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.
We do know the amount of issued shares has gone up recently but not enough to account for a $ 100 million gross as that would exceed the amount of the authorized capital.
Yes, BGMO has stated that the arrangements have been concluded. That does not imply that the cash is in the bank.
Take an anology of selling your house.
You list it and eventually some one makes an offer. The sign back of the offer is the deal. It is not "closed" from a legal sense nor is there cash in the bank. Barring any hiccups with inspections, financing and zoning, the deal does eventually close. This can be a few months for most homeowners.
When BGMO has stated the arrangements have been completed, I take this to mean the same thing as the acceptance of the offer to sell my house. Not closed nor money in the bank.
Has BGMO actually stated it has all of the cash sitting in an account? If so, please quote it.
Has anyone contacted the target companies to see if they have any deposits from BGMO?
Without sounding like a doubting Thomas...
what third party evidence do any of the BGMO posters possess which proves that there is money in the bank acoount?
A line of credit, according to my banker, is a debt not an asset. It is not cash either.
If there is actual cash in the bank, does anyone know if any of it has been forwarded to the target companies? If so, which ones?
Given the summer months...
You should not hear anything from Mr. Herzog for two weeks.
The bankers in London are on vacation so will run a little light staffed. If you are in Dubai or Delhi, it has to been sweltering hot to work so things slow down.
It is not what people want to hear but that could be reality.
I am not a CA or a CPA but
The revised financial statements still make no sense to me.
I asked my kid who is a beancounter to look at the reports.
The balance sheet does not indicate that it is consolidated.
My kid says there should have been something listed in the assets for the other companies but they do not appear at all. There should have been some kind of hard assets or even goodwill but nothing.
The income statement shows that it is consolidated. My kid said something about minority interests (whatever that is) should appear if the other companies are not 100% owned.
The "kid" as I like to call him wrote something for me. Maybe readers can help me interpret it. "Income and expenses for acquired companies are consolidated from the dates acquired and not for the reporting period of the controlling shareholder".
I would think that if something was acquired there would have been something in the press.
I am going to ponder this while having a Moose - Moosehead for the non-Canadians.
With respect, when a stock analyst quotes assets per share, it is usually done on the basis of net assets per share.
If you assume the total asset values are real, then, you need to back out all of the liabilities. That would bring the total down to about 1.10.
So where did the big increase in the paid in capital come in without issuing shares?
Or, did BGMO issue a few million shares at $ 20 each?
Clearly, the alleged statements are posted without the knowledge or permission of BGMO or they are intentionally or criminally misleading if approved by BGMO. Mr. Herzog should pull the statements.
I would agree that a businessman with the experience that Mr. Herzog displays on the BGMO web site having been in business for himself and working at a senior level for others, it is clear that the statements are midleading. I would suggest that either the poster of the information is trying to short the stock either harming the company's reputation or as a way to buy back the stock for a song.
Fairy tales can happen to you...
In going through the alleged Bergamo numbers, I am amazed by the cavelier preparation of the financial statements.
A few things stand out as being highly questionable even to the untrained eye, for example;
- The statements do not indicate that the values are rounded to the nearest thousand yet the preparer uses values that round to the nearest thousand
- Usually, accounts receivable is to record items sold but not yet collected. Since no sales were reported on the income statement for the current period, there shouldn't be any accounts receivables.
- If the item in the acocunts receivable was to represent the investment receivable, then, it should be recorded as such.
- Oh, by the way, it wasn't collected by the end of June! Hopefully, they have done so by now.
- As for the liabilities, payables to shareholders should be disclosed as for the purpose.
- If there are 84+ million shares outstanding, the par value should be something line 84,xxx and not an even number
- No retained earnings? With all of the travel costs and fees that Bergamo has paid, the number should be negative but not a ZERO.
- US GAAP says that an income statement is for a specific period behind the date of the statement not a year and a half into the future.
- My guess is the the income statement should show no income and about $ 5.5 million in costs being the amount due to shareholders and the bank fees.
- A future focused projection is not an income statement. It is only a crystal ball!
- Now, I do not know about you but does it seem strange that with all of the prospective acquisition targets that the projected revenues totals exactly $ 2B. You would think that each component would have had their own projections when Bergamo came shopping. So, what is the probability that it totals exactly $ 2B and all of the other costs being a multiple of 10% of the top line.
Some very wishful thinking on the statements I might add.
GreenSafe also made other changes.
Check out the expanded biographies for the management group and the Links page.
"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts.
This quote from William Shakespeare is quit fitting when I read the comments on this and other blog sites.
Hillard Herzog may have...
Gone to the UK early last week
Gone to the US on Thursday
Gone to the UK and is back!
