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.
exactly what at least a couple of us - futuresman comes to mind - have been saying for upwards of 7-8 months. a company with effectively no cash and significant working capital needs - both with the existing additive products and perhaps eventually large contracts - treads a fine line. i can think of many a small company - both private and publicly held - that has been crushed by not being able to fund working capital requirements. that is no doubt another part of any negotiation ron is working on that is critical to cementing a deal, and many larger potential customers aren't willing to fund smaller vendors' wc needs. just look at the latest public casualty, gtat, the stock of which vaporized by 93% yesterday after filing for bankruptcy soon after not winning what many assumed was going to be a large contact from apple. all of a sudden, too much debt having funded non-contracted inventory. game over. equity holders wiped out
not nearly as 'thin' as it appears.
you can bet there are some participants who are unwilling to show their hands.
$1-$1.10 does look like intermediate resistance. breaking above that would presumably be a good thing with less supply overhead.
only serious revenue acceleration and/or meaningful contract news would lead to breaking that resistance band prior to year end, imho
that's all very nice, but until a meaningful contract or two or three is signed sealed and delivered, this is almost all on the come. there are reasons for the lack of contract news, and no doubt at least one of them is that the parties are still far apart on terms, and the implicit gross margins mills is trying close are not palatable to the state, country, or company. and this is now 8-9 months after a deal of substance appeared to be imminent.
meanwhile the a/r 10-k combo...
(and just why does mgmt insist on releasing sec related documents at the last possible moment?)
annual report published 9/30/14 link: http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/ECSL/filings
...admittedly w/ most info almost 100 days old, showed the following...
sales up 20% (granted off small base)
human expenses up 12.1%
op cash flow -$770k vs -$751k
debt down 15.9% ($412k)
interest expense down 21.2% ($46.8k)
no cash (no change), which has a lot to do with...
share count up 9.6% .. so much for the posts about virtually no new shares
56.6mm vs 51.6mm
to see where most of the share growth materialized
http://www.otcmarkets.com/financialReportViewer?symbol=ECSL&id=127104
for example, on p.3...
bill robertson 325k shs for $128,750 of consulting services (no comp fy2013)
paul gleason ... 475k shs for $232,750 of consulting services
presumably the 10-q due 11/14 should show some serious progress. otherwise, tax loss selling will accelerate
oh, finally, financial statements are unaudited
am i correct from looking at your may-june dynamo additive 10-tank data that there was no improvement in mpg? did you start using the additive at 5690 miles or 6088 miles?
certainly more meat on it than the previous update.
nothing truly concrete, but apparent progress.
but not all holders. buying and selling at the margin is what matters. i took about a 3.5 bagger in a holding period of under 3 months with an average cost in the high $.40's. stock currently is more than 40% below my average out. little of consequence has been announced in the seven months since january news releases. Four months to go until mid december. as stated by others, contract negotiations can take a long time and be very frustrating, especially when the balance sheet is not flush with cash and steady cash burn reigns. i'm still intrigued longer term, but it's a jungle out there. enter at your own risk.
disagree. october maybe. not august
tax loss selling has already begun in many small and micro caps. i'm sure there are plenty of newer buyers and holders who have paper losses in this one. tax selling will accelerate after labor day as it does every year. ecsl may end up being a great buy or trade in the last couple of weeks in december.
mgmt is doing its shareholders a disservice by not announcing terms and proceeds promptly.
as for amazon, bezos has been able to load on non-cash expenses for years so he can report losses, pay little or no taxes, and use that 'extra' cash to reinvest in the business and capital projects while chasing future growth and market share. trust me, the company in reality is not losing money on a cash flow basis. Far from it.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/cf?s=AMZN+Cash+Flow&annual
operating working capital negative. way more cash than debt.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/cf?s=AMZN+Cash+Flow&annual
a business model only a fool can't love. bezos has been laughing all the way to the bank for over a decade, never mind the seemingly pricy stock and market valuation based on all matters of metrics
thin to $1.90... i think not given average daily volumes near 100k over the last several weeks. rest assured there are sellers out there not showing their hands on level 2 or anywhere else.
as for the 'investment', not good or helpful that there are no details. given the company's mediocre cash-poor balance sheet, any financing with equity or debt is a material event that is required to be disseminated to the public promptly upon execution.
so, mr. mills and mr. robertson...
how big an investment?
what are the net cash proceeds from the investment?
was the investment made at either a premium or a discount to the then current market price?
how long will that cash infusion last? (operating burn rate?)
how many shares at what price and how much dilution?
how many shares o/s now as well as fully diluted?
no can do.
sold some of it on mid january volume spike, more on early mid february volume spike, and the rest of it when it broke below support in early may.
why would you and many others on this board keep hyping expectations unless you are actively selling the stock?
if you really wanted to buy more, you wouldn't or shouldn't be raising expectations to unrealistic heights or unreasonable time frames.
