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.
He should have done that as a PR, without the tweet first.
Still, if true, awesome. If false, he knows the consequences.
It is known that there are purchases on military bases overseas (Germany, at least), especially of StemIntense.
We've yet to get hard info on any other overseas purchases.
He never said a dividend would happen.
He said it was something being thought about.
That's all.
If you doubt it, go back and check.
CEOs get large numbers of shares all the time. Nothing strange there.
In fact, Nick exchanged his shares for a much smaller number of shares which had extra voting rights, to keep the voting rights the same.
How does that make him look bad?
It doesn't. Just the opposite.
EVERY company is an enrichment vehicle for insiders.
It's just a question of whether they're trying to do so legally, and make it an enrichment vehicle for shareholders, too, or not.
You and I have reached different conclusions on that question.
I did not say they are distributing 2 different types of packaging.
From what I've heard, they were distributing one, then switched to another. That kind of thing happens all the time in retail. Nothing unusual about that.
Let's set the record straight:
You'd be more believable if you said 4 year old product, since that's how long ago they stopped producing before last fall's restart.
Of course, those here who have ordered the product and used it know better than to believe that any of it is old inventory.
By the way, the doctor who got the beat-down was making a claim that it reduced sleep apnea, which was beyond what Snorenz is allowed to claim. It can only claim to reduce the volume of snoring. This does not mean the product is not legit. It's legit as long as it's only claiming to reduce snoring volume.
I agree that the website is crappy and I'm eagerly and impatiently awaiting the improved one.
Thanks for checking into that yesterday.
I think I understand the "sell by Amazon" difference better now.
I agree with you that it wouldn't be the best course of action.
It wouldn't be the way I would do things.
But different people reason differently. All I meant was that, when trying to figure out possible reasons for the delay, it's good to think out of the box, and come up with possibilities like this which might make sense to some people even if it doesn't make sense to most of us.
I agree with you. The Amazon PR is more significant than a lot of people seem to realize. All those calling this PR desperate or sad probably just don't understand the significance of it.
Don't get me wrong. It's not earth shattering news, but it's solid, very good news. Definitely worth a PR for this kind of company.
The first part of your statement is correct.
It's not MDIN's patent. It's Celprogen's. MDIN has exclusive license. This is not new news. This is how it was announced from the beginning.
The second part of your statement is the opposite of what I've heard. I heard that there was definite interest by others in the patent. Could you let us know where you heard that nobody else was interested?
MDIN's products are very different from homeopathy.
Homeopathy uses highly diluted substances. As per Wikipedia: "is a system of alternative medicine originated in 1796 by Samuel Hahnemann, based on his doctrine of similia similibus curentur ("like cures like"), according to which a substance that causes the symptoms of a disease in healthy people will cure similar symptoms in sick people"
This is nothing close to MDIN's products.
It's a patent, not an application.
http://www.celprogen.com/image/data/Patent.pdf
I've posted this before, just this Monday:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=89942283
Just because someone posts information about the application doesn't mean they never got the patent. I hope most people reading this do some investigation before jumping to conclusions based on things posted on message boards.
Wondering if you're asking only about revenue when you ask this:
Conjecture, I agree. Comical, I do not agree.
I think it's a good possibility to consider.
Love the Egyptian prince reference!
You're right, as long as it's selling, we shouldn't worry much about how.
And what evidence do you have that that's what will happen?
What kind of verification do you need for the patent?
We know it exists. Is that what you're questioning?
We know the deal is real. If it weren't, there would have been all kinds of chaos when they announced it in the PR.
So what verification are you looking for?
Don't expect frequent updates on the lactose intolerance product. It takes some time to develop a new product. There are lots of details to be dealt with.
Most people want Nick waiting until things are a "done deal" before communicating. So, why wouldn't you want the same for the lactose patent product?
I have no idea what press release you're talking about.
90% of the reported sales for that previous quarter were distribution agreements.
Only about 500k were actual sales, which is only a modest increase from the 900k in annual sales in 2004.
Sales after 2004 increased as they made a big international push with great success.
I don't have the actual numbers handy, but some PRs from that time show that sales had indeed gone up worldwide.
So the 500k of non-distributor revenue may have been fairly even with how sales were at the peak.
Also keep in mind that there may have been some pent-up demand with the product being off the market for a couple years, so an initial burst of buying, especially to stock up the distributors, would not be surprising.
Now, wouldn't sales drop off after that first quarter? I expect so, except that there wasn't much international sales in that quarter (ending March) and StemIntense was still relatively unknown, and HealthEnrich wasn't even out yet. So the quarter ended June should see a lot less revenue from Snorenz in the USA, and more from those other products, and internationally, to pick up the slack.
