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.
Thanks gopack, but no apology needed. We all say what we think at the time with the information we have available. I did the same. Just have had more time to get more information. And I really have no motive. I just like the information I've been able to glean here. Occasionally, it feels good to help someone understand some of the accounting gibberish.
Don't give up, I might still post something that doesn't set well LOL.
Good investing buddy,
Jim
probe1, I didn't imply that they were making up numbers. All I meant was that you can rely on the numbers they publish whether it goes to the SEC or to Pink Sheets or both. One is just as valid as the other. If PLNI sends them to the SEC, they are informational. If they go to Pink Sheets, they are also, informational.
If they are audited, they are the same information and will usually not be much different unless the auditors make PLNI change a reserve or an accrual or some such thing which is usually a sheet-internal change or reclassification. For example, on the balance Sheet, you have Long Term Debt & Short Term Debt. Short Term is due within one reporting cycle (1 year) and the Long Term is greater than one year. The auditor might require PLNI to reclassify a portion of the LT. Debt to Current Portion of Long Term Debt (Short Term Debt). Overall, the debt is the same but it's on a different line. The statements are essentially the same.
So, audited statements might be slightly different but not materially different but no matter where they are published, you can rely on them equally.
Turek previously stated that he would publish all of PLNI's statements to Pink Sheets.
For me, "audited" is more for lending institutions and large investors. For me, any financials that are published in a place of public access(pink Sheets)or a paper of regional distribution are equally valid for investment purposes. Buy 1 share so you are a stockholder and send for a copy of their published financials. They are required by law to furnish you with a copy.
This is just my opinion.
state, it isn't new news. If you look back at my posts you will find that very recently I indicated that I personally wouldn't mind a bit more dilution if it meant profitability next year or the following year.
We all know that in business, it takes money to make money when you are just a start up company.
You have to invest in equipment and maintenance, raw materials, accounts receivable, payroll, rent, supplies, and the list goes on. It takes green dollars. Wishing won't make it so.
Alternatively, they could let the company spiral down to a fiery death which would benefit no one.
There's 4.9 billion shares out there now. Would another half billion make a huge difference? Maybe it would in the long run by allowing PLNI to become profitable. But now, since the net value of the company itself, according to the financial reports, is negative (less that zero), why be concerned over dilution.
The actual value per share is negative dude. A bit more negative right now won't be a disaster! But, it will allow PLNI to grow, get positive cash flow, get a positive net worth, and eventually buy back the shares they issued or expand the company to a size that has enough assets to support 5.5 or 6 billion shares. Lucent Technologies has done it and stays around $3.00 a share.
Oh well, these are just my thoughts and opinions on PLNI at this time.
Good luck and I hope we all make a buck.
Capn, one more thought about your last post to me. I just bought back in to PLNI (500,000 at .0025). If I lose it all, I'm out $1,270.00 (including my broker's fee). My portfolio fluctuates considerably more than that every day. I wouldn't consider myself "stuck" in anything. Right now, if I decided to sell, I would lose about $220.00 (including the broker’s fee).
I am still not what you would call a long holder unless the stock goes down to half, and then I would just let it sit and not even think about it except occasionally. If it goes up to .005, I will probably be happy with doubling my money. Depending on how it looks, I might sell at .003. That's the way I do in the pinks.
I have made money with PLNI.
I look at what PLNI is doing and, from my experience, I feel that Turek will eventually make this company into a profitable "going concern". He is not a dumb person. He has surrounded himself with very credentialled managers
You call him dishonest. I call him a business person. You say he lies. I say he does what he has to do to make this company work. You say he doesn't do what he says. I say he does do what he says but he's too optimistic about his employee's abilities to make his deadlines or a bit overzealous.
In the long run, we will all find out. Might be good, could be bad. But I think that JT will give it a real try to make PLNI a viable company.
probe1, I appreciate your question but please understand that when a public corporation publishes financials, they are under the same laws (Tort, Equity, Civil, and Agency [SEC]) as they are when they publish audited statements. The benefit from audited statements, for we stockholders, is the verification of the numbers by a responsible independent party who has a lot to lose by playing games with numbers that investors rely upon for their portfolios.
Additionally, auditors look for compliance (SOX which just formalized what accountants have always done but placed an onus on the auditors to comply), internal control, intercompany and close party transactions, reserves, O&O inventory, and similar things. Additionally, they check the numbers to make sure that there are no mechanical errors. Then, they review their audit by the local, regional, and if a large enough company, a national manager or board. Then they add their opinion to the bottom that states that the financial statement "fairly represent" the financial position of the company at a specific time (usually year end or fiscal period end (except in a short period audit).