Unfulfilled expectations are the bane of most stocks pushed by mgmt, brokers, or owners.
I have appreciated several of your posts of substance involving links to related subjects of interest as well as your interpretations of various news items. but a lot of brief posts of no substance on this board are a waste of everybody's time.
it is pretty clear to me that ecsl will soon have a balance sheet problem, if it's not already there.
fyi, two of my past posts...
11293 on 1/25/14
investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=96353855
11917 on 3/13/14
investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=98752682
i assume you meant frost likes the guy (lawyer). if so...
no argument at all. frost is pretty much the smartest guy in the room wherever he goes.
after his success at key, we were investors in both ivax and teva.
he's been indulging in serious insider buying at opco, but the valuation seems very rich. stock hasn't acted all that well.
maybe one should put in a bid at 8 and see if it gets hit some time in the next several weeks/months.
ok, that's encouraging. the two areas i wanted to see.
General corporate transactional work
Intellectual property and licensing
i will say that's an incredibly broad spectrum of the law to be proficient and expert in. he sounds more like a generalist than a true specialist, but that's just a guess based on the info presented.
fyi...
http://www.gtlaw.com/People/Bruce-C-Rosetto
http://www.martindale.com/Bruce-C-Rosetto/27844875-lawyer.htm
http://www.divestopedia.com/2/1185/pre-sale/preparation/podcast-interview-with-bruce-c-rosetto-financing-expert
yes, thank you, i am. it's a good start, though it doesn't come cheap.
i just hope it has one of its senior partners looking over the shoulder of whatever 'cub' lawyer(s) who presumably is/are creating the legal documentation that will form the basis of any contract that hopefully is forthcoming.
intellectual property protection is very tricky business. i am on the board of a private company along with a 'retired' ip lawyer, and his key contribution to the company is making sure our legal reps don't make any errors of commission or ommission in any deals that are negotiated and/or closed.
do you or anybody know who specifically is representing gt in its relationship w/ ecsl? probably a good question for robertson.
you don't truly know the extent of what you have until mills completes negotiations and ironclad beneficial contracts with a fairly big cash rich entity... or two... or three...
until then, this still mostly on the come.
i've seen plenty of wannabees not make it to the promised land due to overinflated expectations and/or lack of execution of a game plan and/or lack of cash.
in this case, a key part of the game plan is a truly significant signed contract that is favorable to ecsl's interests, shareholders, and employees, and does not cheapen or give away ecsl's ip.
not only does mills have to close a substantive contract with good terms, he must also be supported by excellent ip lawyers who make sure the other entity is not able to pull subsequent maneuvers relative to the ultimate final terms of any deal that is completed.
i disagree.
from what i've been able to unearth, there is a huge discrepancy between the percentage of cars which are recommended to use premium (or mid grade) and those that actually are 'fed' premium by their owners.
the key here, i believe is the difference between the words 'recommended' and 'required'.
most recommendations are ignored, especially over the past 2-3 years when the price spread between regular and premium has widened considerably from the former traditional $.20/gallon to generally between $.30-$.40/gallon (and occasionally worse).
If 'required', owner/operators almost always buy premium without fail. But those designations are small by percentage relative to 'recommendations'
what little direct research i've been able to to unearth so far says only 2-4% of gas bought in north america is high octane premium, so i'm not sure i'm buying your 'price discount' theory.
anybody who can provide links to recent articles on the subject of what percentage of americans or global drivers buy 'premium' that proves or disproves what i've found, please do
so, first cut, dynamo added about 20% to 1929 model a mpg on top of bishops, and about 25% to 1930 model a.
okay, well that sounds like decent incremental numbers out of the gate, relative to the 7-8% added mpg cost i calculated in a post a few days ago.
Thank you.
OK, so the dynamo octane booster essentially costs 25 cents per gallon, or about another 7% cost per gallon above the $3.50 average per gallon cost of regular, so the mpg enhancement better be well over 8% to make economic sense to we consumers.
The dynamo cetane booster costs about 19 cents per gallon, or maybe an incremental 5% above the per gallon cost of diesel.
From Cyberfuels website....................
"Dynamo Cetane Booster" is sold by the case (16 bottles per case). The bottles come in two sizes 4 ounce and 16 ounce.
The 4 ounce size treats up to 20 gallons of diesel per bottle and the 16 size treats up to 80 gallons of diesel per bottle.
"Dynamo Octane Booster" is sold by the case 16 bottles per case. The bottles are 4 ounces and treat up to 20 gallons of gasoline per bottle
A company called wellhead services that sells prepaid debit cards?
What's with that?
So $5/bottle for the 4 oz gas case, and $15/bottle for the 16 oz diesel case.
