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.
Very nice day! All those sub-2s that we've been buying lately look mighty nice right now! Give this baby a few more quarters and then see where we're at.
Possible monster brewing? Looking forward to the next few quarters.
Interesting playing with this year's and last year's numbers. Last year they did 452K in December and 843K for Q4 with a 44K net loss. This year they did 564K in December and 963K for Q4. If we just apply the increase in revenue to their net profit, it would show 37K loss for 2009. Still a loss but a steady improvement from the last 3 years: 2007: 941K loss. 2008: 306K loss and this year estimated 37K loss. Maybe they're finally turning the quarter and 2010 will show at least a 300-500k profit which would be a solid .01 to .02 in eps.
DPDW down 33 percent since the latest Q. DPDW is in serious trouble now and I'm not sure the business model will work. I still think this is going sub-dime soon and I see no traction until and if they can ever turn a serious net profit. Can they? Even with nice revenues they still find a way to lose millions each quarter and the O/S is too bloated now to ignore the huge losses. Investors are in a show me state right now. Show me you can turn a profit (in the millions) for a couple quarters and then maybe I'll invest again. They could go under first.
Unfortunately, it does not result in $7.9M in revs to MMGW. The Electric City Wind deal is not exactly what it appears. If Electric City ever makes a profit then maybe MMGW will see some profit trickle down. I was not impressed talking to Ricker. GL though.
Contrary to what Ihub has just posted. Today is not the first day of Christmas. The first day of Christmas is Christmas day! The 12th day of Christmas is January 5th. All leading up to Epiphany on January 6th.
Just imagine if they could make about 500K in a year. That would be .02 eps x your multiple of choice. This could run to 20 or 40 cents. But it needs to show up in the Q's at some point. Can they turn this into a profit making venture? I'm hoping so.
Bottom line is that they need to find a way to increase the bottom line. Be it by increasing revs and or cutting expenses. The SS is there to make this run if they can ever show some consistent positive net revenues. In 2009, they've only had one Q (Q2) where they made a net profit. They're down about 156K for the year. I wouldn't own some shares if I didn't think this had a chance. Maybe these new tracks if show something in the next couple quarters. Until then, I'm standing by.
No worries! Thanks for posting that.
Absolutely false!
I think you're on the wrong board!
DJRT only lost 64k in Q3 after making 73.6k in Q2.
That's why I say they're close but still need to find a way to make a consistent buck.
As to the share structure there are actually less outstanding shares now than last year. Only have 24.5M.
Please check the facts next time! Thanks!
You never know! And it's getting so ridiculously low now it may be ready for a bottom bounce. Tempted to double up down in this range. After the holidays, I'm going to give them and call and see what's up.
Still holding all my shares. I still like that they made money this quarter (109K) and that another acquisition is on the table. I still would like to hear more on the reselling of fuel. That will be our big news if we ever get it.
Bozell: Elite Media Ignored Climategate
Wednesday, December 9, 2009 8:24 PM
By: Jim Meyers
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/bozell_climate_gate_media/2009/12/09/296751.html
Outrageous!!! I guess we better not breath anymore. I'm sure the trees don't feel the same way. Unbelievable! Every day it's some new government program or intrusion.
Controversial EPA Ruling Linked to 'Climategate' E-mails
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/epa_ruling_climate_emails/2009/12/09/296740.html
What a disaster this would be.
New health care benefits come at a price
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091210/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_consumers
Pretty obvious what has been going on but nothing new for those that have a background in science and research. My bet though is the media will just let this slide and the few people who even hear about this will forget about it shortly and the scam will go on and on and on. We need a few brave scientists to really expose this and push hard to get this out there. Not just about these e-mails and documents but the whole idea of real research with real facts and doubt. Nobody trusts a forecast for the next day but yet they take these 100 year or greater doom and gloom forecasts like they're perfect. Do people even realize the amount of variables that go into a long range climate model and how they can be tweaked to get the result you want? There is no way to accurately represent all these variables. Only God knows what our natural climatic variation will lead to in a 100 years or a 1000 years (if we're even here anymore).
