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.
Snow,
I have seen you right on stocks so far, but I find your confidence on this one intriguing.
Wouldn't one normally think when a company reports unaudited numbers on a past qtr like nowauto did that should carry more merit than future projection by this company? In hindsight regarding nowauto no merit was correct, but without hindsight you saw no merit in nowauto's claim but you do see merit on this one. Was your reasoning at the time about nowauto different primarily because it was a non-reporting company? If so, wasn't that reasoning faulty in the sense that it did become reporting as promised?
After all the rambling by me, to restate you seem to be not as skeptical regarding this company as you were on either veltex or nowauto. I completely understand about veltex and agree completely about that one, and in hindsight about nowauto.
sam
vphm deal only makes sense to me if buying a new product line very soon that is accretive otherwise I don't get it
sam
thanks eom
Rawnoc,
You are accurate.
My question is what does the part about inventory at end of 3 year contract mean. I doubt it is significant but I don't understand.
sam
Thanks RRufff eom
Rrufff,
What are your thoughts on titan? I don't understand the company so I have no opinion except it is easy to see why the stock dropped.
sam
Rrufff,
I read a number of press releases.
One talked about the company philosophy. Also there was a mention of about 210 million shares o/s I believe.
President mentioned last year buyback shares at .005 if my memory is again accurate.
Sharecount could change rapidly as he said the philosophy (he took over 9 years ago) was to mainly acquire businesses via issuing stock. He thinks great number of shares is just fine if you are growing as a result.
The guy has had 9 years to increase share value. Current price indicates to me I will concentrate elsewhere.
sam
Hi Rrufff,
I ran across an interesting one today that I will skip but I think may be your type.
PBLS.PK
sam
The stock will be much higher if
1) no stumbles, just consistent improved execution
2) expanded business with Disney
3) going to a better exchange and frequent, better press releases
Lots of companies would go much higher if they did some of the following as well.
sam
My analysis is that one should continue to consider performance to be unpredictable.
Given the uncertainty of everything about trudy a forward pe of 5 would be generous if one first uses an optimistic formula for forward net income.
I consider 3 * $306K to be an optimistic net income for next 12 months which would be about .0018.
Pe of 5 = .009.
The only reason for higher I think should center around a buyout, but I have no confidence about that.
If by this time next year net income for sep 2006 was $500K then I would see things differently.
sam
Rawnoc,
If Disney is doing some on their own, could that mean contract not renewed?
sam
Rawnoc,
I don't know whether your last message is more good or bad.
sam
Rrufff,
I am assuming you do not think company will do massive dilution. I am sure though you would not bet heavily on that.
sam
Also pr was not forward looking.
sam
Jdraney,
You are basically saying pr was okay, because you figure there is no justice. I can not assume good faith, it is possible but can not assume.
sam
Jdraney,
You are a complete fool if you think it is okay that they had a press release that said 17 cents for 2nd quarter with 6 million revenue, unless you can show me proof that pr was done in good faith.
sam
Now is the time for ag in arizona and sec to investigate.
Has anybody else contacted or know best way to, that is contact info?
I am planning to.
sam
Bobwins,
The only think different about the issue today from last week is that the competitor has materialized.
Is the appearance of potential competetitor at this time a surprise or predictable?
sam
thanks rrufff
Rrufff,
I have seen criticisms from ragingbull.
One is that the head guy is good at lining his own pockets.
Two is that office locations of businesses are suspicious.
Three if I remember name right that Dr. Jacob Green one of the team has questionable history.
On the other side of argument, top guy claims he has put a lot of his own money overtime in this.
Any comments on any of the above?
sam
vphm:
I don't know if the clinical results is the primary cause of the price drop or not.
I somewhat understand after studying the clinical results that the results do look good.
The pr is both scientifically and confusing in nature. Perhaps a scientist would have read it easily.
I don't know at this point how the pr is being assessed but could be that it is being assessed incorrectly.
My guess is at some point phase 2 will be started and the stock will react positively.
sam
Rrufff,
I don't totally agree because a cancel could be viewed as wishy-washy and people also remember and have a bad taste in their mouth.
In the long run though if this is a good company the reverse split will be very good and the negative part of the split has already been done.
I think the biggest question from an investing standpoint is the financial future. Right now if there had been no reverse announced, I think we would be trading at about .010 to .012 because there are no financial positive numbers yet.
The spin about positive income when the income is negative does not fly.
sam
Actually Rrufff in the long-run I think a reverse split logically is clearly better if it is not abused as a way to continue diluting a company to death.
My only complaint about a reverse split if done by a moral company is it should be combined in my opinion with good news so that stockholders are not crushed as much on the announcement.
Being shareholder friendly though to me as a first rule is to be a company that is going to be successful in the long-run and not just better at appealing to investors.
sam
Doubloon,
Just a quick scan of header on this site said proven post-Shamrock of $252 million.
