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.
As long as we're comparing sizes...
VBDG is now 9K shares for me or about $3200. Not a lot for most of you, but $3200 is 4% of my total yearly salary!
Both of those Targets were sold out? TIA
ALIF: Here it is.. just had to read your DD summary again after drinking a gallon of water...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=29370916
Mike: ALIF: I didn't see a mention of potential iPhone opportunities in your DD.. have you seen/heard anything? (granted I am half drunk.. nope, I am drunk....) Thanks for your ideas-
Next contest if I win: VMC vs SwingTrade
Here's how it might work:
* Respective board moderators and assistants will pick 5 players that are considered routine posters to their boards (they may choose themselves).
* The team will choose 5 stocks and put, say $1000 hypothetical dollars in each.
* Everyone else will choose the team (and date/time) that holds the portfolio that appreciates 50% first.
Of course, this contest is only possible if all parties agree to the lighthearted competition...
Sound like a good time??
VBDG will double first, June 23rd 2008 1030 hours
Why?
- The market should realize the potential prior to next Q's numbers (especially with all of IHUB buying).
- I doubt ZYNX's numbers will allow it to go all the way to $3
- June 23rd is also the day I start boozing at 1030 AM. How else do I forget it's my Birthday??
ATC: Another KiK call:
Cycle Country Announces 2nd Quarter Financial Results and Conference Call for May 15, 2008 at 11:00 am EDT
Wednesday May 14, 4:00 pm ET
SPENCER, Iowa--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Cycle Country Accessories Corp. (AMEX: ATC), the recognized leader in development, sales, marketing, and manufacturing of a variety of products for all terrain vehicles (ATV), garden tractors, and golf cars, announced today earnings for the 2nd Quarter, 2008 of four cents (0.04) per share for the three months ended March 31, versus a loss of two cents (-0.02) per share for the three months ended March 31, 2007. Total revenue increased by 40% from $2,787,140 to $3,911,684.
For the first half of the year, the company has announced earnings of fifteen cents (0.15) per share versus three cents per share for the first half of fiscal ‘07. As has been stated previously, guidance for the full year, fiscal ’08, is projected to be fifteen to twenty cents (0.15 – 0.20).
The increase in revenue for the 2nd Quarter was due to an increase of 77% in ATV Accessories and a 95% increase in Contract Manufacturing. ATC experienced a 53% decrease in the Weekend Warrior business segment, and a decline of 26% in the Wheel Cover business division year over year. The company said a significant percentage of the increase in the ATV Accessories segment was due to the increase in snowplow blade sales as well as an increase in sales to OEM customers. The increase in Contract Manufacturing was due to an increase in orders, mainly from current customers.
The decrease in revenue for Weekend Warrior was due to a decline in sales from their national retail customers and the decrease in wheel cover sales was due to a decline in sales to golf car OEM customers. Said David Davis, Chief Financial Officer, “We believe our Weekend Warrior division has strong potential for long term growth, and we have recently evaluated its current marketing methods and programs to rejuvenate this business segment.” Mr. Davis further commented regarding the Wheel Cover division, “New wheel cover designs and the pursuit of new markets for our wheel covers are two of the methods the company is using to offset the declining OEM sales as witnessed by our success in the lawn and garden industry’s zero-turn mower market.”
On Thursday, May 15, 2008, Cycle Country will be hosting its 2nd Quarter conference call at 11:00 am (EDT). Those wishing to participate in the call may do so by dialing 1-800-762-9441 approximately 10 minutes prior to the event, and use Conference I.D. number 3876406. In addition, a replay of the presentation will be available approximately 20 minutes after the call by dialing the same number and using the same Conference I.D. number. Those wishing to listen to the conference call through the Internet may do so by using this link: http://viavid.net/dce.aspx?sid=00005022. The replay of the presentation will also be available on this web link approximately 20 minutes after the call has ended.