How many bottles per fill up, or what portion of a bottle for how many gallons fill up?
if/when news of substance is released on a meaningful contract or 2 or 3, the spread will evaporate and the stock will take care of itself as volume expands and - with some luck - stays much higher on average subsequent to the news release many of this board's participants await.
would be of interest to most people on this board, i suspect. so would it be best to conduct the comparison right after a maintenance tuneup... new sparks, air filter, etc.? not to mention properly inflated tires.
am i to infer that the combination of dynamo on top of bishops original does not result in a diminished combined improvement in mpg performance, in other words 1+1 really equals 2, or is there some degree of diminished performance effectiveness using dynamo if bishops original is already being used?
Solar, do you or anyone else on this board have knowledge of the retail and bulk price points for both the 4 & 16 oz bottles? Also, anybody have a clue as to likely gross margin. I assume the GM is quite high, but that's just a guess.
hopium, unless proven otherwise
patience may or may not end up being a virtue
precisely, until a signed contract of substance is announced, the stock is in a holding pattern. and presumably the longer the 'holding pattern' goes on, the stronger the gravitational pull will become.
when there is nothing of substance to say, no posts are necessary.
it's just noise clutter that obscures the few posts that may well be helpful to the regular readers of this board, or new readers and potential investors who are trying to get up to speed.
here's my short list of what strikes me as posts that might further the knowledge of those who aren't particularly familiar with the 'story' out of about that past 500 i've flipped through.
11531
11604
11763
11817
11822
11896
your first post, i see. good luck.
we're all waiting for godot... even the constructively skeptical slojab.
anybody care to take an educated guess as to how much a bottle of the "Singular 96 Gasoline Additive" added to their tank at fill up will cost at retail?
unlikely algos trade this name given low mkt cap, thin volume, typically fat spreads
risky business betting farms, unless you have a virtual farm w/ no assets.
btw, where did you find more money? ...
lighter than AIR Friday, 02/21/14 02:35:00 PM
Re: dshade post# 11726
Post # of 11734
picked up more at 1.65
lighter than AIR Tuesday, 02/18/14 03:39:09 PM
Re: dshade post# 11679
Post # of 11734
I bought at 1.65 and 1.85 today...no powder left or I would take out the ask at 1.85...
yes, saw that link via slojab earlier. no arguments.
bet the 2/15 short interest will be considerably higher than recent numbers. we'll see.
respectfully disagree.
market maker shorting provides liquidity, whether you like it or not. without mm's, volatility is higher and ability to accumulate or lighten positions considerably harder. be careful what you wish for.
not to beat a dead horse, but 'shorting' of stocks tends to be a higher % of total volume (often double counted) on stocks that are thinly traded because market makers are obligated to make a market, and are in the business to make as much money as they can for themselves in the process.
Does it look like just one player trying to game the stock, or multiple monkey heads?
great comprehensive post, prolife.
not sure if 1/13/14 mgmt letter update is incorporated by one or more of the links or not. if not...
http://www.encountercare.com/update.aspx
would be interested to know what your source was for the trading float of approx 40mil shares?
yahoo finance has it at 28mil.
one contributor to this board says 10mil, which i highly doubt.
looks like mills and stanton own 4.74mil and 2.75mil shs respectively, or just under 15% of the 52mil shs o/s.
your number of 40mil implies there are another 4.5mil shares held my mgmt and/or bod members or other 'insiders'.
anyone else here who has a solid source for the float calculation please chime in.
thanks in advance
interesting. thank you much.
does anybody on this board have bill robertson's direct email address rather than the general ir address?
i have some questions for him that may shed light on some issues and numbers that have appeared on this board.
again, thanks in advance.
can you please give us the first 5 'asks' prices and #shares off level 2 currently? or a screen shot ?
thanks in advance.
what matters more than shares o/s is the market cap when contemplating shifting to a major exchange.
right now w/ about 49-50mm shs o/s, the mkt cap is around $90mm, still quite tiny in the overall scheme of things.
personally, i have no problem with a trading float of around 28mm shares, according to yahoo finance.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=ECSL+Key+Statistics
so noted. i am not a fan of stock splits, period. purely cosmetics. the days of being concerned about trading in round lots is long gone. look at brkb, aapl, goog, crm, pcln, etc.
i suspect if the stock accelerated towards double digits that the company would do an equity offering to enhance its working capital position and create more float.
once again, the idea of a spin-off down the road may have serious merit.
let's see how events, announcements, and execution unfold.
stock split? forget it. no reason whatsoever for such speculation.
at the very least, shareholders would presumably benefit if and when the stock crosses $5/share on decent volume and holds that level.
that's when many institutional investors and mutual funds can consider buying and owning a stock, according to their charters.
spin off is another question altogether. that may make sense down the road.