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.
one other thing 74 million in revs is not the same as earnings. If you were a builder and sold homes say worth 200K each and you sold 10 homes last year your revs would be 2million. now if you made 25K on each house after expenses then you have 25K x10 = 250K that you could put a industry P/E on. 250K x 10(industry P/E) you have 2.5 million market cap.
Now same example except you are in a bad market and you sell the same house for 150K because thats all you can get. so you lose 10K per house x 10= 100k loss so now your -100k x 10P/E is a negative number. so P/E doesnt work. Pretty much a market cap on negative earnings is what people think the forward earnings might be. No one wants to own a company that would continue to lose money forever.
Hope that helps
Truckinguy, That was a very thoughtful post and I wish we got more like that around here instead of POM POMs and other who look as life as a bataan death march. LOL
Here goes. your logic is flawed in the P/E part. Thats stand for price to earnings. assume they have no net earnings because they are having trouble paying debts. (FACT) then P/E is a N/A. So for a P/E to be viable metric it needs to be positive number.
Please if someone has a better insight to this please post.
dilution= is like playing football against an opponent that can take as many downs as they need to score.
amazing. did you find out what is causing that big down turn?
LOL I hope you are kidding. ONLY after a major RS. LIKE I said befor AVWI only has value as a shell. maybe 500K what JPT is worth is anyones guess. I would have guessed at least 35-60 million with good FINS. With BAD fins could be book value which is the value of the assets. With a company that has negative earnings its impossible to put a P/E on it. and I have to assume they are losing money if they are defaulting on a major loan.
This is not they forgot to pay the VISA card like some here have being posting. This default will have a direct effect on their ability to borrow money and at what rate and or terms. IMO
probably destined for dollars with a 1000 for 1 RS in the near future IMO
last two days the dilution has stopped imo.
I see SEAB is on top of the bid. Thats very interesting.
well I would say your right. But the moving board company was losing money too. Cash Im still in shock that JPT is making no money. But if you go back in my threads you will see my WAG that at this share price the market cap is around 20 million dollars. Is that to much or super cheap for a trucking company that is going into default???? I dont know.
What I do know for sure is that JPT is not as strong as I thought they were. Im not an investment banker and for us to make a real evaluation we would need some FINS. Somehow I dont think Javelin will be releasing those until after the merger.
Hey thanks for breath of fresh air around here. Tired of the POM POM waving and death and dispair posts. Lets discuss what we know and or can make a logical WAG.
I only look at the facts. Without financials its hard to say what JPT is worth. Everything else is a guess. up until the other day I would have conceded JPT was at least an average company. Now I dont know what to think. IMO
NOT as much as I use to Green. LOL
Im sure every trucking company has fuel surcharges. We dont know what really caused the problem but fuel has to be a pretty good guess. IMO Bottom line is here that premise that JPT is is good financial shape is seriouly in question. I have been contacted by individuals who are pissed I posted that court case. Do people really think a material fact should be shoved under the rug. And in case anyone is wondering NO I DONT SHORT STOCKS like Derbs group.
depends but usually shareholders get little or nothing
tumbleweed city here. Why did they waste the money buying a shell. Makes no sense.
Amazing! We find out JPT cant pay its bills and it only moves down two tics. Just shows that people are gambling and not investing or Peacock is proping this thing up well. IMO
what do you do?
just one. I have a few friends on that one.
REGARDING AVWI
Palmer Equipment has defaulted on its obligations under the Master Lease Agreement
and Schedules P001 and P001 in that it has failed to pay the installment due April 27, 2008 and
May 27, 2008 on Schedule P001 and April 21, 2008 and May 21, 2008 on Schedule P002.
Palmer Equipment has also defaulted on the payment of late fees payable as a result of these and
prior defaults
the one real positive thing here is that I think the deal is for sure is going to happen now. JPT needs the money. Maybe they will take this money and get squared up. One thing I do know for sure! Peacock pockets will get lined. he never forgets to pull his off the table.
I do. I like dpdw and eegc and still hoping for clxn even though PEA=COCK is still the ceo. Just waiting for clinical trials to be done. Hopefully peacock cant screw that up.
I think that many CEO's are pretty straight shooters. The ones that get most of the news attention arent.
notice that the trades at .002 in the last hour are mirror trades? MM or persons want the price to not fall.
You are right! I tried to have an open mind but I found these things to be true
A the French never ever TIP
B the check is never in the mail
C PEA=COCK never tells you the whole truth.