8.8 million at the old $40 > $252m makes me think reserves are now higher.
Since reserves is a common way of valuing company that is good.
Have I got the facts right?
sam
Jderaney,
If the company is in as good a shape as once promised, then there should have been a press release at time of audit release stating that numbers for september quarter would be better than 17 cents or at least in a lofty ballpark
sam
Jdraney,
One thing to keep in mind is when this stock plunged from 80 cents to 20 cents causing at least losses for those who had been patiently long and sold on the audit, nowauto was very quiet.
How do you explain if this company is playing a solid ballgame that nowauto did not put out a single pr to try to cut the losses people were experiencing?
My own belief is it makes no sense if the company cared about its shareholders.
What does make sense to me, is the company is worried about lawsuits and/or the sec.
If you are right about the company, time will tell. If you are wrong about the company, I will ask the SEC to investigate this company for possibly lying in the pr that said 17 cents earnings for 2nd quarter. I will ask the SEC to look closely at the company.
It is my hope if it comes to that the ceo will have a lot of problems, don't know if that will come true.
sam
I know without studying closely all the numbers that selling yesterday was the choice for me.
The number one topic in my opinion should be whether it is time yet or to wait before contacting the SEC about the pr of June quarter of 17 cents earnings being investigated as to whether being a lie by the company or something less than a lie.
sam
Rruff cxti,
What I recall reading several months ago on CXTI was that the method of payment was that money was not received until work completed or certain milestones, I don't remember precisely.
Back when I read the information months ago I knew based on the company's description of their cash flow concerns that they expected to raise money, so this was not a hidden event.
sam
Bobwins,
If nobody else steps forward I plan to report to SEC that they should investigate whether the pr for 2nd quarter unaudited earnings reported was a lie.
My view is just because it is unaudited does not mean anything stated should be ok legally.
I would like to know though if legally it is okay to say anything as long as the word unaudited is thrown in. That question is VERY IMPORTANT for future purposes of whether to take a risk. Everybody should have known after the shell maneuver that ceo was not trustworthy imo since unexplained share increase as part of deal. The only reason to like stock after that was pr for 2nd quarter of 17 cents.
Whether in the very remote event justice is properly dealt, as an investment it is pure history except the issue of what is there in the legal system to discourage the lying, to justify the risk?
sam
sam
Rruff,
I got out of this stock.
Reasonable expectation of cash dividend, I will agree with that. Legal expectation though is how I see it where the question is?
Unless the pr is convincing in a legal sense for cash or easy equivalent, then right or wrong(that is can he skate free?) the top guy may be attempting to deceive and win. That is why I view the dividend as speculative.
sam
Starboy,
I think what the head guy is doing is risky, but I think it is too iffy to think he is being truthful.
As has been said, he could have a buyout valued in a questionable manner. He could have an elaborate dividend scheme planned that is worth nothing to shareholders.
Just a speculative play.
sam
Question for strong bears:
how many of you would take a position in this if a pr came out saying the man pledges the big dividend would be strictly an all at once cash only pay out and the division sale was done solely with straight cash, or would most of you still think a trick?
sam
Doubloon,
I was in vlxc and followed closely for a good while.
I would not trust anything about this company long-term until they become either a regular reporting company or for at least 6 months did not increase share count, verified with transfer agent who depending on who there answers may or may not give share count.
Last fall vlxc was claiming earnings of over $3.00 a share was going to happen for 2004, and at that time o/s was 2 million shares. There is nothing good that can be said about being on track for $3.00 per share earnings and now down to current claim.
sam
Doubleortriple,
I took a small loss on this one as well.
Look on ihub at these 2 good boards:
value microcaps
vmzip
Jim,
I can see how they can skate free legally on all this.
What I don't understand is how this can be the best way to run a scam? The only way I can see is if this is the final wind-up.
sam
Jim,
I think you are absolutely right. I think every way around we could be outsmarted, the we being me and not you.
sam
Jim,
If you were a judge, would you let them get away with a non-cash dividend?
sam
Datatech,
There have been a lot of negatives thrown around.
If you have no doubts about this company, I would like to understand why.
I don't think most bashers are getting any financial benefit out of bashing this company, I think it does not pass their smell test in some cases and in some cases some people enjoy a good bashing dialog just to talk.
The motivation to me is not the issue, the issue for me is why does the company look beyond doubt to you?
sam
As to actually screwed, I don't think I have seen the answer yet.
sam
Question:
I don't know how to see all the old press releases due to symbol change. I know some are in the header here.
I would like to know if any press release specifically says the payment will be in actual cash. Also, would shareholders have any legal right to complain if company says in that case we decided for whatever reason better to give restricted stock.
How can they legally claim giving proceeds if they give stock?
Giving stock to me would be like splitting? Is that correct?
Bottom-line does the company have to give a dividend that translates into the equivalent of real money to shareholders or else be subject to possible criminal proceedings?
sam
sam