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.
Shareholders need to advocate for a change in this. If management really believes that TTCM will become profitable, they would be willing to tie their compensation to this outcome. Shareholders may not have the ability to vote to change these agreements, but they can vote with their money. There are shareholders that could send the price to less than <.002 with the sale of their shares. That would really damage the ability of the management to issue more convertible debt. The threat of that may be enough to cause DLM and Jon to be willing to renegotiate their compensation.
This is the point I made about the misalignment of incentives here. The people who are working to create an impression that this company is legitimate are the same people who make money regardless of whether it is profitable. Jordan earns money through the development costs paid to Honeycomb regardless of whether TTCM generates a profit. DLM and Jon earn money through the licensing fees paid to ARknet regardless of whether TTCM generates a profit. Common shareholders lost a lot of money this quarter, and the issuance of another $440,000 in convertible notes (most of which has already been spent) will dilute their ownership interests in the future. I can’t understand why shareholders would listen to these three following this Q. It’s similar to taking everything a used care salesman says to you about the vehicles you’re test driving as a fact.
These three have almost no skin in the game and, consequently, have very little incentive to manage your investment well.
45 days gets us to Saturday.
Well we should have the 10-Q in either the next few minutes or tomorrow morning.
It would be illegal to provide this information outside of a filing or earnings call.
I'll be transparent with you. I'd like to know. I think the answers would make it clear that this company is worthless. You should want to know because you believe it would disprove the idea that this company is worthless. Either way, we should both want to know.
Would you like to know the answer to those questions or not?
Do you want to see the answers to questions like these?
Yeah they seriously need to set up an official Q&A around the ER. Nobody ever ask any real questions on these things. Ask how many app downloads there have been in the last month. Ask why you think this ridiculous "If you build it they will come" approach to e-commerce will work.
You guys just keep missing the point. If people who have better knowledge of a company and its products than you do have chosen to avoid it, you probably should too.
"with a high likelihood of massive losses" Nobody on the Telegram shares this view. Everyone there is certain that TTCM is a multibillion dollar company is the making. If you made the statement you just made here on Telegram, you would be attacked.
It's not odd. If nobody invested in this company understands the technology or how to read SEC filings, that tells you something about the company.
Would you want to invest in a car company that engineers are avoiding? Would you invest in a biotech company that has no scientists as shareholders? No. Why? Because these people are, to some extent, insiders. They understand companies in their field better than you do. If they're avoiding a company, maybe you should too.
I think that I wrote about this last week. Scam isn't synonymous with illegality. TTCM is taking advantage of investors who don't understand accounting or the technology involved. I haven't seen any evidence that of the longs here or on Telegram have a background in finance or in tech. That's a red flag. These investors are being mislead by comparisons to other big tech companies and the misuse of buzzwords like augmented reality and blockchain.
"So it is wrong in stating that TTCM doesn't own "them." What patents are being referenced?"
Arguing over which patents are important really isn't an interesting discussion topic. Patenting code is ridiculous because there are so many languages and ways to achieve the same or similar results. Competitors can simply build a program with the same functionality in a different way. The important thing here is the license agreement. Again, the $200k/yr + 7.5% of revenue licensing fees eliminate the possibility of TTCM ever becoming profitable.
2018 10-K/A License Agreement. We can argue all day about whether you think this matters or not, but it's not really important. TTCM licenses these patents for $200k/yr + 7.5% of revenues. That is an EXTREMELY costly license. It means that TTCM has to have an operating margin of >7.5% just to break even. Nextech AR is already generating million in revenue each quarter and doesn't even have a 7.5% operating margin.
This is the #1 problem with TTCM. You can argue about Akyumen, marketing, patents, Main Street Shopping, blockchain, 3D scanners, etc. all day long. As long as this licensing agreement exists in its current form, none of that matters.
The patents are licensed. TTCM doesn’t even own them. I believe the software developed by honeycomb could be capitalized, as GAAP allows for the capitalization of custom software. This would help investors monitor how much is being spent on app development compared to how much is spent on advertising, consulting fees, etc.
There’s nothing wrong with how they’re presenting it now, but it’s just not as informative as it could be.
"The way it's trading definitely shows it's not Dilution"
Can you explain how you can tell the difference between retail investors selling and convertible debtholders selling?
Also, we will know in the next few days if that's true or not.
How do you know this?
DLM is referenced in SEC filings (with Jon) as the inventor of certain IP that is licensed to TTCM. If DLM can't even write code, how did he manage to create these software products?
I guess I'm just surprised by the fact TTCM investors are ok with a guy who can't write code and has no experience in IT in general running a software company.
Most companies are managed by people who have either skills or experience that are relevant to the core business or have a finance background. DLM has neither.
Facebook - Zuckerberg was a Harvard student and was described as a "programming prodigy".
Amazon - Bezos has a degrees in engineering and computer science from Princeton. He was also SVP at Shaw at the age of only 30.
Twitter - Dorsey is also a programmer.
Apple - Steve Jobs had experience with computers from a very young age. He had a summer job at HP when he was only 13. Cook has an IE degree and an MBA. He worked at Compaq before Apple and was a SVP at Apple for years.
So what do all these people have in common? They have EXTENSIVE experience or, in the case of Jobs, a lifelong obsession with the products their companies sell and the industry in which they operate.