I have been pretty consistent I think.
A. I have never liked PEA=COCK in this deal
B. Almost without exception I thought JPT was a profitable ompany!
C. I have tried to be a voice of reason and not just wave POM POMs on all my posts. yeah a few times I waved one POM but hey a guys got to have some fun.
What happened today?
I found out that JPT is having trouble paying its bills! and I sold all but 50K of my shares. Why because one of the variables in my equation was very wrong. Maybe I wait until the split but I have not lost all interest. Im not emotionally attached.
I didnt say I was out of here. I said I sold my shares. IF the price gets to a point that its a fair deal I will jump back. Im not a BS flipper. I have stated my case and if you find out news that makes you revalue the deal then you take appropriate steps. Right now the price is propped up with a few small buys. When the 8K comes about this material event I believe other investors will do the same. IMO
Green, I hope you hit the ball over the fence and I'm wrong. You might learn something from investors who have dealt with the PEACOCK before.
Dont listen to me but read honest posts from people like FED and Zorro. Drinking PEA=COCK koolaid will make you poor. IMO
not so cheap when you calculate 1 billion shares(best guess) and we are only getting around 5% imo maybe as much as 10%. if the share count is near a billion and we get 10%(generous)I get a market cap of around 20 million!
is twenty million to much for a company thats losing money??
Hard to justify a P/E when your earnings are negative.
YOU MAKE THE CALL
dent1 none of us have seen JPTs financials becuase they are private. You can bet one thing though! they arent rosey if they arent paying the bills. imo
hope the info got out before DERB he/she could short the hell out of it.
mogul I respect your opinion and I think you could be right. Fuel costs may have risen faster than they could adjust for them!
but that being said we know by this court case that revs are not sufficent to even breakeven at this point or they would pay the lease. NO company would destroy thier credidt rating for if they could borrow their way out it. IMO Credit lines must be maxed out too or this wouldnt be happening.
BTW did IR let us know that there was this little problem NOOOOOOOOO! They could have been honest and tell us the investors what was really happening. NOT PEACOCKS STYLE.
OK lets look at this rationally? before we and I include myself thought JPT was earning 35-70 million in REVS and maybe a couple mil in profits. We were paying in the .002 range with the dilution still going on. Now we have pretty much erased the fact that JPT is earning money because if they were they would be paying the bills. DOES EVERYONE AGREE WITH THAT?
So based on that what should the new price be since one piece of the puzzle has been filled in?
rational comments only please LOL
I assume some of those buys where automatic trades made by computers??
I have no doubt that this will be settled with our money. So this suit will go away but more important to me shows that JPT is not as strong as we all thought. YOU might think im a basher but Im not. I really hope JPT makes it ok and you make pennies! But Im not going to hide information. There are at least 2 other people on this board who already knew this!
If you are a smart investor look at the facts and distance yourself from the emotion. IMO GLTY and I might even buy back if I find a good reason to do so.
your right I sold the minute I found this out. I really take no pleasure in that though. Burned to many times. I probably got a wash when it was said and done.
I have had enough of Peacock and his BS. Price is holding better than I thought but I think we can kiss those great REVs BS goodbye. Since when does a company that make millions of net dollars default on equipment loans. Guys this is looking like FCCN all over again. IMO
7. Palmer Equipment has defaulted on its obligations under the Master Lease Agreement
and Schedules P001 and P001 in that it has failed to pay the installment due April 27, 2008 and
May 27, 2008 on Schedule P001 and April 21, 2008 and May 21, 2008 on Schedule P002.
Palmer Equipment has also defaulted on the payment of late fees payable as a result of these and
prior defaults.
THIS IS THE PROBLEM FOR THOSE WHO DIDNT READ IT ALL. imo
Someone forwarded this to me. Seems to me JPT is having problems paying its lease bill and has gone into default. IMO
I think we all need to read this and think about whats going on here. I take no pleasure in releasing this info but I believe that all the investors need to be aware.
PEOPLE’S CAPITAL AND LEASING
CORP.,
Plaintiff,
-vs-
JIM PALMER EQUIPMENT, INC., JIM
PALMER TRUCKING, INC., JIM PALMER
EQUIPMENT II, LLC, AND JAMES V.
PALMER,
Defendants.
Harold V. Dye
Dye & Moe, P.L.L.P.