EDITORIAL: Hiding evidence of global cooling
Junk science exposed among climate-change believers
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Scientific progress depends on accurate and complete data. It also relies on replication. The past couple of days have uncovered some shocking revelations about the baloney practices that pass as sound science about climate change.
It was announced Thursday afternoon that computer hackers had obtained 160 megabytes of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in England. Those e-mails involved communication among many scientific researchers and policy advocates with similar ideological positions all across the world. Those purported authorities were brazenly discussing the destruction and hiding of data that did not support global-warming claims.
Professor Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit, and professor Michael E. Mann at Pennsylvania State University, who has been an important scientist in the climate debate, have come under particular scrutiny. Among his e-mails, Mr. Jones talked to Mr. Mann about the "trick of adding in the real temps to each series ... to hide the decline [in temperature]."
Mr. Mann admitted that he was party to this conversation and lamely explained to the New York Times that "scientists often used the word 'trick' to refer to a good way to solve a problem 'and not something secret.' " Though the liberal New York newspaper apparently buys this explanation, we have seen no benign explanation that justifies efforts by researchers to skew data on so-called global-warming "to hide the decline." Given the controversies over the accuracy of Mr. Mann's past research, it is surprising his current explanations are accepted so readily.
There is a lot of damning evidence about these researchers concealing information that counters their bias. In another exchange, Mr. Jones told Mr. Mann: "If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone" and, "We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind." Mr. Jones further urged Mr. Mann to join him in deleting e-mail exchanges about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) controversial assessment report (ARA): "Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re [the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report]?"
In another e-mail, Mr. Jones told Mr. Mann, professor Malcolm K. Hughes of the University of Arizona and professor Raymond S. Bradley of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst: "I'm getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don't any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!"
At one point, Mr. Jones complained to another academic, "I did get an email from the [Freedom of Information] person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn't be deleting emails." He also offered up more dubious tricks of his trade, specifically that "IPCC is an international organization, so is above any national FOI. Even if UEA holds anything about IPCC, we are not obliged to pass it on." Another professor at the Climate Research Unit, Tim Osborn, discussed in e-mails how truncating a data series can hide a cooling trend that otherwise would be seen in the results. Mr. Mann sent Mr. Osborn an e-mail saying that the results he was sending shouldn't be shown to others because the data support critics of global warming.
Repeatedly throughout the e-mails that have been made public, proponents of global-warming theories refer to data that has been hidden or destroyed. Only e-mails from Mr. Jones' institution have been made public, and with his obvious approach to deleting sensitive files, it's difficult to determine exactly how much more information has been lost that could be damaging to the global-warming theocracy and its doomsday forecasts.
We don't condone e-mail theft by hackers, though these e-mails were covered by Britain's Freedom of Information Act and should have been released. The content of these e-mails raises extremely serious questions that could end the academic careers of many prominent professors. Academics who have purposely hidden data, destroyed information and doctored their results have committed scientific fraud. We can only hope respected academic institutions such as Pennsylvania State University, the University of Arizona and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst conduct proper investigative inquiries.
Most important, however, these revelations of fudged science should have a cooling effect on global-warming hysteria and the panicked policies that are being pushed forward to address the unproven theory.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/24/hiding-evidence-of-global-cooling/
Climate Skeptics See 'Smoking Gun' in Researchers' Leaked E-Mails
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/11/21/climate-skeptics-smoking-gun-researchers-leaked-e-mails/
CRU Director steps aside while investigation goes on into the cooking of temperature data. I've said all along that these liberal, atheist scientists have been doing this. Anything to make a buck and support their anti-God, human activity is all bad stance.
CRU update 3
Tue, 1 Dec 2009
Professor Phil Jones has today announced that he will stand aside as Director of the Climatic Research Unit until the completion of an independent Review resulting from allegations following the hacking and publication of emails from the Unit.
Professor Jones said: "What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible. After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director's role during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the University for agreeing to this. The Review process will have my full support."
Vice-Chancellor Professor Edward Acton said: "I have accepted Professor Jones's offer to stand aside during this period. It is an important step to ensure that CRU can continue to operate normally and the independent review can conduct its work into the allegations.