About Cycle Country Accessories Corporation
Cycle Country, with over 50% of the worldwide market in several product categories, is the industry leader in the design and manufacturing of custom-fitting accessories for virtually every brand of utility all-terrain vehicles (ATV's). Cycle Country also produces accessories for the lawn and garden market through its subsidiary, Weekend Warrior and makes high performance oil filters for the motor sports industry through its wholly owned subsidiary, Perf-Form. In April of 2005, Cycle Country acquired Simonsen Iron Works, now operating as Cycle Country-Spencer, providing metal fabrication.
www.cyclecountry.com
www.weekend-warrior.com
www.perf-form.com
SVLF: rec'd an answer re: Lack of Quarterly CC:
In response to your question regarding conference calls:
The company will not be having quarterly earnings calls until further notice. This was a decision by senior management due to the fact that we no longer have analyst coverage. Should you have any specific questions regarding any disclosed information I will be happy to answer them. Thank you.
Thomas J. Morris
Executive Vice President - Capital Markets & Strategic Planning
1221 River Bend Drive, Suite 120
Dallas, TX 75247
Seems like a good reason to me. However, I feel the lack of Guidance (which may have been heard in a CC) is the reason for the skepticism in the stock price currently - after such a good quarter.
One more point: I was very impressed that they answered my question within 3 hours... on a Friday evening!
CAMH: AJ: How do you know it's a $30K loss? Did we ever know what the margins were for the HearTwave when we sold it for $30K? (I'm not trying to be a smart ass here... I really don't know!)
If CAMH can still make a decent margin on their sales using the "lease to own" program - assuming an exponential increase in the # of sales - we'll still get to those $millions$ in dollars in revenue we were looking for back when we signed the StJ agreement.
It's simple math: #sales X margin = revenue.
One more point: the "lease to own" deal may in fact help us by quickly moving the MTWA usage to a Tipping Point (i.e. Malcolm Gladwell) - leading to even bigger revenue.
CAMH:
At least they're changing strategies. On the other hand, they better find results QUICK or Blumberg will take the Board by Proxy. Some catalysts I see that may help the company/stock:
* CMS verification of the denial of GE's MMA (by mid-month)
* Results and publication of pilot studies showing the increase in ICD sales with the use of MTWA. Even if not published, this type of info will help the CAMH salespeople.
* A salesforce now dedicated to the HearTwave... rather than a conflicted, scattered salesforce seen with the StJ reps.
Given the above, this might be a bottom-
Just my opinion. Hope I'm right.. but hope usually isn't a good reason to invest.. dammit...
2Morrow... now that it's After Hours... I must say, that was probably the most fun DD I've ever had the pleasure of reading! Hilarious!
Clears up a few things....
... at least for me. It's just an IM with my Attorney friend:
me: Well, the judge has set a trial date for the MOSH case for late this year. She's also set other important dates, like the last date of "discovery" for either party, the last day to get witnesses, etc.
I mean, does that mean the case has "merits"?
Atty: not necessarily
trial dates are set even when motions are still pending
me: Pssh. Thanks for killing my buzz.
Atty: what you want to look for is a ruling on summary judgment motions
me: I didn't think she had to rule on it if it wasn't going to be "granted"??
Atty: no, it needs to be ruled on, granted or denied
me: Jeez. Well, it's been out there a while. Any usual time frame?
Atty: not really, we've had them ruled on as late as a couple of weeks before the trial date
the late it goes, the better the indication that it is going to be denied
a.k.a., trial is happening
me: So, we need to see "summary judgment denied" prior to the trial.
Atty: yep
me: Dammit. So, that's still hanging over our heads then.
Atty: yeah
but as I have said, they are rarely granted
me: Ohhh yeah. And it probably would have been granted by now, yes yes????
Atty: in the scheduling order, is there mandatory mediation/settlement conferences?
me: Give me a "yes" or I'm selling tomorrow.
Atty: can't do that
sorry
me: Dude, I'm kidding.
Atty: I know
but I am serious, can't say it should have been granted
me: I have no idea about the scheduling order.
What I meant was, The summary judgment request from the defendants has been out there at least a month.
Atty: that actually is not a long time
me: I'm starting to want my money back for this counsel.
