Just been holding my STTK shares and waiting patiently, junebug3211. I'm glad the explanation was helpful.
You're welcome, Snizzle, and thanks for the compliment. Wish I could do a better job of explaining it more simply, but it is sort of a tricky accounting mechanism to explain.
Explanation of the major component of the quarterly-loss.
Reported today on the 10-Q was a net loss for the quarter ended 11/30/14 of $5,052,804. That is a very large number by any measure, but especially when compared to the total revenue for the quarter of $320,108.
What is important to understand though, is what the vast majority (4,575,975 of the $5,052,804, or about 90%) of that loss represents. The line item encompassing this figure is called 'Change in fair value of derivatives'. So what exactly causes this to occur? Share price fluctuations, from beginning of the reporting period to the end, trigger a restatement of a balance sheet item known as 'Derivative Liabilities'. This sits on the balance as a liability of the organization, but not the kind of liability that you would typically settle with actual money, such as rent or salaries payable. Simply stated, it is sort of a theoretical amount computed based upon the the terms of the derivative instrument(s), which in this case happen to be convertible notes.
So dilutive convertible notes, which are all too common in the OTC (where an ever increasing number of shares have to be issued to settle those notes, as a corp's share price declines), impact this account from period-to-period. When the computed liability amount goes up from period-to-period (as happened in the 10-q that was just released), the increase is booked as a loss for the period (even though no cash went out the door, or will need to go out the door to settle that liability increase). For example, based upon the share price fluctuations, that same computed liability account balance could go back down by more than $4 million next quarter (without any payment being made to satisfy it), and an offsetting gain would then be booked next quarter as large as the loss on the derivative liabilities increase that was booked this period.
But just because it's not a cash loss, and just because it could disappear as quickly as it came, that does not mean that there's no negatives associated with this type of liability. Any derivative liability represents real uncertainty to the organization responsible (such as the possibility of extreme dilution from convertible debt with highly unfavorable terms).
But I believe that it is important to distinguish a loss generated from derivative liabilities from a loss that resulted from real operational expenditures. Mainly because real operational expenses (i.e. rent, salaries, marketing, product development) are recurring and sort of consistent from period-to-period, whereas the derivatives liabilities loss may completely disappear (and even show a huge gain) the very next reporting period. And once again, a widely fluctuating share price is the main cause of such a phenomenon.
I hope this information is somewhat helpful. And as always, simply my opinion.
STTK