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.
I still see it on the Foodtown website.
Are you saying it was on the shelves in the physical stores, and then removed?
To clarify once again: he has no control of when the DTCC lifts the chill. They can take as long as they want.
His only mistake is posting his feelings and wishful thinking as tweets, since there are always going to be some people who interpret a CEO's wishful thinking as a promise. I've heard the word "promise" used many times to refer to something which is clearly not a promise.
It's clear that he didn't understand how long it would take to get the chill lifted. I believe he really is doing everything he can to make it happen, which at this point is not much, except for going to NYC to meet them in person, which he's doing tomorrow.
He got current with Nevada many months ago. I have no reason to believe he'd lie about the chill when he was truthful about that, and many other things.
What are you missing? Well, one thing is that the selling was a very small number of shares, probably from just 1 or 2 people, and the price stayed within the recent trading range. Of course, you couldn't have known that right after your post, the selling would stop, and the buying would start. All-in-all a pretty normal day of trading in this channel between .0024 and .0029.
Another thing is the fact that the Walgreens.com and Drugstore.com placements were originally announced to be happening sometime in mid-July, so the fact that they're not there yet is no surprise.
I was just reminded to clarify that these are NET sales projections, not gross sales.
Net sales are what you get after subtracting out returns & refunds.
So with net sales between 830M and 880M, gross sales would likely be in the range of 890M to 930M.
I think one of the restrictions on buybacks is no more than 1/4 of the volume in any given day, is it not?
If so, they wouldn't be able to buy 6-8 Mill as you thought, right?
They could get about 4 Million with volume of 17 M.
I'll back up these statements.
I've tracked Alexa rankings for over a year now, and found them to be a quite reliable way to predict what upcoming quarters are going to bring in revenue, just comparing each website to itself in previous quarters.
Right now, my projection is 830M to 880M for Q2, based mostly on Alexa rankings compared to previous quarters. In fact, since I made those projections 2 weeks ago, the trends I predicted for late June for reach & pageviews of WOL and OL are still on target except that pageviews for OL are trending better (they're not dropping anymore). So that actually raises my projections, but so slightly that the roundoff is about the same.
It'll be difficult to predict VivaVuva's impact in the next 2 quarters (Q3 and Q4), but after that, we should be able to get accurate predictions even for VV.
We're not worried because, for things which have been under the management's control, they have delivered on them, consistently on time. Things not under management's control are the things which have dragged on.
This management has proven to be effective in getting things done.
That's why we're not worried.
Yeah, now it's getting to be a higher volume day, but the price is in the same range, huh?
There must be as many eager buyers as there are eager sellers.
and I bought 1/3 of them.
It's not a lot of shares, really. Volume is a little high today, but nothing extreme. The shares being sold were most likely bought off the market.
I suppose it's theoritically possible, depending on your definition of dilution.
First, let me say that the "dilution" some are implying here is completely speculative and might even be suggested just to scare people. There is no firm evidence in support of it. There is firm evidence of a buyback, as the CEO has stated it many times and it's in their last quarterly report, exactly how many shares were bought back and in treasury vs. retired.
So, with the type of dilution some people are implying, it wouldn't make sense. No company in their right mind would create shares, dump them on the market, while also buying shares from the market, especially with the restrictions on buying.
The only recent "dilution", if you want to call it that, was of 2-year-restricted shares issued to a company in return for an exclusive patent license for a lactose intolerance product currently under development. The company specifically asked for shares, not cash. Think about it, they would not do this unless they believed the shares would go far up in value.
There was a long debate here about whether this was dilution, and if so, was it good dilution or bad. The closest we came to agreeing was to call it "good dilution". Again, these shares are also restricted for 2 years, so they can't be hitting the market.
You might be able to argue that he HAD trouble at some past time determining the share structure (which is debatable, since the history he has given is completely consistent with what he has said in the past), but you can't say he "IS HAVING" trouble determining the share structure. It is determined, recorded, announced, submitted to DTCC.
There's a very important distinction between past and present tense here.
And what evidence do you have that they're having trouble determining the outstanding share numbers? They have been very specific and detailed about all the transitions in the share structure, between the last quarterly report, and the letters to shareholders.
Let's get the wording straight on this so as not to confuse others:
Shares from the O/S are currently hitting the float, making the float larger.