This does not mean that it is the real actual financial position of the company because of all of the accruals that are made and the reserves that are estimated. The only time you really know the financial position of a going concern is when you close the doors and finalize your books.
I know it sounds strange but it's a fact of life.
As the old accounting joke goes: What is 2+2? Answer: What do you want it to be?
Anyway probe1, you can rely on the published statements as much as you can on the audited ones unless you see that somebody was indicted for fraud like in the Enron case. Then, you can worry.
PLNI is just too small a company to envision them risking a long jail sentence for a couple million dollars.
JT just took almost $6 million from LexReal and put it into Plasticon. Why would he spend this kind of money and time and effort to gain a couple million. Just doesn't make any sense to me.
Add this to the fact that JT is expanding the corporation and embarking on the first steps of growing a company and I, personally, see no reason not to rely on the unaudited financials. Too much at risk for PLNI at this juncture to be dishonest in the financials.
This is just my opinion.
Capn, Microsoft's most recent 10K, immediately following the auditiors opinion (Item 2):
Special Note About Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements in Management?s Discussion and Analysis (?MD&A?), other than
purely historical information, including estimates, projections, statements
relating to our business plans, objectives, and expected operating results, and
the assumptions upon which those statements are based, are ?forward-looking
statements? within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These forward-looking statements generally are
identified by the words ?believes,? ?project,? ?expects,? ?anticipates,?
?estimates,? ?intends,? ?strategy,? ?plan,? ?may,? ?will,? ?would,? ?will be,?
?will continue,? ?will likely result,? and similar expressions. Forward-looking
statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that are subject to
risks and uncertainties which may cause actual results to differ materially from
the forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update or revise
publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information,
future events or otherwise.
As I said, all public reporting companies!!!!!!
PLNI is no diffreent!
Capn, the quoted paragraphs you posted are apparent in most every filing. Please look at any other filing and it will have similar verbiage. It's part of the future outlook thing. The last two I just looked at were PXLW (Pixelworks) and RMBS (Rambus) in which I also hold positions. They both have similar statements.
Here is an excerpt from the preamble to PXLW's last 10Q:
(EDGAR Online via COMTEX) -- Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. Forward-looking Statements This Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and other sections of this Report contain "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 that are based on current expectations, estimates, beliefs, assumptions and projections about our business. Words such as "expects," "anticipates," "intends," "plans," "believes," "seeks," "estimates" and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. Actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in such forward-looking statements due to numerous factors. Such factors include, but are not limited to: changes in growth in the advanced television, multimedia projector, digital media streaming devices and flat panel monitor industries; changes in customer ordering patterns or lead times; timing of design introductions and design win cycles; the success of our products in expanded markets; success in achieving operating efficiencies from our restructuring efforts; competitive factors, such as rival chip architectures, introduction or traction by competing designs or pricing pressures; insufficient, excess or obsolete inventory and variations in inventory valuation; our product mix; new product yield rates, changes in regional demand for our product, non-acceptance of the combined technologies by leading manufacturers; changes in recoverability of intangible assets, long lived assets and goodwill; increased competition; continued adverse economic conditions in the U.S. and internationally, including adverse economic conditions in the specific markets for our products, adverse business conditions; failure to design, develop and manufacture new products; lack of success in technological advancements; lack of acceptance of new products; unexpected changes in the demand for our products and services; the inability to successfully manage inventory pricing pressures; failure to reduce costs or improve operating efficiencies; changes to and compliance with international laws and regulations; currency fluctuations; and our ability to attract, hire and retain key and qualified employees.
What I'm saying is that PLNI is not alone. Very large companies do exactly the same thing.
Many other companies have been suspended from trading until their financials are up to date. So, I must conclude that PLNI is doing what they told the SEC they would do or I think we would probably see a notice to PLNI published by the SEC.
Like I have always said, speculation is very speculative (move over Yogi Berra!)
Good luck in everything.
Rick, you might also wish to reference the PLNI financials where it states very plainly (as I posted previously) that Semco and Pro-Mold are both wholly owned subsidiaries of Plasticon.
I don't know how much more plain a statement of fact can be.
Why are people even asking these questions? Duh!
Nice work this morning old chap. A lot of work here. Well done!
Bob: The reason I used the Parkinson's Law example for PLNI was because of the, in my estimation, top heaviness of the organization.