I agree that chill removal is important to investors like US:
That statement said they sold over $300k at Walmart and over $140k at Walgreens way back in 2004, when the product was not as widely known. They implied that overall revenues were about $900k, and that was before their major international expansion, where they met with great success, and where copycat products continue to thrive.
I suppose it's a matter of interpretation as to whether that means the product sells or not.
Yes, look back at that last big run in late February, everyone.
It was preceded by a month in the .002s, followed by a quick dip of a few days into the upper teens, then the big runup to a penny.
Seems like we're having the exact same pattern now.
You are confusing insider buying with company share buybacks.
They are two completely different things.
Were you talking about the quarter that just ended in June when you said this?
Not sure when we'll see that run, but it'll come sooner or later.
Speaking of financials, I have finally finished my Q2 revenue projection, based on analysis of Alexa data for the quarter just ended, compared to previous quarters.
I've compared 3-month Alexa rank, reach and pageview % over the last 5 quarters, mapping them to revenue trends for the websites, to come up with these projections for Q2 revenues, AFTER returns and refunds:
OnlyLeggings: $390k (up > 10% from Q2 2012)
World Of Leggings: $180k (up 135% from Q2 2012)
With some adjustments for other revenue streams, this brings us to:
Overall revenue: $840k, up 24% from Q2 2012
For the upcoming (July-September) Q3, I believe revenue will be even higher, around $900k.
This bucks the trend from last year where Q3 was a little lower than Q2.
The main reason is that I expect VivaVuva to contribute about $100k, more than offsetting the loss of about 50k revenue from the closing of Robertson.
This is based mostly on a comparison to WOL's first quarter (Q2 2012), where it did $76,670 with a rank of 320k and reach of .00028%, whereas VV projects to rank closer to 200k with a reach close to .00040% by the end of September.
I still expect Q4 to go over $2 million, bringing the year's total to about $5 million.
SIGN #5 (of 5) that MDIN is NOT likely a scam:
This is the strongest, most reassuring reason.
The lactose intolerance patent. Think about things from the perspective of Celprogen, and Kenneth Manzo.
First, this shows the patent is real:
http://www.celprogen.com/image/data/Patent.pdf
and that Celprogen obtained it last fall:
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120926006325/en/Celprogen-Obtained-Patent-US8236297B2-Method-Treating-Lactose
Then, this shows that MDIN got the exclusive license to use it:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/northstar-acquires-a-new-and-exciting-patent-license-in-a-multi-billion-dollar-industry-209327661.html
If the patent deal never happened, or if the terms of it weren't accurate, wouldn't Celprogen have responded to this PR by now, setting it straight? Given the terms of the PR, they'll have to declare themselves as major shareholders in MDIN, so if it's not true, they'll be very vocal about it.
So the patent license deal is real, and probably worth a lot, maybe enough to make MDIN a target of acquisition.
Now, HERE'S THE CLINCHER!
Again, think from the perspective of Celprogen and Kenneth Manzo.
If they thought MDIN's products/business might be a scam, wouldn't they have insisted on cash for this deal, instead of insisting on shares in the company, as they did?
Since they sold the rights for just shares, don't you think that during negotiatinos, they insisted on access to a firsthand, direct look at the company's operations and sales, etc., so they could be sure it was all legit and worth something, before agreeing to the deal?
Don't you think that Celprogen & Ken Manzo feel 100% sure that MDIN is legit, and not a scam?
These guys are smart and informed, so if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me!
SIGN #4 (of 5) that MDIN is NOT likely a scam:
This is a medium strength reason. The PR about selling Snorenz on Walgreens.com and Drugstore.com not being refuted by either of them. This means it's a pretty sure thing that Walgreens.com and Drugstore.com WILL be selling Snorenz online.
SIGN #3 (of 5) that MDIN is NOT likely a scam:
Response to delays. This is the WEAKEST of the 5 signs, but worth mentioning, since it at least offers some evidence and reasoning, which puts it ahead of a lot of (but not all of) the arguments against the company recently.
A big red flag has been delays in several things that would give us "proof".
The good signs: Rather than being silent on the matter or giving vague excuses, the CEO has been vocal and specific with his reasons for the delays. Again, this is not a strong positive signal. It's just that I would expect someone who's covering up the truth to communicate more vaguely, and not as much.
Also, much of the perception that the delays are bad is because their schedule has been aggressive and optimistic from the start. These are not bad qualities for a CEO to have, but they can lead to overly optimistic statements on likely timeframes, which can cause disappointment.
Still, do the delays cause me concern? Yes. I want to see those milestones achieved, and soon. If they aren't, the red flag becomes more negative, but it's not there yet.
Continuing the series...
SIGN #2 (of 5) that MDIN is NOT likely a scam:
Longs here have also posted great experiences with customer support. As BJames mentioned recently, you don't get great customer support without some investment of time and money, the kind of investment that a scam would not make.
.