If you look at the chart, you'll see that .0018 is extremely unlikely anytime soon. Always possible, just like having it reach .02 tomorrow is possible. Just not likely.
For newbies: to get a more accurate picture than this doom and gloom picture that was just painted for you, look through the quarterly reports. It's all stated in full detail there.
Yes, a few years ago there was toxic funding, and reverse splits, which drove the price way down, while they had little revenue. Key words: years ago. They don't need financing anymore, as they have profits. No financing in 2013.
What is happening is that shares that were previously restricted just got unrestricted, and those got dumped into the market. That was about 2 months ago, and helped cause the drop in stock price to its current base. The CEO recently posted the exact number of shares that got unrestricted.
The CEO has been very open and accurate about everything that has been going on with the company and the share structure.
New traders might also look at it the other way; that something is obviously holding it up above .0025ish.
The question people should always ask themselves is, what's the risk vs. reward? This has had a couple of big spikes up to 3 times this level, and formed solid bases in the .002s twice now after those runs.
New investors might be saying "reward potential is very high compared to risk potential".
I think these statements are accurate if you change the present tense to the past tense. "Used to be in control".
So the one thing we can agree on is that none of us know how much time he is spending on building the business each day. It could be 90% of his working time, or just 10% or something in between.
So we each have to make our own determination based on what else we see and hear.
I'm inclined to believe he wants to spend 90% on building the business, but can only spend about 60% to 70% on building the business because of all the stock issues and rumors he has to fight.
You might conclude something else. We agree that we're just guessing, and hopefully we're making educated guesses.
Again, you have not given specifics as to which sites you're talking about.
I checked them all again. They're all valid. One of my links was bad, for StemIntense in South Africa. Here's the corrected one:
http://www.wantitall.co.za/Health-and-Personal-Care/Stem-Intense-Muscle-Builder__B00BEYBW76
The New Zealand links show a different package design, but describes the product as imported from MedGen, Inc. Sometimes packaging has to be changed for different countries, for various reasons.
In all cases, you can put these products in your cart, no problems.
Clearly, the sites selling StemIntense couldn't have been "years ago".
And for SnorEnz, the New Zealand site has a comment from 2013. That's not "years ago".
I'm inclined to believe that you didn't even check all the sites, until you can tell me specific links and their specific problems.
Here's an interesting US site which has SnorEnz:
http://www.socialgrocery.com/products/Snor-Enz/Throat-Spray-for-Snoring-Relief
I disagree.
They're all CURRENT sites.
I went to every single one of those sites today to verify.
They all look to be from the current year, 2013.
Please be specific. Which site looks old to you?
This would seem to make sense, since it seems that products have been available through overseas sites and outlets for a while, but not in the US.
Shareholders "doing DD" are less likely to call overseas, so those places don't get bombarded with calls like stores in the US.
The only way to do things here in US is to not announce the names of stores in the US until product has appeared in so many places that it "dilutes" the level of calls being made to any one place. People will get some "yesses" and post what they've seen, and the calls will die off quickly.
Here are some overseas places I've seen or heard about:
Snorenz in New Zealand:
http://www.nzonlinepharmacy.com/products/Snorenz-Throat-Spray.html
They even have a "Snorenz strips" version in NZ, which was apparently on store shelves In January according to the comment here: http://www.nzonlinepharmacy.com/products/Snorenz-Oral-Strips-14.html
Snorenz and Stemintense in South Africa:
http://www.wantitall.co.za/Health-and-Personal-Care/Snorenz-Original-Anti-snoring-Spray__B00028MH10
http://www.wantitall.co.za/Health-and-Personal-Care/Stem-Intense-Muscle-Builder__B00BEYBW76 ;
Stemintense on military base in Germany:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=86973651&txt2find=GERMANY
Snorenz CAN be found on the Foodtown website, and both products are for sale on Amazon, of course:
http://www.amazon.com/Snorenz-Original-Anti-snoring-Spray/dp/B00028MH10
http://www.amazon.com/Stem-Intense-Stem-Intense-Muscle-Builder/dp/B00BEYBW76
Let's think about this a bit. How much time each day do you think Nick spends on tweets and the other kinds of communication you mentioned? Probably a few minutes a day on tweets and less than an hour a day on average for all the PRs, letters, etc.