Just a quick look at Parkinson's Law for those who wonder what it is and why it applies, in my estimation.
http://www.heretical.com/miscella/parkinsl.html
rrm, First, I beleive that there is a mistake in the notes to the first quarter explaining the loss. They counted the interest & other expense twice so the loss, based on their reporting (Net of Beneficial Interest) was $758,270, not $812,184.
Based on the $758,270 loss, PLNI would have needed to have Revenues of $3,858,348 (assuming no increase in SG&A)to break even at the bottom line in the first quarter. There is no reason to expect Sales, General and Administrative costs to increase for this small incremental amount. The accounting staff should be able to handle the increased paperwork with little problem at this low volume. Perhaps some of the expertise that is being paid wages at PLNI could also be contracted on an as-needed basis. I don't know what they could do about the SG&A but my experience has shown that a position filled will generate a job that is difficult to complete in an 8 hour day, in the corporate world. A good example for me is how folks like GM, Ford, Delta, etc. wake up one morning and decide they have 30,000 to many employees. Whoa, must've happened last night while we were asleep! LOL!
If we assume a simplistic model with no cyclical sales,the average will be the first quarter x 4 (overall), then PLNI will need to have annual revenues of $15,433,392 to break even.
If we use your estimate of $13 million total sales, we will look pretty good but still incur a loss unless they cut the SG&A costs (management)(see calculation below). Assuming PLNI does $13 million and the SG&A remains the same, Interest and Other remains unchanged, and the Gross Margin remains at 37.4%, PLNI would have a loss for the year of $910 thousand.
So, unless PLNI does something to reduce the SG&A expense (where I personally see more than necessary for a start-up company, it will probably be a couple years before they show a profit.
Alternatively, they could expand their product lines in molded plastics, work on increasing their construction lines by going direct to very large customers, and expanding the Semco customer base beyond projections.
There are many ways to accelerate the companies growth as long as they use a planned growth and don't outgrow their ability to manage their company. Many companies have grown too fast and either had to sell or lose their business (AMF, Head Skis, and others).
Another factor that could improve the profit picture would be economies of scale (more production, lower costs, less set-up, more production efficiency, etc.).
I could do another pro-forma using your cyclical assumptions but I don't think the overall would be that much different. The main difference would be in the interim reporting (quarter to quarter) but the year would still be about the same.
Calculations based on current Gross Margin Percentage.
Pro Forma Annualized
Qtr. 1 06 Break-Even Estimate-13mm
Revenue 1,830,534 3,858,348 13,000,000
COG (62.6%) 1,145,782 2,415,326 8,138,000
G.P (37.4%) 684,752 1,443,022 4,862,000
Op. Exp.:
SG&A 1,389,108 1,389,108 5,556,432
(Loss)/Gain (704,356) 53,914 (694,432)
OtherInc/(Exp
Int. Exp. (41,918)
Other Exp. (11,996)
Total Other (53,914) (53,914) (215,656)
Net loss (758,270) 0 (910,088)
These are all my assumptions and opinions and are my answer to a question by rrm. This does not represent what will happen at PLNI. This is just one small remote possibility and assumes a very static environment which we all know is usually not the case.
I hope I haven't made too many errors!
This was all laid out in columnar form. If anyone wants a copy to look at, send me a note at jimmy004u@yahoo.com and I'll be happy to send you an Excel spreadsheet you can read.
Good trading!
Bob, at this point, in my opinion, anything positive that increases the PPS is good. I hope the second quarter sales are equal to or better than quarter one. Looking forward with anticipation. Not speculating at this time. Just waiting and hoping.
Post #13719 by rrm should be read by everyone. The links are exceptional and for those who haven't been following the SEC, congress and various movements to halt naked shorting, these are a must read IMHO.
PLNI has been subjected to this because some of it was published. The big question here is how much is not "across the board" or overseas shorting. You can't see those.
Pink & penny stocks aren't the only victims (see article 1 of Motley Fool link). And our illustrious president wants us to place our retirement into the hands of a slanted (I didn't say crooked) stock market where the fox (SEC) kinda guards the henhouse (DTCC) -LOL!
Just my opinion.
rrm, buyins.net has a formula that is a constant, they multiply times the volume, that is supposed to represent a model they have developed. That could account for the difference in PLNI’s short volume but the ones that are most worrisome to me are the back-room, post-it note kind of agreements (per the excerpt from your article). These never show up on any short list; they continue to move even when they are board trades (13 day rule)and still never show up even if they aren't filled.
I’m sorry for all of the folks here who haven’t read some of these current articles on MM shorting and how they do it and how they prosper at the small investor’s expense.
