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.
For clarification when you say "they" who are you talking about? Please be specific by name
Your posts are past the stale date. The public had ample opportunity to invest in SLTD at discounted share price with protection. Both you and Sandridge didn't even know this nor did you know when you were saying that insiders where dumping that pearl had already sold. Give it up
I think one of the major problems with your theory is you seem to be completely unaware that SLTD was also offering on their website a discounted share purchase program with the following terms and features AND you didn't have to be friend or family to get this deal.
1. As an example when I looked at the offer there was a substantial discounted price of $0.025 per share when the stock closed at $0.05.
2. Minimum 1 year holding period before the shares could be sold in the open market.
3. Minimum investment amount was $5,000 and the maximum was $250,000.
4. 1 year price protection. If the company sells stock to other investors over the next 12 months at a price lower price, you will receive additional shares to compensate for the lower price.
Stale
Your posts have long since past the stale date
You have completely misrepresented the employment contract. California is an "at will" employment state. There is absolutely nothing that ties him up here. He can leave at any time and be let go at any time with or without cause. The non compete clause is surprisingly short.
Can you explain to me how going forward JN is enriched by your theory? If the stock price drops based on "toxic financing" all of his current options will expire out of the money. If the company meets the net income targets, the incentives are awarded and the stock goes down due to further "toxic financing" how much is he really going to benefit?
Tie it to diluted EPS would be best.
I happen to know real estate and your picture doesn't begin to show the size. I also happen to know people that work for non profit that influences energy policy and they have assessed for example hypersolar's invention and these are real people trying to make a difference in the world.
I'm sure RV-Pllot will thank you for your analysis and his large losses in SUNW when he reflects on the 2016 results and the true value of the company at that time
Not a tiny office at all you continue to make misleading statements. The office complex was actually a very large Ice skating rink built in the 70s and converted to professional space. It's the largest office complex in that area. Also the constant accusations of guilt by supposed accusation by virtue of proximity is tiresome
Old news and addressed adequately by Jim Nelson. The owners of Sunworks that sold their company for cash and convertible debt have a right to sell some of their holdings and were prudent from a diversification standpoint to do so. Abe is still one of the largest shareholders. The negative dialog around why insiders were selling was heavily promoted by you then as well as now and you were completely wrong about Pearl. Stock went significantly up after they sold out and you were not even aware they sold.
You really need to read this
"JPMORGAN CHASE WHALE TRADES: A CASE HISTORY OF DERIVATIVES RISKS AND ABUSES"
MAJORITY AND MINORITY STAFF REPORT
PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
RELEASED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS MARCH 15, 2013 HEARING
I guess you didn't read the part about government findings. lack of transparency and 6 billion dollar losses.
Let's think about your insider open market purchase theory a little bit by way of comparison - Jamie Dimon makes $30 million per year and was recently lauded for investing $27 million of his own money to show insider faith in JPM. Problem is it looks more like an insurance policy premium to save his annual $30 million in compensation into perpetuity. By the way, a US Senate report published in March 2013 after 9 months of investigation indicated that Dimon misled investors and regulators in as losses rose dangerously to $6.2 billion on a “monstrous” derivatives bet made by the "London Whale"
Sure is nice to keep your $30 million in annual compensation partly due to proping up the stock by showing his support with a $27 million investment. Sounds like a good bet to me particularly when guys like you indicate buying shares of your company its essential to show belief in the company.
Funny, the toxic dilution was nothing as you described either
So let me see here...
1. JPM Chase evaluates SUNW and grants them a credit facility of $2.5 million
2. JPM Chase's credit department is oblivious and isn't smart enough to recognize the risks associated with SUNW (Sarcasm)
2.Nazulya said (and I'm paraphrasing and remember he is your disciple now) SUNW is such a lousy company they couldn't get revolving credit after they already had secured it (Sarcasm)
3. If you have ever run a business or applied for a credit facility you would know that there are debt covenants and financial performance metrics that are taken extremely seriously by a bank particularly in a new company or new relationship
4. When you draw on the credit facility the bank will ask you questions about the use and the time frame for repaying it.