Why not add, he never left in the first place!
My grandkids once saw a re-run of a golden oldie PBS show "Where In the World Is Carmen San Diego?". Just change the fleeing character to a businessman and the show could be just as entertaining.
Seriously, the CEO of a business must be able to conduct "business" which at times means that everything must be kept quiet until the final result can be announced. Many on this site feel that they are "entitled" to a miniute by minute accounting of what Mr. Herzog has done or not done.
Mr. Herzog by law is accountable to the shareholders and has a moral and fudiciary responsibility to report what is going on. Grant it, what has been reported to date has material gaps especially when he shifts gears midstream changing funding sources and not explaining why the old ones were dropped.
I guess he has one last chance to get it right.
I forgot on possibility; maybe, he has skipped town and never coming back!
You should check your facts!!!
On March 31st, GS reported that they ordered the equipment for the first plant. A month later, they exercised an option on two more plants.
It was reported on the GS website that the funding was being coordinated by the equipment supplier. My read of this suggests that GS found funds outside of BGMO for the equipment.
On April 1st, GS announced that they were not going to build at Caraquet, NB as they were caught between two conflicted levels of government.
From the reading that I have done, the plant is less risky than an automotive garage that does air conditioning repairs. I also read that they have been actively chased by smaller towns on both sides of the border to put in plants.
Personally, I do not think they are desperate for $$$ as you suggest.
Canada has a clone of the Patriot Act
It is called Fintrac - ask any Canadian bank, trust of investment dealer and they can tell you loads about it.
As for the revenue size of Adelmann, you can check out the following trade site:
http://www.environmental-expert.com/stse_resulteach.aspx?cid=19652
If they have been in business for 30 years and have done say 2 fridge plants per year and GreenSafe says the cost of two plants is 46 million, by the time you add the other product lines, I can see 100 with no problem.
With vendor coordinated financing, I would concur that 50 mill is not needed. I suspect it could be trade financing like buying a car. The salesman sells the car to you but the local bank provides the funds. The dealership gets a cut of the deal but does not provide the $$$. This is much bigger deal though.
If they got 80% financing, they may only need $ 10 mill. Who knows. With their own money on the table, perhaps GS may only need a few million. Again, who knows.
As for the matter of the groundbreaking, they obviously got permission somewhere to do it otherwise why the exposure to the added risk? I wouldn't do it. I do not think you would either. I have seen nothing in the regional press on who gave permission and I do not think that would have been reported anyway.
The weather was mild enough to do the footings down home. Everything considered, it appears as though the timing was still okay for a partial start of the plant.
As for the cheque, it was a valid cheque in Canada as the original pictures taken of the day had the bank encoding.
The physical size of the "cheque" does not mean anything to banks here. There have been some done on tree bark a few years back and the banks accepted it as long as all of the bank codes are on it.
The real question in my mind would be "did BGMO say they had the money and GS based on the evidence reasonably believed them and arranged the event"? Was it an honest arrangement that went sideways? From what I see in the blogs, the Patriot Act threw HH for a two month penalty. I would say it was a series of unplanned events. Many of the current comments on this site seem to suggest money is very close at hand. If true, then BGMO will have a winner in GS. If not, GS may be able to get the last few dollars needed to build the first plant.
My musings from an interested Haligonian.
Again, with deferrence, you should consider the following:
Adlemann Umwelt has been in business for over 30 years. They have approximately 170 employees and according to one source over 100 million Euro in annual sales. Google Maps shows a large building of a minimum of 100,000 square feet. According to their website, They have built over 55 refrigeration processing plants.
So, would you consider Adelmann small?
As for the issue of the land at Caraquet, NB, the company and the Town were very clear on the matter. The French language media reported that the Town provided industrial land to the Company. Everyone agreed that the land was properly zoned except a provincial government employee who said it was a wetland. Even though GS said they have left town, the local government is getting the issue resolved for the the entire area. The dispute is between governments said a Radio Canada report.
I do not see how that was a company "screw up" as you call it. They were trapped in a feud between elected officials.
I have done my own digging and from what I can find, the process makes sense and it has already been done for some time. What appears different than the trade is the supply of goods. To me, they would not disclose everything (if ever) of who they have deals with or not. I suppose the GS people in their meetings with governments and retailers probably figured out that it makes more sense to grab everything they can than just a limited product segment.
A very long time ago, I was in retail. If someone said they could take away everything for disposal rather than part, it would have made my bosses life much easier.
I read that ARCA is doing something similar in PA using GE as a partner with a broader mix than what they are used to.
So, does a broader range of products using newer equipment sound out of line, I do not think so otherwise why would ARCA do it?