What's he doing with the rest of the day? None of us can know for sure.
So how can you say he is spending all his time preoccupied with the stock price and chill, when all you're seeing is 10% of his day, at most?
My impression is that he spends most of the other 90% busily building the business, based on all I've read over the last few months. When communicating with shareholders, he covers the stuff he thinks shareholders most want to hear about.
From the emails I've seen, they're very careful to not make any specific points which would be considered leaking of inside info to just a few, and not everyone. They're vague where they need to be vague for legality, while still dropping enough hints that we can figure out what they mean. They know what they're doing.
Excellent points about profitability. As efficiency is gained and profit margins stabilize, valuation should shift to P/E and PEG as you said.
Last year, Danny focussed a lot on efficiency during the slow summer months. It's the perfect time to do it. He also needs to train people and stock up for the Q4 rush, which could raise costs a little in Q3, although efficiency efforts should offset that. I think Q2 should show increased efficiency, so we should still see profit.
Regarding your question:
I definitely agree with your BRAV estimate for Q2, but remember that Q3 was BRAV's weakest quarter last year. Are you thinking that Q3 will be over $1M because of VivaVuva?
Once it starts to move up steadily and break through .004 with volume, the speculative buyers will pile in. We'll get that kind of movement and volume once enough of the expected good news hits.
I think it's just too dormant for most speculative buyers.
I think a lot of folks have bought very small stakes, just so they'll get the reminder to check on it daily in case it moves. That could explain the > 3000 shareholders. I think many of those will buy bigger stakes once they believe it will move.
I'm agreeing with you on the Spurs!
And in the other one, sorry cldblood, but gotta go w/ the Bruins (either way, it's been entertaining)!
I would interpret that differently.
I would think it could get the DTCC to move a little faster, knowing the CEO is about to show up in person. They'll want to be prepared.
It makes it more likely that they'll be ready to remove the chill before then.
One less meeting they'll have to spend time on if they just get the chill removed by then.
All of which makes this the best time to buy.
Waiting for the next quarterly? I'm just hoping people's expectations aren't too high on it. Q2 is historically the worst quarter of the year by far for leggings.
The next quarterly will look good if you compare year-over-year, but bad if you compare quarter-over-quarter. Hopefully in 2014, VV smooths out that Q2 weakness, but for this year, based on Alexa traffic trends, I'm projecting between $830k and 880k (after returns and refunds). Much better than last year's 677k, but of course well below last quarter.
I expect Q3 to then go back up to over $1M, and the historically strong Q4 to blast well past $2M.
OK, so if you know the answers, why are you asking the questions?
I think you missed the majority of my message, which was that some of those with brokers who CAN buy it still don't because of lack of confidence, and want some more indicators that this is legit. When those indicators come, the stock should move.
P.S. I'd appreciate if you would say "should have" instead of "should of".
The answer is simple, and I think most here know it.
Because of the chill. Most brokers won't let you buy this stock until the chill is off.
That alone is enough to scare some folks away, or make them stay cautious, until the chill is off. Not everyone has time to dig for information and verification, and read every tweet and PR and posted email, so their confidence in MDIN may be borderline, and they're merely looking for the chill removal (or uplist, etc.) as the sign that it's safe to buy in.
Also, many people will not open a new brokerage account just to buy one stock.
I had to strongly cajole my siblings to open accounts in order to buy this.
So, the stock price stays low. I think most longs are tapped out, but will find money to buy a little more when it dips really low. So it stays in a range.
MDIN just sent DTCC a letter 2 days ago. That's not sitting back.
I'm sure DTCC would be very angered by constant nagging, so the MDIN approach is the best. Some communication, but not to the point of nagging.
Well, I can't possibly take your word for it, because I have this message from BJames15 which lists out the details of all those dated tweets, and arrives at the opposite conclusion from what you're saying. So, I'd need to see some pretty convincing argument to the contrary to be convinced.
Here's what BJames15 told me:
Regarding Nick's Tweets not having follow through:
It's ok, I have all of his Tweets, and again, any reference to 90% of them being false IS A LIE!
In fact, out of 17 dated Tweets (or ones with time references), only 3 of them are the ones even in question, which is actually CLOSER to 90% of them being COMPLETELY TRUE AND ACCURATE!