Someone please sell me more at $ .35? Thanks-
Littlefish... it's one poster and one stock... I think it's naive to think that with all the posters and all the stocks discussed you will not find yourself in one disagreeable situation... I feel the positive situations and feedback ( both provided to and by you!) far outweigh the negatives. In other words, it doesn't seem like this one poster and stock disagreement is a good enough reason (at least for everyone else!) for you to abandon all of IHUB. I mean, if everyone left everytime they got pissed off at some other poster, Rawnoc and BRIG would be the only posters left!! Just my opinion-
Everyone needs to CHILL on the Summary Judgment issue...
A story: I ask my boss every week for a raise. She doesn't tell me, in writing, that I didn't get it - but once she did. Then, she decided that she didn't want that piece of paper out there, so she asked for it back. Once I returned her denial, it didn't mean that I got the raise!
The moral of the story: The ONLY Court Filing we have to watch out for is "Summary Judgment Granted". Anything else regarding the Summary Judgment is just fluff (and most likely a mistake, because as the court clerk said "...this case is so complicated!!!"
jdouble... yep they're pissed.. I laughed out loud at the "Conculsion". Their last sentence really points out the fact that Pioneer has indeed been trying to kill this MOSH trust - and now they're ticked it's not going their way:
...how can the Plaintiffs hijack and force a 25 year old trust to stay open long after it was supposed to terminate while they invent yet another iteration of their case."
Sounds like sour grapes to me!!
The "are these guys for real?" angle will play... the Judge has always been rational (i.e. on the side of MOSH). Just my opinion.
No it's not a joke and this is my favorite part:
22. Plaintiffs hope they have not offended the court with its attempt at a little humor to point out the ridiculous but in the famous words of Pioneer, "enough is enough".
Seriously, only MOSH is profiled here... not my site...
www.lawsuitplays.com
..a good idea?? Hope the site's administrator can get this out there!
Which one of you put up this website??
www.lawsuitplays.com
First, I'd call Zynex to ask what your options are regarding attaining a TENS device so you can utilize the NMES (NeuroMuscular Electrical Stimulation) on yourself.. or were you asking about the NeuroMove?
Then, please report back to this board regarding their customer service.
Following that, read The Brain That Changes Itself http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/29/arts/bookjeu.php
It will help you understand that you can indeed attain remarkable functional gains no matter how long ago your stroke was... you just need the correct therapy. Good luck-
Seeksup, DPT
In what sort of waters would a Roguedolphin..
..swim with a smile?
Len: Absolutely love the dry humor. EOM
I for one agree with Hank and feel blindsided... I mean they announce the earnings date and conference call, then on that date they change their tune and put us investors off..
On a big-picture level though I agree with everyone's thoughts and still feel the risk/reward is well worth it here... How's that for pragmatism??
Raw.. thought you'd be the type to sit around all day on the computer, trading stocks and doing DD, sans shirt... I mean, that's how I roll...
CRM: Jeez... Yahoo's hist. P/E now reading 388.. forward at 91...
INRB: FWIW
Today, industry-wide oil sands production stands at over one million barrels per day. In 2008 alone, the oil sands sector plans $20 billion in new capital spending – a number Stats Canada says will exceed the total investment in Canada’s manufacturing industry this year.
http://www.suncor.com/default.aspx?ID=3272
Let's hope INRB can garner some of this $20Billion-
"On the positive side it may eventually give existing and new potential investors more comfort in Zynex as more issues have been covered in detail."
Couldn't agree more. All this ZynxWB guy has done has forced us all to go through the exercise of thinking about business issues we may not have thought about before - leading to conclusions that further strengthen our confidence in Zynex.
Seems his efforts are backfiring.
Thanks Mike. That helps! <EOM>
This might impact TENS unit business for Medicare beneficiaries:
The APTA and its members (including me) need to act to exempt PT's from this proposed regulation... moreover though, IF this legislation passes without exempting PT's, the question remains: Will it preclude PT's from acting as TENS unit providers??