As far as being down too low to continue to short, that’s a foolish statement (by another poster). The MMs short at .0001 because they can go to .00001 and do when they buy back as evidenced by CMKX.
I hope that PLNI's financials come as promised and that they are improved. I’m not looking for profit yet but improvement. Another big help would be some source of cash inflow other than increased dilution. I believe that PLNI is attempting to avoid more sales of common stock but for the business to grow they must have cash and I personally wouldn’t mind a small additional issue if it means profitability next year.
Anyway, most of this is speculation and opinion. Thanks again for the excerpt. If you have a URL for the article maybe others would enjoy reading the whole thing. I saw another very similar article on Motley Fool.
rrm, thanks. I read this piece awhile back. It also tells about the MM's ability to time their buys and sells. I thought that that part was also interesting because they know exactly when to short and when to buy.
Collusion!
Fraud that is allowed by the current SEC regs.
I think that SHO is a joke when this is openly occurring and the SEC does nothing.
The biggest joke is that they are looking at PLNI when the MM's are robbing us blind.
Just my opinion
You think PLNI went down, look at Yahoo yesterday! Down over $7.00. Ouch! This happened on a predicted drop of .1 billion in revenue for next quarter, which is a very small percentage of their gross revenue. That's a 20% drop in one day. Not much chance to get out fast there.
rrm, I hope that the PLNI's cycles are opposite for construction and other Pro-Mold products. That would be great. I don't know much about what all they produce (other than what's been posted and from the pictures) but if they produce anything that is holiday oriented, then Christmas stuff might start in August. From my experience, that's when companies usually start buying. Delivery is usually during and after September so maybe, we can hope for an earlier profit at the bottom line.
Have you heard or know anything about Semco's products? Other than their sealer, I have no insight. Also wonder about after-market maintenance for additional sales of sealer. I wonder what their business cycle looks like too (physical sales cycle, not accounting cycle).
It would really be nice if PLNI gets to a point like BlueLynx and reports their P&L by major product category. I know that that's a ways down the line at best and probably requires more cost sophistication than PLNI currently has. I probably shouldn't expect that from a small company when very large companies usually don't know their cost breakdowns LOL.
Just my opinions.
Cap'n, the 4,473,962,322 shares outstanding is a basic and diluted weighted average. For the actual shares outstanding, look at the bottom of the next page and you will see 4,997,740,100 actual shares outstanding. I made the same mistake the first post I made earlier today. On further examination, I found my error.
Big difference if you want apples with apples.
Capn, I understand that and you are right. However, any report issued after the report date is required to have subsequent events included in the new release if it is officially published by a public company. There are no subsequent events that indicate an increase in the common stock.
You can see that the republication of '04 year end has subsequent events.
Anyway, I am looking forward to the next report. I think that this will tell me a great deal more about PLNI, even without the stock info. I am looking for a decrease in SG&A as a percentage of sales and Gross Profit.
I am looking for increases in working capital, cash and A/R. Another overall biggie, in my opinion, will be a smaller loss this period.
As I said in an earlier post, I wish PLNI would release a section on the expected annual sales cycle because I think that the loss will grow in the coming fall and winter months. This company deals a lot with construction and except for rebuilding, temporary repairs and things of that nature, the hope is that the other products from Pro-Mold will improve the cyclical picture.
I am hoping that next spring, PLNI will have a profitable quarter.
Let's just wait and see what happens to the share count in quarter two. Guessing about it does no good and just gets folks unhappy.
Good luck and I wish you the very best and maybe we both can pick up a few bucks in the pinkies. I still won't hold a pinkie if I make a 20% or greater profit. I am way ahead on PLNI and my first buyin was at .0074. Just bought a few more shares at .0025 last week (with certs).
Super, I don't get violent. I just try to see what others are saying and see if there is some validity to their belief. Cap'n has a point if you don't look at the final filings and look at company info releases to Pinksheets when they weren't filing. Now, the filings, in my opinion, are all that count. All the PR releases that were unofficial info, given to Pinksheets was just interim estimates at a moment in time. The financials have a base at a specific point in time, the end of the fiscal year for reporting, which, for PLNI, is 12-31. I will run with this date because I was an accountant and the fiscal year end was always the "hold your feet to the fire" date. It's also a very important date for the SEC as well as Mar. 31, Jun 30, Sept. 30.
Anyway, good luck and thanks for the reply.
Cap'n, the only reliable information is in the official releases. These are legal and there is a liability under the false reporting laws of the SEC (influencing buyers/sellers) if they are officially released by the company whether audited or not.
