Shrotker,

If you have Matin in a position where he pays close attention to your questions, I think one fair outstanding question is over ownership of the mills but seems more than likely that would be on your list of questions already.

Number two question in my opinion would be how many shares o/s and what was the increase in shares for, preferably a complete history/breakdown of each increase for past 6 months.

sam

Rawnoc,

Looks like Texastex can have good posts if you weed thru the rest.

sam

Miamimice/Rawnoc,

Matin is obviously a very busy guy. Miamimice always says this is just a facade for a scam.

Rawnoc, Have you ever seen a such a busy guy all as part of a facade for pinksheets?

sam

Miamimice,

Your lowest point of credibility is attacking people on the board. Your sole goal is/should be supposedly to expose Matin.

sam

Miamimice,

It is simple. Pual does not believe you, so he is not going to follow your advice.

sam

Pual,

I am glad for your input. Remember a favorite theory of yours is somebody could be pulling Matin out of a hole.

If so that is fantastic, because this unknown person/group if they take over as CEO may build shareholder value and trust and getting things done and keep Matin from chasing bad ideas.

To try to stay objective though that scenario maybe 10% I would say. I am having a hard time assessing percentage chance for a scam, ie 40 million revenue being a lie without remedy.

Shrotker studies closely listing requirements.

sam

I submit the idea that it is plausible that this comapany can get listed before end of year.

What do you think Shrotker?

sam

Pros and cons,

The pro is then the figures could work for 2004 audit.

The con is Matin has a history of hiding things he doesn't want people to know.

I guess the biggest pro for favorably viewing the company is Miamimice has not convinced the board that this is a scam.

The biggest negative is Matin has not built shareholder value to date, but he has one more bat in the ninth.

sam

Another rough calculation:

I am not assuming any method will come close to actual.

Start with 2400 Gross in 2003

Triple to 7200 for 2004, take off expense and you could get 6 Million earnings.

Looking at numbers that way perhaps 2004 earnings could be on the money.

No reason to like Matin's style but the substance of 2004 audit who knows?

sam

Rawnoc when you have the time,

I saw the $570,000 figure, but I saw no explanation so I don't know if it was only relevant to 2003.

I have a hard time putting together the figures but if I choose to start with -$250K + $570K = $320K

Assuming 2.5 times greater revenue for fun for 2004 and same percentage profit 320 * 2.5 would provide an inaccurate guestimate of $800,000 profit for 2004. If use 3-fold $960,000 profits.

Compare $1 Million for 2004 then to the hoped $6 Million, I would argue the figures then are not disastrous but not good enough. Of course there could be $6 million profit, but 2003 audit does not hint at that, best as I can tell.

sam

Shrotker,

Any thoughts on the reported $250,000 loss unrelated to trucking?

sam

Earnings,

Earnings are a difficult way to measure to begin with. A lot of tricky accounting can go on.

Operating earnings versus net:

Anybody have an answer as to which should be more significant in this case. I do not. Seems to me though unless the $250k net income loss excluding trucking can be explained, one should not feel good.

Negative sentiment by most could cloud judgement but for now the judgement is negative.

sam

Shrotker,

New negatives today were

5 million less revenue than expected and excluding trucking losses there was $250,000 net income loss best as I can tell.

The future may reveal great stuff, but that is hope just like the hope that the audit would be good for price of stock.

If 2004 audit is like this one (ie a disappointment), the stock at best may not move up much.

sam

At this point looks to me as bad as no audit ever coming. 2004 audit my change that, but I don't plan to wait.

sam

Don't forget this blast

You are so correct Dag. That RB board has some 50 posts or more since I last read it with absolutely no content or fibre to any of them. I get I get, some think it is a scam, some think it is going to $8. But I do not see anyone offering any basis for their opinions.

I'll respect any opinion that is based upon anything more than a warm fuzzy feeling or a Miss Cleo prediction.

welcome to veltex Ihub

Another blast,

Note prediction of $20/share earnings 2003

LVT @ .03 cents is trading 85% below what VLVT says it's earnings per share of .20 cents 2003 will be..In all my years in the stock mkt VLVT is the most extreme situation of disparity between a company's stock price and it's publicly stated fundamentals as a profitable business.Can anyone think of another company present or past that compares to this?I have known companies that traded temporarily slightly below 1 times their 12 mnth EPS,but never to the extreme where VLVT is at..You can add up the reasons why VLVT is currently trading at 3 cents..#1 VLVT is on the pinks and has been for nearly 3 years #2 VLVT prior to Sept2002 was completely neglected by management to get news out on it's business so it takes time to build back credibility with the mkts..#3 VLVT shares O/S have increased rapidly from 27million Sept2002 to currently 42million so the possibility if not actuality is that at least some of these shares are being sold on the mkt increasing the float,holding the price down and causing buyers to be reluctant to come in with any large degree of buying..#4 Bashers,Shorts,MM's are taking advantage of all the reasons above and naked shorting the stock for the short term which has accelerated it's current downtrend..#5 There really is something fundamentally wrong with VLVT that management is not being honest about,but somehow the Market as a whole has figured out--The problem with #5 however is no one doing their Due diligence--not even the bashers--can substantiate with any verifiable evidence any claim of VLVT being fundamentally flawed..Even more the addition of officers of VLVT in just the past 3 months like Brunetti,Freidel,Duff,Warren,Squire,Hoffman--Would these folks with many years of business experience join a company that was terribly flawed in some way--Isnt it common sense they did their DD of VLVT before joining?/Anyway Next 3 months should be very interesting to see how the stock responds to all the upcoming events

I am surprised to hear that raw - eom

Texastex,

Why don't you be rational? Thousands of good minds thought Enron was legitimate, to be 100% confident about Veltex is not reality. If you want to say there is better than 50% chance that Veltex is a good company, then one might or might not agree with you but you would be closer to rational.

sam

Ask your self on recent share increases, according to Rawnoc, done for our common good why our leader did not wait until the audit was out and prices were therefore $3/share and heading upward before raising funds?

sam

King thought it would do well when at adjusted $5 share 2 years ago.