Prepared by APTA Staff
2/1/08
Medicare Program; Establishing Additional Medicare Durable Medical Equipment,
Prosthetic, Orthotic, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Supplier Enrollment Safeguards: Proposed
Rule.
Background
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) published in the Federal Register a
proposed rule on January 25, 2008. This proposal would add new requirements and revise
current language stipulating the Medicare enrollment requirements for DMEPOS suppliers to
establish and maintain billing privileges in the Medicare program. In an effort to ensure that the
supplier enrollment requirements are clear and to ensure that Medicare beneficiaries are getting
appropriate services from DMEPOS suppliers, CMS proposes to make several revisions to the
enrollment requirements. These revisions would impact DMEPOS suppliers enrolling with
Medicare for the first time as well as those currently enrolled in order to maintain their billing
privileges. Comments will be accepted by CMS through March 25, 2008.
A summary of the provisions can be found below.
Revised Standards
Revision One: Currently the supplier standards state that the DMEPOS supplier must operate its
business and furnish Medicare-covered items in compliance with all applicable Federal and State
licensure and regulatory requirements. CMS makes clear in this proposal that it is the obligation
of the DMEPOS supplier, not the National Supplier Clearinghouse (NSC), to be aware of all
licensure and regulatory requirements and changes to these requirements. (The NSC is the
contractor which processes the DMEPOS supplier enrollment applications). The NSC has no
obligation to inform a DMEPOS supplier of any licensure or regulatory requirements.
Revision Two: If a state requires a specific license to furnish certain services, it is CMS’
interpretation of the regulations that the DMEPOS supplier cannot contract with an individual or
other entity to provide these licensed services. However, a DMEPOS supplier could hire the
individual as a W-2 employee. The owner of the supplier or full-time W-2 employee must obtain
and maintain this licensing requirement as a result of this interpretation. The Agency feels this
clarification is necessary because it wants to make clear that the expectation is that CMS is
enrolling DMEPOS suppliers, not third party agents that subcontract their operations to suppliers
that are not or cannot enroll in the Medicare program.
Revision Three: DMEPOS suppliers must maintain business records for seven years after the
claim has been paid.
Revision Four: DMEPOS suppliers must maintain a physical facility on an appropriate site.
CMS clarifies the definition of “appropriate site” with the following conditions:
• The supplier location must be accessible during posted business hours to beneficiaries
and to CMS, and must maintain a visible sign and posted hours of operation. If the
supplier’s place of business is located within a building complex, the sign would have to
be visible at the main entrance of the building where the place of business is located.
• The supplier location must be accessible during posted hours of operation to beneficiaries
and to CMS. DMEPOS suppliers would have to notify the National Supplier
Clearinghouse (NSC) in advance of any planned changes to their posted hours of
operation.
• The supplier’s place of business must be staffed during the supplier’s posted hours of
operation.
• The supplier’s place of business may be a ‘‘closed door’’ business, such as pharmacies or
suppliers providing services only to beneficiaries residing in a nursing home, that
complies with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations.
CMS also seeks comments on whether the agency should establish a minimum square footage
requirement to the definition of “an appropriate site.”
Revision Five: CMS reserves the right to conduct on-site inspections to ensure that the
DMEPOS supplier is in compliance with the requirements of the Medicare program.
Revision Six: Currently the Medicare requirements state that a DMEPOS supplier must maintain
a primary business telephone listed under the name of the business locally or toll-free for
beneficiaries. The requirements specifically preclude the use of a beeper/pager, answering
service, fax machine, car phone, or answering machine as the primary business number. These
provisions are revised to ensure that cell phones and beepers/pagers are not used as a method of
receiving calls and that “call forwarding” features are not used to forward a call to a cell phone
or beeper/pager.