Some of these verified Tweets include (recent to earlier):
Share structure update on time
New patent deals in the pike, which came true
Q released early
Nevada made current
A/S updated with billions dropped
Shares stated canceled
IR campaign (which, he even updated on March 26th as going well)
New Pet product information on time (including release date via PR)
Announced a Feb 14th PR with great info
Announced online launch
P&L and projections announced and delivered upon
Working on a database with retailers (wouldn't be released before full rollout, so it's not even relevant yet)
Products shipped and going on shelves (again, we've been given info on sightings, and someone not seeing it does not negate those who have and have contacted Nick)
So, what's in question is really two Tweets having to do with retail updates, which are clearly because of a strategy change to not release them until full rollout. In fact, he very specifically mentioned his apprehension to do so since losing the Food Town contract and that he wouldn't be doing so yet. So that point is worthless to dwell on.
Also, one having to do with 'an official list' which was then shortly followed by the Pro Forma, which though not as 'official' as some would like, is all he is willing to give at this point under the above scenario. Again, no need to dwell there.
Any reference to the shelving of product's date shows a lack of understanding how to connect all of the information and is being disingenuous to what has happened. Nick has negotiated permanent shelf space via an end cap item, proven through articles here to work in the exact timeframe Nick has provided. So exactly on track.
And lastly, a celebrity announcement WAS updated via email and specifics were given as to where we are on that topic as well. So that means it has also been addressed already as well.
So nothing that is being said about Nick not coming through on his Tweets is actually true. In fact, it's quite the opposite. And it would be ridiculous for someone to say that because he did not release a list he Tweeted which he said he would because he changed his strategy that it makes him a man who would lie about $5 million on a Q. That is absolutely off track. Just ridiculous.
And I would say that is case closed. To bring up any other petty issues about his Tweets is irrelevant and would waste all board members' time, and this topic is done.
Look, if the chill gets lifted and financials audited and a great Q2 and the stock price doesn't move, THEN we can all start to whine and get worried and impatient.
But until those things happen, we just have to deal with it, and be patient. It's not going to move up until there is a catalyst which can overcome the games.
What good does it do to keep complaining about how impatient you feel? That won't move the stock, and won't help us understand what the stock's likely to do next.
Wack, I think you're confusing "target date" with "promised, committed date".
There's a difference. You have to understand how to interpret communications.
Yup, it was less than 2 weeks ago when it crossed under 100k in the US rankings.
Here are the numbers showing the steady progression of VivaVuva's Alexa numbers.
Note that I didn't start recording until 12 days after VivaVuva was announced, and I sometimes miss a day or two. Also the dates are for the last date shown on Alexa, rather than the current day (which is usually 2 to 3 days later).
Date World USA 1m Reach% Pagevw%
3m rank rank x 100k x 1000k
05/20/2013 2340 k 179 k 3.1 2.2
05/23/2013 2019 k 153 k 3.7 2.5
05/25/2013 1840 k 137 k 4.3 2.7
05/26/2013 1705 k 125 k 4.7 3.0
05/27/2013 1661 k 127 k 4.9 3.0
05/28/2013 1608 k 121 k 4.9 3.3
05/29/2013 1536 k 114 k 5.2 3.6
05/30/2013 1548 k 117 k 5.2 3.6
06/01/2013 1444 k 114 k 5.5 4.1
06/02/2013 1397 k 112 k 5.7 4.3
06/03/2013 1305 k 103 k 6.0 5.3
06/06/2013 1149 k 88.6 k 6.6 7.6
06/08/2013 1111 k 84.4 k 6.7 8.1
06/09/2013 1080 k 81.1 k 6.9 8.5
06/10/2013 1046 k 77.6 k 7.2 8.8
06/12/2013 968 k 71.2 k 7.8 10.0
06/13/2013 928 k 67.6 k 8.1 11.0
06/14/2013 909 k 65.7 k 8.2 11.4
06/15/2013 874 k 62.4 k 8.6 11.9
Agree with all you said, except I think it's more clear to call it year-over-year growth, even if you're comparing quarters to quarters from a year ago.
Saying Qtr-over-qtr could confuse people into thinking you're saying every quarter, revenues go up 250% compared to previous quarter. Of course we all know that's not what you meant.
Did you mean to say "should have bought?