“We will announce details of the Independent Review, including its terms of reference, timescale and the chair, within days. I am delighted that Professor Peter Liss, FRS, CBE, will become acting director.”
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/dec/CRUphiljones
I'm sure they'll try and cover it up. Do you hear anything about this in the mainstream media? Of course not. Where are the reporters anymore???
Sir Muir Russell to head the Independent Review into the allegations against the Climatic Research Unit (CRU)
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/dec/CRUreview
This is off the CRU's main webpage: No kidding everyone is checking out their lies!
University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit
Due to the present high volume of visitors to this page, you will shortly be directed to the latest news about CRU on the main University of East Anglia website, or you can go there immediately by clicking on this link.
Global Warming Hoax
More info coming but here's just a small piece:
http://www.thedailystar.com/opinion/local_story_342034507.html
Nevermind
Hmmmmm
I see the energy bars!
What FRHV foods did you see on the page 10 of the HUD report? I didn't recognize any as those were all local Harvard area businesses. Am I missing something? Tks!
That's why I'm holding my shares! GL!
They issued 18,963,887 in February 2008 to convert creditors debt to shares in FRHV. Note 19 I believe.
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=6434284-1032-182006&type=sect&dcn=0001052918-09-000095
It's a great company and everyone seems to love the product they provide (expensive but fun!) It's just that they need to show a net profit and then this will take off. And not just for one quarter a year. I do own shares because eventually they may figure out how to generate some shareholder value. GL!
I understand why some could lean that way but with her background and experience, why milk a scam or whatever you think this might be for what I'd call a modest salary in the business world. If I saw the O/S going up every quarter yes, but it's moved very little in 2 years. I've only got a small stake though and I'm still DDing. I'm open to discussion on both ends.
Seems reasonable for someone of her background.
The most interesting thing I took from that old post is that the O/S has nearly remained static for the past 2 years. Apparently they are not making money by selling shares. Hmmmmm.
I see he did put EVG on one of his slides. No audio.
http://smallcapepicenter.com/OnlineConference/PeterGrandich/
Evolving Gold at 1 pm EST again Friday.
http://agoracom.com/conferences/1-online-gold-and-commodities-conference/schedule
MEETING MANAGEMENT
Company officials will be online at the following specific times to post answers to your questions.
Thursday, December 3rd: 2:30PM EST
Friday, December 4th: 1:00PM EST
http://agoracom.com/ir/Evolving/forums/discussion/topics/384405-presentation-agoracom-online-gold-and-commodities-conference/messages/1277991#message
AGORACOM.COM
online gold & commodities conference december 3-4
thursday, december 3rd, from 2:30 - 3:00 pm est,
quinton hennigh, evg president will be taking questions
http://www.evolvinggold.com/
BLTA Update:
Still waiting for the company to explain where their money will come from to get off the ground.
Still waiting for them to explain why their service frequency expired on September 30th.
Still waiting for them to explain what they will do when their fitness certificate expires in January. It will be revoked if they don't fly before then (one year from fitness finding).
It's amazing that people will pay .11 for a so called company like this that has 440M shares outstanding, no revenues and have accumulated a $21M deficit! And with their current PP and other shares given out and likely sold into the market, we can assume they'll max out their O/S. Run valuation models on 500M O/S. Even if they find the money to get off the ground, I don't see how they think they can make a 40% profit margin and have 100M in revs. If you believe that, I guess it's an easy 100 bagger from recent lows. Whatever... A more realistic outlook would be for them to break even at best or even a slight loss. I guess we'll see. I thought at sub .02 this might be worth a gamble and it was. Certainly a great time to sell now...not buy!
The problem is they're not making money and their revenues have been pretty flat the past three years. Maybe these new tracks coming online with help over the next couple quarters otherwise they better find another way to turn a net profit.
The Democrats rammed this through without one Republican or Independent vote. It must not pass again because the next time it will be for real and it will be the end of the U.S.A and the beginning of the U.S.S.A. Just read through this and see just a sampling of what's in this bill. Do you really think the voters would approve of this if they knew what was in it?
Debatable Health Care Bill
By Cal Thomas
http://www.calthomas.com/index.php?news=2770
Thanks Mark!