Revision Seven: The current supplier standard requires that the DMEPOS supplier has a
comprehensive liability insurance policy in the amount of at least $300,000 that covers the
supplier’s place of business and all customers and employees of the supplier. If the supplier
manufactures its own items, this insurance must also cover product liability and completed
operations. CMS proposes to amend this language to require that the supplier have a
comprehensive liability insurance policy in the amount of at least $300,000 per incident that
covers both the supplier’s place of business and all customers and employees of the supplier. The
supplier must ensure that this policy is in force at all times. The requirement that the policy
covers product liability and completed operations in the event that the supplier manufactures its
own items remains in effect. The supplier must have appropriate liability coverage before
submitting its Medicare enrollment application. The DMEPOS supplier must list the NSC
as a certificate holder on the policy.
Revision Eight: CMS proposes to expand an existing requirement limiting DMEPOS supplier
contacts with beneficiaries by telephone to include contacts by computer e-mail or instant
messaging, coercive response internet advertising on sites unrelated to DMEPOS products (not
explained further in the proposed rule), and in person. Soliciting beneficiaries is prohibited
except when one or more of the following circumstances applies:
(i) The individual has given written permission to the supplier to contact him/her by
telephone concerning the furnishing of a Medicare-covered item that is to be rented or
purchased;
(ii) the supplier has furnished a Medicare-covered item to the individual and the supplier
is contacting the individual to coordinate the delivery of the item; and
(iii) if the contact concerns the furnishing of a Medicare-covered item other than a
covered item already furnished to the individual, the supplier has furnished at least
one covered item to the individual during the 15-month period preceding the date on
which the supplier makes such contact.’’
Revision Nine: At this time, supplier regulations state that the supplier must be responsible
for the delivery of Medicare-covered items to beneficiaries and maintain proof of delivery.
Additionally, the supplier must document that it or another qualified party has, at an
appropriate time, provided the beneficiary with necessary information and instructions on
how to use the items safely. CMS proposed to revise these standards in the following ways:
A DMEPOS supplier—
• Is responsible for maintaining proof of the delivery in the beneficiary’s file;
• Must furnish information to beneficiaries at the time of delivery of items as to how the
beneficiary can contact the supplier by telephone;
• Must provide the beneficiary with instructions on how to safely and effectively use the
equipment or contract this service to a qualified individual;
• Is responsible for providing instruction on the safe and effective use of the equipment that
should be completed at the time of delivery; and
• Must document that this instruction has taken place.
New Standards
• DMEPOS suppliers must obtain oxygen from a State-licensed oxygen supplier. This
standard does not apply if the State does not license oxygen suppliers.
• The supplier must maintain ordering and referring documentation, including the
National Provider Identifier (NPI), received from a physician, nurse practitioner,
physician assistant, clinical social worker, or certified nurse midwife, for seven years
after the claim has been paid.
• Suppliers would be prohibited from sharing a practice location with another Medicare
provider. This would include a physician/physician group or another DMEPOS
supplier. CMS notes that it is aware that physicians and other licensed nonphysician
practitioners may obtain their own DMEPOS supplier number and
furnish DMEPOS from their office. As a result, CMS is seeking comment as to
whether it should establish an exception to this space sharing proposal for
physicians and non-physician practitioners and the circumstances that would
warrant the exception.
• DMEPOS suppliers must be open to the public a minimum of 30 hours per week with
the exception of those who work with custom-made or fitted orthotics and prosthetics.
The enrollment form, the 855-S form, would be modified to accommodate this
proposed change.
• CMS proposes to add a supplier standard that would preclude a supplier from having
an IRS or State taxing authority tax delinquency. Currently the Medicare program
does not consider whether a current or prospective supplier has such a delinquency.
The 855-S would be revised to require that the DMEPOS supplier certify that it does
not have a tax delinquency and agree to allow CMS to verify this certification. Tax
delinquency is defined in the proposed regulation.
• DMEPOS suppliers would be required to inform CMS, the NSC, or an authorized
CMS contractor of any adverse legal action or felony conviction within 30 days of
this determination. Failure to do so would result in an overpayment determination. In
other words, if CMS, the NSC, or CMS authorized contractor determined that
payment(s) was made after an adverse legal action or felony conviction, they could
recoup that payment(s).