My motive is to make money on this stock. And I believe this stock is significantly undervalued at a nickel, so I believe my percentage return on my VLVT investment will be very substantial.

Roger, we differ in that I shed my emotions and focus only on corroborating evidence. I admit that it's not easy from time to time. During periods of doubt, I review the facts as I know them, and I get back on my horse.

Blast from the past.

See post 470. Shares issued as of 11:05 PST 1/16/03 = 44,878,412

almost 5 fold more by fall 2004

Also true with me.

sam

McEnulty,

Basically it makes sense that above-average caution should remain in place in best case scenario for this company.

sam

thanks rainman eom

Rawnoc,

Long term I still have no trust in Veltex. Short-term I think there is probably a quick upside with audit release. Time will tell.

sam

Rainman OT:

How can I find information on PA Resources?

sam

Rob,

I don't know if this is strictly an accounting question about using overseas figures without verifying.

It does not sound independent though, and independent seems to be a favorite word in accounting as well as the word verifying I think again.

Also, I don't know what reporting requirements are beyond forms and regularity for exchange purposes. Shrotker studies that a bit.

Also, the other thing is what will the market think. I don't think the market is going to bend over backward to readily except something that just barely could make the cut.

sam

Rob,

I can understand as with any message board that some discussion is viewed as more valuable and other as less or not at all.

If you know somebody with independent knowledge, that is good criteria. If you like Veltex a lot, I would still say that one should try to get as much information/thoughts from negative posts as from positive posts. It is a form of due diligence and this company merits I think more analytical study than most.

sam

Rob,

Once again the issues exceed what people were talking about last fall which was quality of previous audits and the 18 million share issue for purchase of mill.

Since, there has been the rapid share increase that has not been discussed by management and the completed purchase of KCA garments. Management owes us in my opinion clear discussions. We don't get clear discussions. A company should not be trusted without that particularly with so many issues. I think one should invest in this company only with an approach of distrust, which means for conservative purposes not at all.

This does not mean that no chance for a good ending exists.

sam

stockwizard,

Describe location and date and what you saw of facilites, number of employees etc..

sam

Surely an entertaining board - eom

Well, would Roger guy be Pual?

sam

Pual,

I am wondering. If you could go back in time machine when it was recently $3.75, would you have sold all then and stopped looking?

sam

McEnulty,

I agree 100% with the contents of your post. I believe the biggest risk for longs currently is that the audit will not be as good as Matin has led people to believe, but I think we will see a released audit next week.

We will know then.

Second problem if that hurdle is cleared is the deceitful expansion of shares in my opinion. It could be for clearing up messes (ie previous lies). Best case scenario is the company cleans up its past and becomes honest and straightforward.

I doubt that.

sam

Miamimice,

I am just trying to narrow down what I can understand clearly. I don't believe Matin wants the stock to nosedive unless he plans to give up next week. This news release will sustain the stock this week, maybe that is all he is hoping for.
Basically it looks like next collapse is imminent or else there will be a nice enough audit submitted for us all to see next week that will continue to sustain the stock price for at least a few more weeks.

Anything beyond that looks like speculation as always until we see more, but my bet is that collapse will not occur this month.

Also I believe Pual does do a slow pump, but I believe he is honest, not some sort of foot soldier. In fact I don't believe you have proven that there are any paid foot soldiers on the board, I give that a 5% chance.

sam

Miamimice,

If it is a well-known fact about Veltex not earning a single penny overseas, how come Pual who has been in this for 5 years does not agree to my knowledge? It may be a fact. Well-known though to who?

sam

Rawnoc,

How does this appear to you? Short term good I think, but if holes are not obvious on a 2003 audit, but high unexplained share count exists???

sam

APPRECIATE EOM

Bobwins,

What do you expect in growth then for aspen after 2005?
Thus what pe?

sam

Looks like classic lying.

Should be interesting what they say about the trucking disaster in their 2003 audit. If they ever release it. A real audit would make Veltex look like a company near bankruptcy I'm sure. So, I would expect a audit like the one in 2001 and 2002. I wonder what happened to Andrew Friedel? He was pumping Veltex in late 2002.


Veltex to add 160 trucks in the next six months

The Memphis, TN-based trucking subsidiary of Veltex Corp. plans to add 20 trucks this month and 40 more by the end of the year to meet growing demand, the company announced in a statement today.

After the purchases, the company will have a fleet of 106 trucks, but it plans to add even more, including 100 additional vehicles by the end of the first quarter of 2003.

The purchases are being made to keep up with increasing demand, according to Andrew Friedel, president and COO of Veltex Corp.'s trucking subsidiary, Veltex Transportation, formerly known as MultiModal Transportation.

"We're seeing lots of demand," Friedel said. "Our ability to track and re-route our trucks on the fly is a real bonus."