5. When you borrow money from a bank even on a short term basis you record an asset and a liability. How is this transaction misleading anyone? Their are several good textbooks that teach Fundamental Accounting Principles - (Sarcasm)
IMO My point was everyone following this stock since before the up-listing is aware of the stated use of the capital raise. However without that capital raise they wouldn't have been able to up-list and using the capital for its stated use is not misleading. Fact: net proceeds from capital raise = $11,579 million and Cash and Cash Equivalents at year end $12,040 Million. Hmmm... Let me think about how misleading that is
Borrowing $1.8 million on a short term line of credit for business purposes is part of the conspiracy. Hmmm, didn't you just point out the capital raise was for acquisitions
Didn't Cavuto say it was a good business model also?
Wouldn't be the best use of cash at this point. Did you forget you are "warning" everyone of "toxic financing" and continuing dilution from the growth by acquisition strategy.
The use of capital markets was needed for uplisting to NASDAQ. If you read the annual report you'll find Sunworks's cash flow statement indicates that the company ended the fiscal year with a net positive $1.3 million in cash flow from operations. Free cash flow increased by 310.4% from the previous year to $1.0 million.
So who's lying now?
problem is with 164 solar manufacturing facilities worldwide and even more excess capacity, the price pressure so severe that even a cell like SLTD's is not an economic game changer at this point hence the shift to installation.
Here is why you are wrong. Another poster already explained to you that a high percentage of patents are initially rejected. This is a fact. One of the primary purposes of the patent process is to evaluate the submission against other patents. You want us to believe that "inventors" are aware of all patents that may cause their invention to not be patentable. Seriously??.
Fact - in the 5 years SLTD was promoting the cell business, the economics changed over time and the pricing pressure on panels combined with the large number of manufacturers makes it so the panels now are not where the money is. Does that make Nelson dishonest? Only according to you and the other conspiracy theorists that claim to be looking out for the retail shareholders and profiting from it at the same time. The fact that he recognized consolidation of installation companies is where the advantage is and that an improved cell whether patentable or not patentable may be an advantage at a later time just makes him smart not dishonest.
Fact - the financial fundamentals of SUNW have improved dramatically under Nelson's leadership.
I thought this might be important for you to read as an alternative non-consipircy theory reason why the cell isn't being manufacutured - Below are some exceprts from the annual report of one of the most successfull worldwide solar manufacturers... emphasis on declining prices and excess capacity with declining average selling prices over time. Long story short panel pricing is low enough that the profit is in the installation and excellent customer service makes the difference.
"The solar industry continues to be characterized by intense pricing competition, both at the module and system levels. In the aggregate, we believe manufacturers of solar modules and cells have, relative to global demand, significant installed production capacity and the ability for additional capacity expansion. We believe the solar industry may from time to time experience periods of structural imbalance between supply and demand (i.e., where production capacity exceeds global demand), and that such periods will put pressure on pricing."
"Worldwide solar markets continue to develop, in part aided by demand elasticity resulting from declining industry average selling prices, both at the module and system level, which make solar power more affordable to new markets."
"Lower industry module and system pricing, while currently challenging for certain solar manufacturers (particularly manufacturers with high cost structures), is expected to continue to contribute to global market diversification and volume elasticity. Over time, declining average selling prices are consistent with the erosion of one of the primary historical constraints to widespread solar market penetration, its affordability."
This is the best post I've read on this site
How did the gross margin improve so much in the 4th quarter and for the year reported 2015?
