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.
Well, this just makes me more comfortable that Nick is running things rather than someone else:
nick just now wants to expedite????:after 2nd Q letter should been sent out every week until chill removal
The quarter ends June 30th, but the disclosure is not until sometime in July.
Anyway, it will indeed be a big concern if NONE of those things happen by the first week of July. I believe we should get 2 of the 3 by first or 2nd week of July, with the audit being one of them, since that's under their control.
Read the quarterly report carefully. You'll see that no more than 10% of the revenue was from online sales.
Exactly right. MDIN has no control over how fast the DTCC processes chill removals.
In fact, it seems to me that someone at the DTCC must have been on vacation last week. Take a look at their reports. In the 5 days last week, looking at reports from
http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/imp_notices/2013/nscc/otc/OTC-110.pdf
to
http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/imp_notices/2013/nscc/otc/OTC-114.pdf,
they had a total of 4 chill removals (12K Sec Reinstatement) reported, with 0 on Monday, Tuesday and Friday last week.
Today, there were 58 12K Sec Reinstatements! 58 !!
http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/imp_notices/2013/nscc/otc/OTC-115.pdf
DTCC must have been backed up big time, and someone's on catch-up duty!!
Sadly MDIN was not one of them, and you can spin this whichever way you want. I'm inclined to believe that DTCC is still in the process of catching up, which is good for MDIN as long as the number of 12K Sec Reinstatements stays high each day until MDIN appears in the list.
I think the reason is that most people are waiting to see the yield sign actually removed before jumping in. Some people may not even be aware that this is about to happen, and will only know about it when the yield sign is removed. It will make a difference for some people to see it made "official".
Regarding VivaVuva you said:
alexa rankings mean nothing dont put so much emphasis on that. They dont coralate to sales
Well, don't get too excited!
It's more of a target, as in a challenging goal to strive for (well, for BRAV employees) rather than a prediction of something highly likely.
I do believe that with hard work and good decisions it could be achieved.
Thanks, Missy! I'm dreaming of 14M in revs in 2014, which would be great.
"14 in '14" could be our rally cry.
That would be 2 cents / share in revenue, which would drive the stock price to several multiples of that.
Guess is the right word here, and that's what I'm about to do, make some wild guesses, but they'll be based on traffic trends, and how I see VV traffic increasing compared to how WOL started, adjusting for seasonal trends and website readiness and name recognition, etc.
I think the only way VV gets over 1 Mil this year is if everything goes better than expected. It could happen and would be awesome, but I doubt it will ramp up that fast.
I'm thinking it does about 10k to 20k this quarter, around 100k next quarter, then do a full grand opening launch at the start of Q4, and bring in about 500k in Q4.
For BRAV without VV, I agree with your estimates. I think the first 3 quarters combined will be around 3.2M, and Q4 will be around 2.2M (without VV), for about 5.4M. Adding in VV should put them to right around 6M for the year.
The fun will happen in next year's Q1, as VV continues to grow, and doesn't experience the same springtime slump that OL and WOL do. They could follow a 2.7M Q4 with even bigger 2014 Q1 and Q2 numbers, bucking the past trend from the leggings seasonal slump.
Of course, these are all just guesses, but at least semi-educated ones!
A company in South Africa is selling Stem Intense and Snorenz?
http://www.wantitall.co.za/Health-and-Personal-Care/Stem-Intense-Muscle-Builder__B00BEYBW76
Actually, it's not 130M shares he's trying to get it to. Based on the recent PR, they want to buy back 80M more, which would bring it to 189M, and they have another 33M already bough that aren't yet technically out of the float but will be, bringing us to 156M.
So "under 160M" would be more accurate.
I doubt he'll ever get it that low, because if he ever gets it down to 200M, and any good news is confirmed, the PPS will skyrocket.
All true, although I think there's yet another group of investors who believe in the company and want to get in at the bottom. For them, seeing the chart tells them that the 002s are the bottom, seeing as how it based there from December through February, and now again from late April until now.
So the chart tells them "no need to wait... buy now".
All true, although I think there's yet another group of investors who believe in the company and want to get in at the bottom. For them, seeing the chart tells them that the 002s are the bottom, seeing as how it based there from December through February, and now again from late April until now.
So the chart tells them "no need to wait... buy now".
Trading 101, eh? Better check your notes from class.
The real definition of dilution is when SHARES OUTSTANDING goes up, which can happen without the float going up if the new shares are restricted. This happened with the lactose deal, which is good dilution if the rights gained are worth more than the shares created, and bad dilution if worth less.
Float can also go up without shares outstanding going up by having existing shares become unrestricted. This can FEEL more like dilution since it can drive the price down in the short-term, but generally has less long-term effect on share price than real dilution.
Both things have happened recently with MDIN.
The thing we should be debating is the value of those lactose intolerance patent rights, as that's the only thing which tells us whether recent REAL dilution is good or bad long-term.