Conclusion
While CMS acknowledges it has taken several steps to reduce fraud and abuse in billing for
DMEPOS, including competitive bidding, setting accreditation standards, and a proposed surety
bond requirement, the Agency felt further clarification and creation of new supplier standards
was necessary. Several of the provisions of this proposed rule have implication for physical
therapists including:
• The proposed requirement that DMEPOS suppliers hire a full time W-2 employee who
meets the licensing requirements for the State as opposed to establishing contractual
arrangements.
• The proposed establishment of a minimum square footage as part of the “appropriate
site” definition.
• A proposal to require $300,000 in comprehensive liability insurance per incident that
covers the supplier’s place of business as well as all customers and employees of the
supplier.
• While CMS has invited comments on the issue, the Agency has proposed that physicians
and non-physician practitioners cannot share space if both parties have a DMEPOS
supplier number.
WB: You're going to "enlighten us on their sales and general business practices"??? Please do; we should all learn to grow like this:
Posted by: MikeS97707
In reply to: GWMAN who wrote msg# 1473
Date:2/6/2008 9:35:59 AM
Post #of 1760
Here is the updated order history:
Month Orders
Jan 08 1,473
Dec 07 1,091
Nov 07 1,260
Oct 07 1,452
Sep 07 1,042
Aug 07 1,021
Jul 07 715
Jun 07 713
May 07 635
Apr 07 641
Mar 07 602
Feb 07 621
Jan 07 590
Dec 06 323
Nov 06 365
Oct 06 341
Sep 06 314
Aug 06 265
Jul 06 170
Jun 06 154
May 06 182
Apr 06 152
Mar 06 169
Feb 06 145
Jan 06 125
Mike
This 60 Minutes segment "House of Cards" helped me understand the whole mess:
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3756665n&channel=/sections/60minutes/videoplayer3415.shtml
Just bought Hercules Hook..
..at my Boulder, Colorado Walgreens. The teller was just a weekend person and didn't know if/how much they were selling, however, there was only one package left after I bought mine. The only negative to mention is that they were in the section with all of the other "as seen on TV" crap... I'm sure that issue has been discussed ad nauseum, but I wish the Hercules Hook (and all the other VBDG products?) were positioned relative to the product type, not just in the "as seen on TV" section. Anyway here's a pic:
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r46/tykeeter/IMG_0049.jpg">http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r46/tykeeter/IMG_0049.jpg" />
Crap, well, apparently I'm unable to figure out how to link my picture... I can do it on other websites; don't know what I'm doing wrong here at IHub.
LT.. I share your gut feeling, especially given the resources available to us, i.e. the folks on this board.. interested to see what you decide.. thanks-
OT: Do you all invest in a 401K or...
..would you rather trust yourself that you can find a better return on your own - investing in stocks, real estate, etc, even given the tax benefits of the 401K?
Thanks; thought it might be a good discussion, and I'm deliberating putting $$ into my 401K or continuing putting it in stocks and mortgage...
"Lower rates had in fact had an impact on buyers, and activity had started to pick up again. That mood has since changed as some buyers are backing off."
... not only are buyers backing off (or looking at alternatives, such as myself), but when rates were low everyone I knew was getting refinanced. In my opinion, this is what spurned the rates to go back up... the banks knew if everyone was financed too low, they wouldn't get their money!
"Offset Mortgages"
Anyone have one of these? My realtor is saying I should do it, and he doesn't have any ties to it (as far as I know, and I trust him). I just bought a 2-bedroom condo and am shopping around for a mortgage. Have never heard of the "offset mortgage" until today. Here's an intro:
http://www.homeownershipaccelerator.net/data/Movies/5-Min-Movie/player.html
Just made it 101... what's the benefit of making a board one of your favorites?
Check out Wade's post; he called CFO:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=26803754
Hank's view on CASH:
It appears this "cash vs invested" debate may get started again.. nothing against your opinion MSGI but the debate reminds me of one of my favorite lessons to date in my short investing career:
To me cash is not a position but an excuse for not having the ability to find value either long or short..
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?Message_id=20111978&txt2find=msgi
Absolutely classic!