P.O. Box 9198
216 West Main Street, Suite 200
Missoula, Montana 59807-9198
406/542-5205
Attorney for Plaintiff
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
MISSOULA DIVISION
Cause No. CV-08-87-M-DWM
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff alleges the following for its claim for relief.
Common Allegations
1. Plaintiff is a Connecticut corporation having its principal place of business in the
state of Connecticut.
Case 9:08-cv-00087-DWM Document 1 Filed 06/17/2008 Page 1 of 6
-2-
2. Defendant Jim Palmer Equipment, Inc. (“Palmer Equipment”) is a Montana
corporation having its principal place of business in the state of Montana. Defendant Jim
Palmer Trucking. (“Palmer Trucking ) is a Montana corporation having its principal place of
business in the state of Montana. Defendant Jim Palmer Equipment II, LLC. (“Palmer
Equipment II”) is a Montana limited liability company having its principal place of business in
the state of Montana. Defendant James V. Palmer (“Palmer”) is a natural person and is a citizen
of the state of Montana.
3. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1332(a)(1),
which confers subject matter jurisdiction on the United States District Court in all cases in which
there is diversity of citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or
value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. The amount in controversy in this action
exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
4. On or about September 23, 2005 Palmer Equipment entered into Master Lease
Agreement with General Electric Capital Corporation. A true copy of the Master Lease
Agreement (including an Acknowledgment and Consent and Amendment Agreements) is
attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference. Defendants Palmer Trucking;
Palmer Equipment II and Palmer (Collectively referred to herein as “Guarantors”) each
guaranteed the obligations of Palmer Equipment under the Master Lease. True copies of the
guarantees are attached as Exhibits B-1 through B-3 and incorporated by reference
5. The rights of General Electric Capital Corporation under the Master Lease Agreement
and Guarantees were assigned to Plaint
6. Plaintiff and Palmer Equipment entered into two Schedules by which specific
Case 9:08-cv-00087-DWM Document 1 Filed 06/17/2008 Page 2 of 6
-3-
Equipment was leased by Plaintiff to Palmer Equipment subject to the Master Lease Agreement.
Schedule P001 was entered into as of September 23, 2005. Schedule P002 was entered into as
of October 21, 2005. A true copy of Schedule P001 is attached hereto as Exhibit C and
incorporated by reference. A true copy of Schedule P002is attached hereto as Exhibit D and
incorporated by reference.
7. Palmer Equipment has defaulted on its obligations under the Master Lease Agreement
and Schedules P001 and P001 in that it has failed to pay the installment due April 27, 2008 and
May 27, 2008 on Schedule P001 and April 21, 2008 and May 21, 2008 on Schedule P002.
Palmer Equipment has also defaulted on the payment of late fees payable as a result of these and
prior defaults.
8. On May 22, 2008, Plaintiff gave Palmer Equipment and Guarantors notice of default
and demanded that the accounts be brought current. Palmer Equipment and Guarantors failed,
neglected and refused to bring their accounts current.
9. On June 6, 2008, Plaintiff gave Palmer Equipment and Guarantors notice that, due to
their unremedied defaults in payments, that the Master Lease Agreement was terminated as to all
Equipment set forth in the Schedules effective June 16, 2008. Plaintiff further demanded that
Palmer Equipment and Guarantors comply with paragraph 9(a) of the Master Lease Agreement
by assembling the Equipment as set forth in the Schedules at its business premises at 9730 Derby
Drive, Missoula, Montana.
10. Palmer Equipment and Guarantors have failed, neglected and refused to comply with
Plaintiff’s demands as set forth in paragraph 9.. Although any interest in the Equipment in
Palmer Equipment has terminated, Palmer Equipment and Guarantors continue to use the
Case 9:08-cv-00087-DWM Document 1 Filed 06/17/2008 Page 3 of 6
-4-
equipment causing it to deteriorate in value and causing Plaintiff loss.
11. As of June 16, 2008, the date of lease termination, Defendants owe Plaintiff, jointly
and severally the sum of $172,825.58 in accrued lease payments and late charges. Defendants
further owe Plaintiff jointly and severally the sum of $2,272,416.38 in Stipulated Loss Value as
provided in the Master Lease Agreement.
12. It has been necessary for Plaintiff to retain the services of attorneys in order to bring
this action and protect its interest.
Count One
(Recovery of Possession)
13. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegation of paragraphs 1 through 12.