How many times do I have to say that I can't find any evidence that DLM has a background in anything that is relevant to managing a technology company? If you have evidence that he does have such a background, please provide it. Everyone keeps assuring me that they have answers to all my questions but won't provide those answers. This is a discussion forum. I'm trying to have a discussion.
The lack evidence of previous careers is the evidence. Look on LinkedIn, Bloomberg, OTC Markets, etc. None of those sources list and previous careers or experience.
What businesses are those? Management usually lists these things on their resume. “CTO at Square” “VP of marketing at Target.” Saying “I have private business interests” is like saying “My girlfriend goes to another school. You wouldn’t know her.” What businesses does DLM own/manage?
Then you tell us about his career history. This information is usually easy to find for other companies. DLM has a vague career history because he knows he doesn’t have any inexperience running a business and hopes that you won’t notice.
Well that’s certainly a red flag. I would open up a DM with one of their customer service people in your account and see if they can identify why the security was flagged.
He’s been hyping penny stocks for years on social media. He doesn’t know how to code and doesn’t understand accounting. You’d think that someone running a tech company would have some background in either computer science, engineering or finance. That’s the case with most companies. I guess that explains some of the performance of this company.
DLM was a big OMVS promoter a few years ago. I believe it has since been delisted. My uncle knows him from a penny stock group. To the best of my knowledge, he and some other guys have basically been unsuccessfully doing P&D schemes for the last decade. That's the "small business experience" on his resume.
I use E*TRADE but did not receive that message.
"Issuing shares that haven't touched the open market is not burdensome whatsoever to current shareholders."
Alright I'm going to give a really simple example of why this is wrong. Imagine that a company has 10 shares and you own 1 of those shares. You own 10% of the company. That company needs money, so it issues a debt security that converts into 20 shares. Upon conversion, you no longer own 10% of the company. You own just 3.33% of the company regardless of whether the lender ever decides to sell those shares.
"Companies do buybacks"
Companies need free cash flow to repurchase shares, not revenue. This company doesn't even have revenue.
"During the year ended December 31, 2019 we issued 1,571,976,979 shares"
"During the six months ended June 30, 2020, we issue 560,931,025 shares of common stock in conversion of $770,081 of principal and $42,016 of unpaid interest. We recorded losses of $37,267 upon conversions."
Once again, this information is from the last 10-Q. Debt is issued--> That debt matures--> The notes are converted to shares--> The shares you own represent a smaller portion of the ownership interest of TTCM. That's dilution. There is no "Exchanged for longer term shares". There is no such thing as long term shares. The convertible notes are converting to common shares.
"sure don’t see those shares being exchanged back for money in the market." Who do you think is doing all the selling? The companies financing TTCM aren't in the business of holding equity investments. They're in the business of converting debt securities to shares that they then sell so that they can loan more money.
The same private placements that have been HIGHLY dilutive over the past year?
Alright glad we agree on that. Now how do you think that cash burn will be financed?
I bet that when we get the latest 10-Q soon, it will show that the increase in cash burn was greater than any increase in revenue. Do you believe I am wrong?
It's also important to remember that a platform with few users isn't attractive to companies. The ARknet app has had 12 reviews on the Apple store in the last year, so I doubt Main Street Shopping has more than ~50 users. With so few users, it probably costs TTCM more in integration costs alone to set up new companies than they earn in fee revenue. $50 in fee revenue from the sale of a few packages of beef jerky isn't going to offset the money spent integrating and maintaining that account.
So if "those same laws are followed without fail everywhere." then why would there be a lawsuit?
20 years is the life of the net operating loss carryforwards. Having a DTA of zero implies that management does not believe that those NOL carryforwards will be used. That means that they do not believe that TTCM will have taxable income in the next 20 years. This isn't my opinion. This is how GAAP works.
Public companies can't disclose material nonpublic information on message boards or in emails to an individual...
They have to use a press release or filings.
And I'm not interested in talking to DLM while a dozen other people attack me and post childish gifs. I've seen that happen to anyone who asks tough questions on Telegram.
"So that type of statement about "taxable income against which prior losses may be deducted for tax purposes" is NA at this time..."
The net operating loss carryforward can be used for 20 years. Will TTCM still be a startup in 20 years?
"Asking the public about specific concerns which can only be addressed by the company is to much show and not enough go for my taste."
Again, I'm not asking anything. I'm telling you that, based on the latest 10-Q, management does not believe that it is "more likely than not" that TTCM will have taxable income against which their prior losses may be deducted for tax purposes. So, it is "more likely than not" that shares are worth nothing. Can you tell me what is confusing about this?
It's not the information. It's the channel. You can't disclose material nonpublic information on Telegram.
Commenting on the DTA would involve implicitly giving guidance --> Giving guidance outside of a public filing is a Regulation FD violation --> Asking management to answer these questions on Telegram is asking them to commit a FD violation
You're right, this is a discussion board. I'm trying to have a discussion, but I'm continually directed to take my discussion to a forum that is hostile to this kind of discussion. I'm not going to do that. It's fine if people here don't understand or want to discuss my posts, but I'm not going to post on Telegram. If I wanted to do that, I would have already done it.