Therefore, all else is of no consequence as far as I am concerned. I see no dilution occurring in the official releases.
Good enough for me.
Let's see if the number stays the same from the first quarter to the second quarter (when released). Then, if there is an increase, I will humbly appologize but I don't think you'll find one.
It is still my very firm belief, as well as TDA (I was told by a rep there) that the PPS is being manipulated. This isn't a conspiracy, it's simply the way hedge funds and short sellers work.
I see that UBSS is back selling an buying on a .0001 difference which leads me to believe that we are about at bottom. The PPS should start up again, in my opinion.
Good luck.
Copied by copy/paste from financials. Could be a recent entry or a correcting entry. I sure wouldn't worry about a couple hundred shares.
Just my opinion.
Correction of prior post:
Common Stock of PLNI (On Financials as listed with Pink Sheets)
12-31-2005 (Page 4) 3,727,740,100
3-31-2006 (Page 6) 4,997,740,100 (Increase of 1,270,000,000)
6-24-2006 (Page 1) 4,977,740,339 (Increase of 239)
Per SEC filing:
http://searchwww.sec.gov/EDGARFSClient/jsp/EDGAR_MainAccess.jsp
Dec 5, 2005 Pro-Mold Purchase
Jan. 15, 2006 Semco Purchase
Since the acquisitions, I still see no dilution. I believe that my post #13507 was correct and my post 13513 was in error.
I'm sorry but I must have picked up a wrong number in my last post. Haste makes waste and errors and I am deeply sorry for the misinformation on my last post.
Capt, from the 3-2006 report to the 6-2006 report, I see an increase of 503,778,017 shares but I haven't had time to peruse the total financials to determine where these went.
Capt, this is the latest report filed with Pink Sheets on 6-16-2006.
Item (iv): The exact title and class of each class of securities outstanding.
Security Symbol: PLNI
Cusip Number: 727563 10 8
Common Stock:
Authorized – 13,500,000,000
Outstanding – 4,977,740,339
Preferred Stock: 6,000,000,000 Authorized and 1,000,000 issued
Item (v): The par or stated value of the security.
$0.001
Item (vi): The number of shares or total amount of the securities outstanding for
each class of securities outstanding and a list of securities offerings and shares
issued for services in the past two years.
As of the date of this filing (June 16, 2006) there are common shares and preferred shares issued for Plasticon
(PLNI). There has never been a securities offering of PLNI shares. The listed companies are the only companies to receive
compensation for IR/PR. * Big Apple Consulting: 44,006,805 * Equity Link 330,000,000
i. Period End Date 6/16/2006
ii. Total number of shares of stock the corporation shall be authorized to issue is: 13,500,000,000 shares of common stock and
6,000,000,000 shares of preferred stock.
iii Total amount of the securities outstanding 4,977,740,339 common shares and 1,000,000 preferred shares.
iv. Freely tradable shares: Public float 2,804,576,805
v. Total Number of Shareholders: 10,079
The name and address of the transfer agent.
First American Stock Transfer, Inc.
706 East Bell Road, Suite 202
I see no change in outstanding shares.
Are you talking about the Preferred B that was issued to JT? If not, please explain so I can review what I must have missed.
Thanks.
Just my thoughts:
As of April of 2006, according to the 10K filed with the SEC, there was no additional dilution. I felt that PLNI had done an exemplary job of getting through a large production ramp-up (according to their quarter one sales as released in the unaudited 1st quarter statements)without additional dilution.
IF there is additional dilution, it will have to wait until the next quarter's information is released but I can find no filing with the SEC that says they are issueing more stock.
As to what they sell, their literature is available. All you have to do is request it from the company.
Having been in the corporate world for over 30 years with several companies of varying size, I have yet to see any company release their customer list, how much they sell to each customer and to whom they sell it. That is usually proprietary information. Large companies who have very large clients may list their top few customers and I believe that PLNI has done that by their agreement to use primarily one distributor.
The validation of the purchases were made by the April 2006 filing to the SEC where PLNI stated that both Pro-Mold and Semco were both "wholly owned subsidiaries".
Let me know if I've missed something here in my thoughts and opinions.
Have a nice day.
Madlithuanian, see rrm's post #13394 and click on the URL.
About pro-Mold and Semco:
http://searchwww.sec.gov/EDGARFSClient/jsp/EDGAR_MainAccess.jsp
As filed with the SEC 5-4-2006
EVENTS SUBSEQUENT TO THE YEAR ENDED 2004:
On December 5, 2005, the Company entered into an agreement to purchase ProMold, a Missouri corporation, for a purchase price of $3,500,000. The terms of the agreement included a cash payment of $2,500,000 with the balance $1,000,000 in the form of a 7% promissory note, with a five year term, which was secured by the assets purchased by the Company.