Saying the new shares "just got unrestricted" is misleading in my opinion.
Based on my float turnover analysis, the shares must have been unrestricted back in April:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=88473857
After the April dilution, the holders of the newly unrestricted stock sold gradually over the last 2 months. Obviously they could not sell all at once.
The question is, how close are they to being all sold? I think very close.
Side point: technically speaking, this is only what you might call "float dilution", which isn't real dilution in the sense of "shares outstanding" going up. The only real dilution was the deal to get the lactose patent license, which was the good kind of dilution if those patent rights are worth what some think they are.
You were doing well until you said:
its common sense by now that dilution is happening everyday.
Low volume. As tight of a range as you can get today.
Calm before the storm.
I have a feeling it'll be a good storm, and it's right around the corner.
No, I believe "gagged" means they won't tell you any information.
If they tell you O/S and A/S how can you call them gagged?
Your re-definition of the word "ungagged" makes no sense to me.
If I recall correctly, what we were told was that the celebrity is waiting for the results of some clinical trials before fully putting his/her weight behind it. Celebrities need to make extra sure, since damage to their reputation can kill their career.
Well, I hope you're right, but realistically, VV is not going to surpass OL or even WOL before it has its "real" opening, which won't be until about October, per the conference call.
If you look at the website, there are still a lot of empty pages. It's still being buit and populated with choices. It won't really be promoted hard until it's fully ready, and is officially "launched".
But given that it has only had a "soft" opening, and is far from complete, it's very impressive that they've gotten so much traffic. The only thing I have the data to compare it to is the launch of WOL, but that was a "full" or "hard" opening of a complete website which had 2 brick&mortar stores of the same name backing it up and promoting it, so even there, it's not comparing the same situation. WOL did about 2 to 3 times as much traffic in its first month after a "full" launch as VV has done in its first month after a "soft" or "partial" launch with relatively little to promote it. I think that bodes very well for VV.
I don't think that means "the company has to do it". I think it means "the company can do it".
Either way, it seems I was wrong to say that it was out of their control, but on the flip side, is it their responsibility? I suppose that might be a matter of opinion. I doubt that there is a REQUIREMENT that the company verify the info posted on OTCmarkets, but it's a good thing if they do it.
Yes, it would be nice to see the float number corrected, but really, the outstanding shares is the more important number, and that is accurate, so it seems like you're making a big deal out of nothing.
My understanding is that companies do not control what OTCmarkets lists on its company info page. OTCmarkets takes it from reports, so BRAV probably just hasn't mentioned float in a report since 2010.
That's probably because they don't need to, because in the case of BRAV, the float and the O/S are the same.
This is no big scandal, just an out of date entry on a website which BRAV doesn't control.
You got the OnlyLeggings US peak rank right, but the rest are off by quite a bit. See the post I just made a few minutes ago.
Also, WOL's CURRENT rank is a lot better than VV's ranks, but what VV has done is very impressive.
VV's current 81.1k rank in the US (1-month) equals WOL's US rank for the month of September, 2012 (recorded Oct 3rd), and it's improving much faster.
What were the best rankings that WOL and Onlyleggings had?
Very true. You gave the right definition of dilution, and dilution did happen.
However, I think the Nov 19th tweet you referred to, where Nick said "NO shares have or will be issued or freed up in the near future. Dilution will not happen on my watch", was referring to dilution used to raise funds to keep the business afloat. That kind is scary because it might continue a long time, and the business is not improved by it. Indeed, that kind of dilution did not happen here.
This dilution was to gain rights which increase the value and future prospects of the company significantly. It's a one-time event. It's over. I don't mind this kind of dilution. The business is profitable and doesn't need to dilute to stay afloat, so I'm not worried by it.
Seems there might be different definitions of dilution out there.
If # of shares outstanding does not go up, it is not dilution.
Float going up without shares outstanding going up is not dilution, though it might look like it.
The deal for the lactose intolerance patent license was paid for in new shares, which raised # of outstanding shares. THAT'S the dilution. But that didn't cause selling on the market, since those shares are restricted and not yet in the float.
When did he say the DTCC is in touch with him? He just said he was hoping to hear from them.
Indeed! You were the trailblazer in terms of visits to the warehouse and meeting with Danny, etc.
Wow. So many folks focussed on stuff that's not critical to long term share price.
I suppose you could argue that the CEO's credibility is questionable being that BRAV is not current yet, and the CEO doesn't sound slick and prepared, and that last year he made forward-looking statements that didn't pan out (like a 3rd store or a super-optimistic revenue target).
However, those concerns are either trivial, or already answered. He's overly optimistic? Who cares, as long as he delivers consistent, big growth. Not a slick speaker? Who cares, as long as he communicates well enough to run the business. Some plans were changed? A store not opened, and now one relocating or closing? That's business, folks! If you don't respond to changing conditions, your business will die. These changes made sense. To focus more on websites than stores was a good business decision. The Robertson business is SMALL compared to the rest.