I invested for the cell. I also invested in a company that had very little chance of being successful. From that standpoint it wasn't an investment it was a gamble. I don't feel misled at all and I don't agree with Sandridge's analysis regarding the financing of the acquisition. If you gambled on the cell and you are truly in at the average share price you have stated in the past, your annual return even at the recent depressed share price is far better than you would have earned on many other investments. I'm sorry your dream of riches didn't materialize but don't represent all that bought in for the cell to support your opinion
Didn't Solyndra go bankrupt after receiving $500 million funded by the taxpayers? SUNW is profitable. It's amazing how you misleading your posts are
1. Your post 54856 indicates your analysis has the ability to move markets - Quote: "When the market saw my analysis of the pernicious effects of upcoming dilution and penny stock promotions, they agreed. " If your analysis is truly what caused the drop to the low where you claim the issuance of a small amount of options was timed with positive news and the Fox interview you are indirectly perpetuating your problem proposition with SUNW dilution
2. In your post 54821 you allude to securities fraud but then state "By the way, half the time I bash this stock I am bashing my own position, since I am often long heading into earnings based not on the quality of the company, but of the profile of it's investor base who reliably buy more shares whenever the CEO tells them to."
So it appears what you are saying is you are fine with the alleged securities fraud as long as it allows you the opportunity to buy low after the market agrees with your analysis and you can profit from the run up to earnings and then bash again to start the cycle all over again. Do I have that right?
1. It is possible to have a personal, economic and business philosophy that "government subsidies and all the government support can't ultimately carry a market and the market has to be created by good economics" AND at the same time take advantage of those subsidies that are currently available without moral or ethical conflict.
2. It is possible and expected that a company will modify business plans as business, market, political, international and technological conditions change without it being "securities fraud".
3. The fundamentals of SUNW are solid and getting better. Your entire proposition depends on continued significant dilution and that growth by equity is bad which is false. I agree that if significant additional dilution continues it may not be good but let's wait a few more quarters to see if you're right rather than bashing after good earnings and financial reports.
1. Please provide the name and credentials of the "expert" to support your statement: " I was able to get an opinion of the cell from an expert in the field."
2. MIT reviewed the technology
3. The following scientists were at the conference where Solar 3D presented the cell prototype: David Auston, Executive Director of UCSB’s Institute for Energy Efficiency, and Rod Alferness, Dean of the College of Engineering at UCSB. They are not jokes
4. Dr. Nadir Dagli is not a joke. He is an internationally respected scientist.
What financing or other strategies should SUNW be using to grow?
What are your thoughts on the ownership earnings discussion in post 54609 from ahk6608?
So you are officially now accusing these people of breaking the law?
Please. Nazula was talking about recent share sales by Nelson and now that it is clear he hasn't sold any since the uplisting the story changes. And your conspiracy theories contradict each other. First you warn about ownership by Pearl and then when they divest you warn about the divesting. Which is it? So the two transactions are now being dumped on "average joe investors"..provide some proof.
And there would be no company at all today if they didn't acquire Sunworks.
You are completely ignoring the fact that the diluted EPS is transparent to everyone choosing to read the income statement and that the effect of all the convertibles is already reflected there. The diluted earnings per share was in line with the high end of analyst expectations and again your theory assumes convertible debt financing continues in perpetuity even though the fundamentals clearly support other types of financing now
Maybe you could have Sandrige read you the recent filing that discusses the $2.5 million credit facility from JP Morgan Chase?
What I find amusing about most of your posts is that your proposition is that you are doing a deeper dive into the filings than anyone else to illustrate your point about dilution and you post the "evidence" from the filings. You have yet to discuss the earnings per share and diluted earnings per share reported right on the income statement nor point out that the future dilution horror you are describing has very little impact on the diluted earnings per share going forward except in the unlikely event that all future financing is via convertible "toxic" debt which is highly unlikely with the revenue earnings and cash growth that has been reported and will continue to occur in the future
It's not clear to me what you are saying but it sounds like you are saying that insiders are dumping their shares. Why are their no SEC filings to support your claim?
To be truthful you should have put together a historical view that included time periods before you started posting on the stock to demonstrate these patterns existed whether or not you had commented.