The acquisition of Pro Mold, Inc., allows the Company, for the first time in its history to completely control the manufacturing process from procurement of the resins to production of the end user product.
On January 15, 2006 the Company purchased the controlling shares of Semco Distribution, Inc., a Nevada corporation and Ultimate Surface LLC, a Nevada limited liability Company. The purchase was for a total sum of $2,750,000 payable as follows; $100,000 deposit, $550,000 upon completion of escrow, shares of restricted common stock with a valuation of $100,000 and $2,000,000 to be paid as cash performance payments based upon certain funding requirements.
SEMCO was an attractive acquisition for the Company, because its proprietary coating products will work synergistically with the Company’s rebar support products. SEMCO’s products waterproof any surface they are being applied to and specifically would be applicable to DOT projects, such as waterproofing bridge decks and other infrastructure in the United States.
Due to the unique nature of SEMCO’s versatile coating products that chemically cross link to the surface they are being applied to, SEMCO’s surfacing systems allow for multiple applications and distribution in a wide variety of markets.
Both of these entities are now wholly owned subsidiaries of the Company.
FROM UNAUDITED 2004 YEAR END FILED WITH PINK SHEETS 12-31-2005:
3. Pro Mold Acquisition
The December 2005 acquisition of Pro Mold was accounted for as a purchase business combination under the provisions of the FASB’s SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations. The aggregate purchase price of $3,680,000 (including $180,000 of professional fees) was allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on the respective fair values. The Company engaged an independent appraisal to assess the fair value of the property and equipment. The Pro Mold accounts receivable, inventory, accounts payable and accrued expenses and other assets and long term liabilities were estimates of management. Management is still in the process of finalizing the allocation of the purchase price. The Company will include Pro Mold in its operating results starting January 1, 2006.
The following table summarizes the estimated fair values of assets acquired and liabilities assumed at the date of acquisition.
December 31, 2005
Accounts receivable
$ 241,412
Inventory
542,639
Due from related parties
63,477
Other current assets
117,916
Property and equipment
3,580,500
Goodwill
607,223
Bank overdraft
(193,899)
Accounts payable
(309,112)
Lines of credit
(379,413)
Other liabilities
(590,743)
Net assets acquired
$ 3,680,000
Funded by:
Related party funding in 2005 and 2006 (See Note 7)
2,680,000
Long-term debt (See Note 6)
1,000,000
Total
$ 3,680,000
As of December 31, 2005, the Company has approximately $1,100,000 of the purchase price included in accounts payable. The Company received related party financing in first quarter 2006 to make the remaining purchase payments. The related party financing has been converted to a preferred stock commitment.
9
PLASTICON INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Notes to the Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
3. Pro Mold Acquisition, continued
The unaudited pro forma information shown below assumes that the Pro Mold acquisition occurred as of January 1, 2005 and January 1, 2004. This pro forma financial statement information is presented for informational purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of the results of future operations that would have been achieved had the assets been acquired and liabilities been assumed at the beginning of 2004.
Unaudited
December 31, 2005
December 31, 2004
Amount
Amount
Revenues
$3,685,264
$3,015,381
Net loss before beneficial interest (majority shareholder)
(4,002,410)
(1,843,824)
Net loss
(31,669,034)
(73,693,442)
Basic and diluted loss per share
(.01)
(.07)
4. Property and Equipment
Major classes of property and equipment at December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 consist of the following:
December 31, 2005
December 31, 2004
Equipment and molds
$ 4,641,641
$ 1,061,142
Office furniture and equipment
54,923
54,923
4,696,564
1,116,065
Less accumulated depreciation
(650,079)
(597,022)
Net property and equipment
$ 4,046,485
$ 519,043
Depreciation expense totaled $53,058 and $57,176 for the periods ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
In my humble opinion, this is very clear and succinct.
Widowson, I just tried to place another order with TDA and they are not accepting new positions for PLNI at this time.
I had to buy mine from a local broker here in town. Cost me $20.00 but I get certs so I guess the price wasn't that bad.
rrm, I called Semco right after the announcement by PLNI and the guy who answered the phone told me that they were owned at that time by Plasticon.
Sometime back, one of the posters who was ill at the time, visited Pro-Mold and confirmed that PLNI was running the place.