The only question is what has GS lined up in volumes. They do not need to tell any one. My guess is that if they ordered the equipment and got a banker somewhere to put up the money, the bank must have done some DD to grant the credit. So, there must be some "proof" of used goods committed to the plants. What, I do not know. Maybe a subcontract for someone else?
With respect, since GreenSafe has not published its financial statements, projections or business plan, how can you responsibly make statements regarding the break even point or revenues?
They have no responsibility to disclose the data and other than one earlier reference to income per hour, how can you justify such allegations.
How do you know what agreements, if any, GreenSafe has or does need to secure volumes?
From what I see in on the GS website, it appears as they have a materially different business model that the tradtional "bashers" and jobbers. Doesn't it stand to reason that if you ask a tradionalist about something innovative that they have no factual point of reference?
I would assume that GreenSafe has done their homework given the fact that they have ordered the equipment for three plants and have financed them. They had to do some due diligence to the bankers (not BGMO) somewhere along the line.
HH has had a history of issuing PR's that say one thing but when a few months pass by, a new PR comes out and the story changes.
Some people treat this negatively and rightfully so.
However, company management can change what they do if they have a better strategy or a lower cost. That is why they call it "management". In hindsight, HH should have either not said anything in the first place or perhaps told people "I have a better method". At least people could follow the story.
I suspect that HH will likely hold back until he has a solid story that can be reported. One poster said it will be real when the recipient companies see the bucks like Suntrough. That would be for me the "proof of funds".
A Pinkie does not need to report squat. However, Pink Sheet companies can behave like a Blue Chip without the Blue Chip costs if they do their job right. For my two cents worth, or should I now say 10 cents worth, I would save a few bucks for BGMO shareholders and behave like a Blue Chip rather than paying for Blue bragging rights by moving to a higher board.
Why focus on moving to a higher board?
A good company being fully transparent to its shareholders and the investment community needs only to do a number of things:
- hold annual shareholders meetings
- issue audited annual statements
- issue interim statements in a timely manner
- report material changes in an unbiased manner
This could have been done over a year ago without the frustration and angst. If this was done voluntarily, it would control the costs to do so. One does not need to move to a higher board but only behave as though one is one a higher Board. It saves a lot of time and cost.
I marvel how the US permits Pink Sheet companies without regulation. In Halifax, NS, every issuer must file a prospectus and issue financial statements regardless of size.
Some will argue that going to a higher Board will raise the price and get greater investor appeal. I would challenge the point by saying that effective PR and behaving as though the business is a public company would achieve the same results. Invetsors with all of their search tools would find the winner regardless of the market.
Any whiff of money yet?
From what the Telegraph reported about two weeks ago, GreenSafe was given the land in October 2009. They were also given a 5 year tax holiday on the land. If it is anything like what I have seen people pay around here, that is worth between a million or two. Not chump change.
Seems that a provincial employee said the land was a wetland. the newsaper reported that a government person said "nothing will be built over his dead body". It goes further by saying that the entire park is a wetland. The Town and the Company said that it is not a wetland. Looking at the photo on the BGMO website, it seems level and clear to me.
One story says, and I am trying to use my little French from school, the locals are not happy with the big city folks telling Caraquet where to build. There is also a story of the local business groups getting together to work something out.
Since there is an election coming in NB in September, my guess is that the Province will try to fix the deal fast. A little common sense is what is needed. GreenSafe said in one news section item that they will need to look elsewhere for a site for commerical reason. Makes sense to me.
My guess is that they will build the second plant first and the first plant second if you catch my drift. That is what they said would happen.
Seems rather dry so far this month.
A very good question
My guess is that the stock could rise rather quickly but likely short of its true value. There are a lot of big unknowns such as:
- how many shares are o/s now and after the deal closes
- what is the nature of each deal
- what do the consolidated pro-forma statements look like
If I said that the group of companies brought in $ 200 million after three years, discount that to about $ 75 million now. Back out the minority interests (if any). So, if we say, the net is about $ 60 million, then, multiply the remainder by 2 or 3 for P/E of a pinkie.
The wild card is what debt and options are o/s when the deal gets done.
In the absence of any proven info, paying more than a dollar per stock is very high risk.
Now, add transparency in the deal details and financials and move to a higher exchange, then, the P/E rises.
The local environmentalists are in favour
of the plant according to a paper out of Moncton. It is the provincal environment department that is making it a problem.
Yes, we have zoning regs out the whazoo! If I want to extend my deck, I need a permit. Get too close to the next door neighbour and I need to get a zoning change.
If you read the press (not what the Company says) you learn...
That the issue with the land is between two different groups of politicans and not the company. Seems reasonable to me. If it were not so, why does the local press have countless stories the locals banding together.