Not being current makes you suspicious of reported numbers? Fine. For a typical penny stock, that's a valid concern. That's why some on this board have visited the stores and warehouse, and talked with Danny, and employees. We've tracked order numbers, website traffic trends, search engine ranks, social media references, and more. It's been verified that the reports are consistent with what we see elsewhere. The business is legit, and growing. We believe the financial reports whether or not it's labelled "current". We want it to be current so more folks will invest, but we don't need it current to believe in it.
The big things for this company are:
1) How is OnlyLeggings doing (and to a lesser degree, WorldOfLeggings)?
2) What's your next big thing to grow beyond OnlyLeggings? (answer: VivaVuva)
Both of these things were answered well, as the CC made convincing points that their futures might be brighter than previously thought. To focus on anything else is to focus on relatively small stuff, or stuff that's already been figured out as not so bad.
In short, the positives are huge, the negatives are relatively small.
You're basing your estimates on order numbers, but last quarter, order numbers misled us.
I found website traffic to be a more reliable way to predict.
By order number, a proper prediction was at least $1.7M, maybe more.
By traffic, a proper prediction was no more than $1.3M.
Based on traffic, the current quarter will be much better than same quarter last year, and while it will drop off from last quarter, the dropoff won't be as much as last year's dropoff, due to a surprisingly strong May, with momentum into June.
Regarding growth:
I'm pretty sure the company is not growing this Q
Danny reiterated revenue guidance.
I've been tracking Alexa rankings for VivaVuva and the other sites.
The alexa rank for VivaVuva is what shocked me the most. That is pretty impressive.
Date, WorldRank, USRank, Reach, Pageview%
May 22, 2340 k, 179 k, 3.1, 2.2
May 25, 2019 k, 153 k, 3.7, 2.5
May 27, 1840 k, 137 k, 4.3, 2.7
May 28, 1705 k, 125 k, 4.7, 3.0
May 29, 1661 k, 127 k, 4.9, 3.0
May 30, 1608 k, 121 k, 4.9, 3.3
May 31, 1536 k, 114 k, 5.2, 3.6
Jun 01, 1548 k, 117 k, 5.2, 3.6
Jun 03, 1444 k, 114 k, 5.5, 4.1
Jun 04, 1397 k, 112 k, 5.7, 4.3
Jun 05, 1305 k, 103 k, 6.0, 5.3
I think saying "tomorrow" is overly optimistic. He said it was in process and he met with lawyers in Oregon yesterday, then seemed to imply the process is different than it used to be, almost implying it would take a bit of time. He did say they "hope" to have it done "soon". I interpreted it as "2 or 3 weeks".
I believe he said the store would be relocating, not permanently closing. There will be a gap of a few months between closing of old Robertson store (August) and new one at a nearby location.
No specifics in your post about the CC, just vague negative spin.
Lots of specifics in other people's positive posts.
Gainmaker, did you listen to the radio interview with Nick? The link is in the PR and in one of his tweets. You'll get the best answers he's allowed to give if you listen to that. Remember, every CEO has to be careful how much detail they give before the quarterly reports.
Agreed on this, Craig.
That's right. Longs are buying, Nick is buying. He said he's buying up to 80m more and hopefully he will retire that 33M (I believe it was) in the treasury. Soon all of the longs will own MDIN and the whiners will be gone.
I think Nick's theory about someone selling back and forth to themselves or their partners is probably true, and while the "fictitious shares" might be true, I think more likely it's real shares, along the lines of what cldbloodwrmwallet said here:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=88668044
Someone with real shares makes a bid just below the current bid, and with a much larger # of shares, then makes an All-Or-None sell to themselves from another account at their below-the-bid price. If the AON size is large enough it will "skip over" the visible bid and sell below it. All to create the illusion of massive sell-off, just for the price of commissions.
Read the following. It may explain why a shady company could have a chill lifted quickly, and a legit one may take longer. It all depends on the reason for the chill being there in the first place, and those reasons can be many and varied.
http://www.sec.gov/investor/alerts/dtcfreezes.pdf
It says:
A chill may remain imposed on a security for just a few
days or for an extended period of time depending
upon the reasons for the chill and whether the issuer
or transfer agent corrects the problem.
DTC imposes chills and freezes on securities for
various reasons. For example, DTC may impose a
chill on a security because the issuer no longer has a
transfer agent to facilitate the transfer of the security
or the transfer agent is not complying with DTC
rules in its interactions with DTC in transferring the
security. Often this type of situation is resolved within
a short period of time.
Chills and freezes can be imposed on securities
for more complicated reasons, such as when DTC
determines that there may be a legal, regulatory, or
operational problem with the issuance of the security,
or the trading or clearing of transactions involving
the security.