Now I know that this is not able to be validated unless you want to call them yourself but I have never questioned the acquisitions. That's one reason I feel that PLNI is a legitimate start-up small corporation and plans to grow.
Another thing that leads me to believe that PLNI will grow is JT's willingness to sink several million dollars into it to get it started. This "loan" from one of his companies to PLNI is documented in the statements to the financials.
Another indication of the company going forward is quarter one financials. These are also published, whether audited or not, under penalty of law for any publicly held corporation.
Quarter one says a lot about reality. JT got through the first quarter using good business practices when it would have been easier to increase the outstanding common stock. I assume he made longer term agreements with suppliers and stretched his payables and, unofficially, borrowed a couple hundred grand until the nsf check clears. This may seem, to some, to be poor business practice but I have never seen a start-up company that hasn't done some or all of these things. You have to in order to grow unless you have an endless cash supply. You have to use every possible avenue available to you until you establish your customer base, get your cash flow at a reasonable level and build your working capital to the point you can handle the business.
One other thought I had about Semco, which is only a thought, was that perhaps the bonding of the Semco sealer, which I understand bonds at the polymer level, might be used to coat the plastic rebar which, up to now, has been less that acceptable because of it's failure to bond with the concrete and produce the required sheer to make it viable.
Anyway, I'm just blurting my opinions here. I am happy with my buy-in and am ready to fill the million if the PPS moves either way.
Good Trading.
rrm, I see you have a PLNI detractor that has an Ihub birth date of July 9th, '06. You might want to see nootew's other posts for fun.
fynley, yes you did misunderstand my meaning. Pro-Mold is a manufacturing facility and probably has a rate they charge against production to determine the cost of sales. Sales are usually made from the main company. Profit centers are usually considered as that part of the business that reports the sale and costs against the sale, netting a gross margin.
There are variations to this definition depending on the way the company is set up. In ABC costing, each part of a manufacturing facility can become a profit center but although ABC costing is an ideal way to cost products, it's very complex and cumbersome to maintain. Almost no small comapnies even consider the expense of ABC costing.
I don't know how they transfer goods between the entities at PLNI for accounting purposes but, as a general rule, it's probably transferred at cost using some cash flow assumption (FIFI, LIFO, Weighted Average, etc.). Since most companies have no idea of their real costs by product line and many use a simple backflush method and take inventory monthly or quarterly. Beginning inventory plus everything in less ending inventory is cost of goods transferred. Since, I don't believe that Pro-Mold will develop
a set of profit statements for consolidation with PLNI, I would consider it a manufacturing extension of PLNI as if it were located in the same building and simply manufactured goods for PLNI to record as sales.
As an option, Pro-Mold could transfer their production to PLNI at a markup and thus become a profit center. Probably isn't being done because it costs more to maintain records and report it as a seperate entity and consolidate the statements than it would to simply transfer all goods at cost and consolidate the book entries (additional accounting staff at Pro-Mold). Probably wouldn't make sense to incur additional costs in a start up company when no material benefit is gained.
I surely hope that the cost for Pro-Mold to produce the products they manufacture is less expensive than paying someone else's production costs plus their profit plus freight. Thus, additional profit is probably generated because of Pro-Mold even though it's not, by my assumptions, a profit center.
I hope my explanation is clear. If not, I can look up something more for you to read about cost center definitions.
rrm, thanks for the analysis on the Pro-Mold UCC's and filings. You did a lot of work here and I know this all takes time. I don't have time today to go through all of the filings today but I will and, right now, I believe that you are probably right, given your research and explanation.
I have never doubted that PLNI bought Pro-Mold. I have always just taken that as a given from their promise to include them in the financials from 2006 and that the stock sold was for these acquisitions. Vertical integration makes a lot of sense when you are in a semi-experimental green company, or any company that manufactures an affiliated product (staying within your expertise).
I know that Pro-Mold isn't a profit center but the manufacturing COGS is undoubtedly Pro Mold, IMHO. Where else would they be manufacturing and why would anyone go through such a charade when all they would need to do was state that they have a supplier.
I have a good feeling for the long term success of PLNI but I am still going to be in and out of the stock until it becomes a big board player. I will settle this round for .005 which will double my investment and recoup my small loss when the stock dove and I sold at .0056.
I also thank you for your thorough approach to the information you have uncovered. This should help everyone who doubts the integrity of PLNI as a going concern.
Really nice job here!
All just my opinion.
rrm, it looks more to me like pro Mold bought something (probably the new mold) that is financed through 2011 and the trust filed a UCC to protect it's priority claim in case of dissolution. I can see nothing more here than a simple UCC filing. Am I missing something?