You obviously have not been to New Brunswick or know anything of the local law. You can only build an industrial building on industrial land. You just can't plop it down in a farmers field. Even in Nova Scotia, you can't do that.
As for the cheque, did you take a look at the pictures on the GS site. Not the Bergamo site. See the bank code numbers on it? It is a real cheque. Canadian bankers would take it in. And it is not even staledated yet either!
Read the news release...
Seems to suggest that they will but the plant elsewhere. As long as they get up and running soon, I guess it wouldn't matter to a BGMO owner now would it?
CBC Radio Canada on the 12 Noon News
GreenSafe defers Caraquet plant
I was eating my lunch when my friend called saying he heard on the radio that the plant in Caraquet, NB was being deferred.
The radio story said "maybe in a year or two".
I went to the GS web and they used the word "indefinite".
It also went on saying about building in two other places.
While the thought of selling share at over a buck per share to cover future bills would have made sense, look at the pattern of press releases and actions.
Nothing was done on the collection account until they came collecting! At that time, the price was a dime. Could have been done earlier but why not? Maybe, HH thought the matter would go away?
The funding arrangements now being concluded were well after the price was off the top. I do not think HH knew of this funding possibility through eSoft in August to take advantage of selling near the highs.
My hunch is
Paying the bills.
HH is trying to raise $ 25 mill for which he will need to pay fees to someone. At 1%, that is $ 250k. Add on top his now resolved legal bill and his travel cost, we could be looking at over $ 400k in total. At 10 cents per share, that would mean 4 million shares to be sold to cover the bills. Spread that over about 5 to 10 trading sessions and it does make some sense.
Just a wild guess...
I suspect people will wager a bet on a PR coming out on Monday by buying by the close of business Friday.
On Monday, people will get disappointed and the stock trends down.
It's a crap shoot...
12 cents
I correct the last statement.
The Msg was 5688 rather than 5685.
Check out my prediction on Msg 5685
I suggested 6 cents by Tuesday. I was off by half a stinkin penny.
I would expect that Wolfe gets paid directly by GreenSafe on a percentage of what capital they raise from Bergamo. Unless some one knows something, Wolfe does not get paid by HH. that does make him impartial, or, if not, more impartial than me and the other people on this blog.
In reading the local paper, the issue with GreenSafe is not the permit but a disagreement between the town and the province over the zoning. I would think that this issue will go away very soon.
The money finding industry is based on relationships. Many players in the area do not have a web presence.
I think the proveious postings are quite clear that Wolfe is third party money finding man being paid by GreenSafe.
I came across a person who was at the ground breaking in December 2009.
Hal Wolfe is the principal of a firm called Blue Light Capital Partners. He was retained by GreenSafe to locate the necessary capital to build two or perhaps three plants. A number of firms were interested in the GreenSafe process. HH came up with the best offer.
I also read that they are looking at a plant in Manitoba as well.
Another delay?
I guess the following dealy will take it to April 1st - April Fool's Day. But who is the fool? The one who bought in at 30 cnets and it goes to pennies or the one who bought in at 9 cents and sees it go to $ 1.10?
I guess the stock will either sell off in volumes or remain so quiet that nobody will care
I say 6 cents by Tuesday.
the best thing that can happen is when HH announces the money has been received and sent to the various investments.
I believe my post stated a possible inducement to eSoft and not a share sales equal to the capital invested. A couple million shares could do that either to them or perhpas as a finders fee?
A previous post stated the following:
Pursuant to a telephone request this morning, please accept this email as confirmation that the current issued and outstanding for Bergamo Acquisition Corp. is 72,218,185 shares.
If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Best regards,
Tiffany Erickson
Stock Transfer Department
Nevada Agency and Transfer Company
50 West Liberty Street, Suite 880
Reno NV 89501
Tel: 775-322-0626
Fax: 775-322-5623
Since the previous reporting was for about 10 million shares less, I would think that 10 million shares increas in the issued shares were either part of an inducement to Esoft for funding or used to raise funds to finance the fees payable to banks and government agencies. Also, HH's around the world trip does not come cheap.
The real question is if the added 10 million shares were stayed in "safe" hands or were widely distributed to the market.
A call option is the right to buy a specific amount of stock at a specific price for a period of time typically not exceeding 5 years formt he date of issue.
Unless the option was going to expire yesterday, the option would still be good next week.
You do not need to exercise an option today to ensure that youc cpature the big anticipated rise. if the strike price says you can buy at a dime, you still buy it at a dime regardless of the future price.
The only arms length reason that a person would exercise an option yesterday at these prices is that the strike price was lower so that they can lock in a gain should something not happen or get delayed again.
Now, as for a non arms legnth transaction, that is a different question and highly speculative at best.