14. Plaintiff is the owner of and entitled to possession of the Equipment which is the
subject of the Schedules due to Palmer Equipment’s and Guarantors’ breach of the Master Lease
Agreement and the termination thereof. Defendants’ detention of said Equipment is wrongful.
The Equipment has not been taken for a tax, assessment, or fine, pursuant to statute, or seized
under an execution or an attachment against the property.
15. Plaintiff claims possession of said Equipment during the pendency of this action
pursuant to Montana Code Annotated, Title 27, chapter 17.
16. Plaintiff is entitled to a final judgment that it is the rightful owner of and entitled to
possession of the Equipment.
Court Two
(Specific Enforcement)
17. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegation of paragraphs 1 through 16.
18. The Master Lease Agreement, paragraph 9(a) provides that “Lessee shall
Case 9:08-cv-00087-DWM Document 1 Filed 06/17/2008 Page 4 of 6
-5-
return the units of Equipment to a location within the continental United States as Lessor shall
direct.” Defendants have breached and continue to breach the provisions of this paragraph by
wrongfully detaining the Equipment.
19. Plaintiff’s remedy at law of money damages for Defendants’ breach of this provision
of the Master Lease Agreement is not adequate. The Equipment is refrigerated transport trailers
(“reefers”) used to haul perishable foodstuffs. At any point in time, any particular reefer trailer
could be anywhere in the United States. If the reefer trailers are not surrendered in an orderly
matter after deliver of their loads, the value of the trailers as collateral would be substantially
undermined.
20. In addition, on information and belief, Plaintiff alleges: Palmer Equipment; Palmer
Trucking and Palmer Equipment II (the “Palmer Entities”) are all owned and controlled by
Palmer. The Palmer Entities have defaulted on other contractual obligations to other creditors
and are not generally paying their debts as they become due and payable and are insolvent or
bordering insolvency. Palmer has personally guaranteed other obligations of the Palmer Entities
and his personal assets are insufficient to honor the guaranties.
Court Three
(Damages)
21. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegation of paragraphs 1 through 20.
22. Defendants owe Plaintiff, jointly and severally the sum of $172,825.58 in accrued
lease payments and late charges. Defendants further owe Plaintiff jointly and severally the sum
of $2,272,416.38 in Stipulated Loss Value as provided in the Master Lease Agreement.
Wherefore, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severalty as
follows:
Case 9:08-cv-00087-DWM Document 1 Filed 06/17/2008 Page 5 of 6
-6-
1. For an order that Plaintiff is entitled to possession of the Equipment which is the
subject of the Schedules to the Master Lease Agreement during the pendency of this case and a
final judgment that Plaintiff is entitled to possession of said Equipment.
2. For an order specifically enforcing paragraph 9(a) of the Master Lease Agreement by
ordering Defendants to deliver the Equipment to at its business premises at 9730 Derby Drive,
Missoula, Montana or as otherwise ordered by the Court.
3. For judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the sum of $2,445,241.96
together with interest at the rate of 10 percent per annum from June 16, 2008 until paid.
4. For an award of reasonable attorneys fees and other damages as may be proven
including costs of repossession, repair and resale of the Equipment.
DATED: June 17, 2008.
DYE & MOE, P.L.L.P.
/s/ Harold V. Dye
Harold V. Dye
Case 9:08-cv-00087-DWM Document 1 Filed 06/17/2008 Page 6 of 6
Suppressed Image
anyone know anything about this?? http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-mtdce/case_no-9:2008cv00087/case_id-34451/
not uncommon to have credit lines at the limit. MY old bank use to max out the credit line at the fed all the time. It was the lowest cost of funds for us. My friend just maxed out his 1 million line of credit buying 5 houses at 50% on the dollar. Was that bad?? This really doesnt tell us much. Now show me they arent making payments then I will worry.
I will say Im concerned now that you have shown up on this board more and more. Many ihubbers believe you are part of a group that SHORT stocks. IMO you have picked a good person to follow (Peacock) because you know there will always be dilution. I personally hate peacock for my own personal reasons not to make money shorting stocks. Wish I knew how I would be very rich from following peacock around LOL
Depends what they did with the money? lease back just means they freed up cash in a depreciating asset. If I can lease back my trailers at 10% effective rate and I can get 15% return buying a storage facility I would make that trade everyday. Now if they are leasing back because they cant pay the light bill thats totally different.