Oh yeah, bought half a mil at .0025. Think we might be close to the bottom. Just my opinion.
Hey success, the PPS is about what I said I would buy in at and I bought a few shares at .0025. I think we're close to the bottom but the MM's are still working at .0004 spread. So, I am leaving some room to average down or up slightly.
It looks to me like NITE is still shorting but maybe UBSS has shorted too much. They seem to be increasing their spread like they need to fill lower and need to sell higher.
This is all conjecture and nothing except my intuition to guide me. Just an opinion.
I am also looking forward to the second quarter statements. They should tell us a lot about the direction of PLNI during the heavy construction months. Then, we will need to watch and see if the business is cyclical, which I expect it might be because it deals directly with construction, both in the commercial and DIY markets. That could mean a third quarter lull in sales and possibly into the fourth quarter but most folks should probably expect that and not panic or get too overly excited. That's business, especially construction.
BXC (Bluelinx), PLNI's distributor, has increased in PPS by a dollar since Wednesday. I hope they're selling a lot of PLNI's stuff.
Anyway, you and all the other folks on the board have a great holiday and enjoy your choices of food if you need to make those types of major holiday decisions. Myself, it's a beer (or 2), a hotdog (or 3) and some good old home made 'Tater Salad. Mmmm-Mmm. Tastes good already.
Good luck and good trading to all.
Just a funny buy. Someone bought 700 shares of PLNI at .0025. Probably a partial fill but it does look funny. I could even afford to invest $1.75 if it didn't cost me $10.00 in and out to invest it. LOL
Just a little light humor to brighten an otherwise combatant board.
Smile guys and ladies. It's summer, the weather is mostly nice and life is good. Enjoy the moment. Don't worry, be happy!
If you live in the northeast, the rain will eventually subside and the sun will shine again! (Subliminal message? Maybe.)
UBSS is back on a .0001 spread. That looks good to me!
Oh Oh. Update - back to .0004.
fynley, about all I can say about that at this time is that PLNI seems to be going forward, JT seems to be complying with Pink Sheets and the SEC and I have no idea, that I can say as fact, what he plans to do in the long run.
Speculation is easy. Maybe another acquisition, maybe cash needs, maybe restructuring the common in favor of Preferred (A-see rrm's post) that has no voting power but usually carries a premium payment to the holders as spelled out on the stock (articles). Maybe he just wants to have a backup in case. I could go on but it's all speculation. Anyone's guess would be at least as good as mine.
Hopefully, as the company develops, history won't repeat itself and the financials will become timely. Hopefully, PLNI will become an SEC registered company very soon and then I think that that will happen as a matter of course.
I'm waiting to see what happens in the second quarter. I think that that could be one of the best indicators of future events that we will have in the near future. What happened, happened. What will happen is yet to see. I believe that JT is building a viable corporation. It will never be a Google or Microsoft but it could make a lot of folks some bucks.
The PPS has risen from .0024 to .0035 which is good from all investors prospectives except those who have naked shorted below the current level. I am waiting now to see what the drawback does and if it doesn't flop, I'll buy back in somewhere around .003 or so. Otherwise, .003+.
Good luck and I hope the PPS goes to the MOOOOOOON!!!!
This is all my opinion and should not be relied upon for any investing of any type by anyone other than myself.
rrm, just one note about the SEC, DTCC & Naked Shorting. The fellow failed to mention that the DTCC, with the blessing of the SEC, forgave all of the outstanding naked shorts throough 2005. That was, in my opinion, just plain robbery against the small investor and billions of dollars in-the-pocket for the MM's.
Then, the SEC & DTCC refuse to let anyone know the extent (in dollars) that this had on investors.
That's why I love agency law so well.
Anyway, I also have Sanity Check on my "Favorites" list. I really like the site.
rrm, good post. I have to admit that I really laughed out loud when I read it. Being fairly conversant with basic stock definitions, I never thought that anyone would consider that the rest of the preferred would be convertable at that rate. That is funny.
I had a feeling that the reason for the class B was to maintain a majority ownership of the 13.5MM common in any event and with that share, it would be impossible for any kind of a buyout or take-over unless JT decided to sell his company. As a matter of course, as you already know, for large corporations, majority is usually reached around 28% but in a small company like PLNI, 54%-plus rules.
Anyway, glad you posted this and I hope everyone reads it.
It's still funny to think that anyone would approach this in that manner. LOL!
Good hunting and much success.