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.
As it has been pointed out to you more than 10 times in the past few months, the company is LESS THAN 5 YEARS OLD. Not 9 like you keep saying. But don't take my word for it. Go to :
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/AWSL/company-info
Sounds similar to this from post 12262
Please allow me to comment. Your points are in "quotes"
"kind of like the AWSL dividend shares that are never going to be able to be redeemed,...remember those ?"
I do remember them. I have some and I am very happy to have received them for free! As for "redeeming" since when can you "redeem a common share"? I Never heard of such a thing. "redeem" to who?
"ALL awsl shareholders are using those shares now for wallpaper. "
While I admit they do look nice, I doubt that.
"this company is based on creating momentum via a stock promotion,...that is it ! "
Can you point me to this promotion? I have seen no emails, websites or anything such as this to indicate promotion. Well except in 2009 if that is what you are talking about.
"other than that, to date, this company has "nada" to offer shareholders and bagholders or any other individual. "
Really, aside from giving 50% more shares via dividend (or wallpaper as you call it, lets look at what it has:
$1,880.000 in sales in 2012,
$1,600,000 in sales in the past 6 months
Another $7,000,000 in sales from FIT 1.0
The above sales are for 2.7 MW.
The company secured 58.43 MW's in Ecuador. Estimated at $150,000,000 by AWSL management.
Other projects not announced * see Morton response below...
"ever notice that AWSL management never completes anything ? what happened to the Morton Salt deal ?,...some lame excuse why it didn't happen,...and the C&W deal, another lame excuse why it didn't occur,...and a sundry more,...now management is on to ecuador. and the only reason they got in the door there is because of Venecia Gafter,... "
C&W deal did not go through? I am not sure where you have been but they secured over half of the 2.7 MW's for AWS. As for MortonSalt, they cancelled the deal after receiving calls and emails telling them that the company was a scam. Many of the same "sky is falling statements we all had to read. Which as we all know turned out to be false. Let me know if you want all the examples again! This was why according to company news and filings, news will not be announced until a deal is completed irrevocably to avoid this from happening again, As for 'the only reason AWS got in the door was Venecia Gafter', I am confused. She is management. I thought management does not do or finish anything. What one is it? Did she do this, or did management not do it. I am very confused...
"there ain't nothing going to occur,...just a set up. "
Hate to break it to you, but it is already occurring. Approx $3,500,000 in sales over the past 12 months
Here it is... from #12262
"Previously demonstrated" this? You made a claim and I cleared it up. I can repost this if you need? I was very clear that AWSL does not intend to keep these on the books for a full 5 years. (but regardless Pref shares are equity)
You can present it as "you like" but I am going to stick to generally accepted accounting principals.
Aside from all buys being met with short sales (offers_ lets not forget these classic trades like today's 179 share print at .2401 . Putting the stock down on a $43 trade!
Regarding the last post,preferred shares are equity by definition. Taking them out of the financial equation to get to 'your' book value is like me taking the accounts payable out to get a valuation I like.
If we are going to ignore generally accepted accounting principals then I am not sure how these discussions are going to be meaningful.
As for valuation and a premium, since when to small cap's or growth stock get valued by book value? They almost NEVER do. This is reserved for a much different breed of company and security. Most companies, large and small get valued based on growth prospects and EPS.
Therefor, lets assume AWSL gets (based on its current margins and projected sales as outlined in there annual report) earning of $2,500,000 for 2013: (not including Ecuador or anything else other than FIT 1.0_
Earnings $2,500,000
Issued and Out shares Approx: 44,000,000
EPS of .057 share
10 times earning = .57 per share
20 times earning = $1.13 per share
30 times earnings = $1.71 per share
Large companies with slower growth will get 10 times earnings. Smaller faster growing companies can get more than 25 or 30 times earnings. This also ONLY takes into account 1.0 sales and remember Ecuador's 58 MW deal is 20 times larger than FIT 1.0. It assumes no short squeeze at all.
The price is being held down by short offers. ALmost every single buy over the past couple months was met with a short sale. I have posted this finding before but here it is again:
Removing the short sale hold down this would be moving up as there is no real sellers.
http://otcshortreport.com/index.php?index=awsl&action=view#.UgkHERbqoqY
There is a 10,000 bid at .22 and another 10,000 at .2201. You see the .16 bid since the market is closed.
A 3pm 100 share ($25) print at .25. So now the stock is down from .32 on the day. Hmm I wonder who and why this happened.
Hopefully you got that Saul? I recall you were bidding at .25.
Level II is looking good. Bids getting bigger and higher. Offers smaller an higher.
AWSL - OTC Markets Level 2 - 13:10:43
Bid Ask
Time MMid Size Price Price Size MMid Time
08/08 11:53:14 CDEL 10200 0.22 0.32 2500 CANT 08/08 07:35:07
08/08 10:18:54 NITE 10000 0.2101 0.32 3000 ATDF 08/08 09:30:17
08/08 09:30:17 ATDF 6000 0.18 0.35 3000 CSTI 08/08 10:46:07
08/08 10:46:07 CSTI 10000 0.16 0.40 2500 NITE 08/08 10:18:54
08/08 10:46:08 ETRF 5000 0 .135 0.44 2500 ETRF 08/08 10:46:08
08/08 07:35:07 CANT 10000 0 .048 0 .45 4368 CDEL 08/08 11:53:14
Again let me Respond...
Thanks for the very prompt response. What more could I ask for besides annual audited financial statements with full disclosure footnotes and timely files quarterly reports?
Well if you are looking for audited statements an filings every quarter, for the time being you might want to find a company that is a SEC reporting company.. AWSL is not. However AWSL does file annual anne semi annual reports with OTCMarjets.com.
My followup comments are numbered to correspond to your post quoted - below.
1. I can wait for the 2013 financial report to see some of the Ecuador revenues and margins.
Again as I stated, according to AWSL financial reports AWSL will NOT begin to book revenues on Ecuador until late 2013 or 2014. This VERY large deal was only approved at the end of January.
2. I don't care to see the 2009 audit report if management is unwilling to make them available to everyone.
Unwilling? They are available to all. If you are trying to hint that 2009 should be filed on OTC I disagree. Companies do not post 5 year old financials. AWSL went back 3 years in the 2012 annual report. Further than required, I might add.
3. I agree with you about the shorts. I think that it will be very challenging to cover those shorts, since
the AWSL trading activity has been so light for so long - as long as I've been on this board...
The light trading activity has nothing to do with it. You don't need others to buy to cover a short. You need willing sellers. From what I observe, this does not exist. So yes it will be extremely hard to cover. In fact I do not think there is enough free trading shares in DTC to cover.
4. I would like to see some stimulating "awareness" about AWSL. I came to the board just after the failed PSC awareness campaign in October 2009, so I've never seen any "frenzy" to buy these shares. Booyah!
hmmmm... where have I heard this "Booyah" before. When doing a "public service" I am not sure why one would want this. As a matter of speculation I think a short trader would love someone else to take over the shorts and hope the new momentum buyers would sell it to them to partially cover. Then a new short trader is then sitting with the worry of how to cover.
5. We can wait to talk about the "lost equity investors."
6. We hear about the "Strong Doubts" almost every day in the form of the short sellers, but the "Strong Buys" appear to operate in stealth mode.
Actually there is only one person I know that says repeatedly "strong doubts" , but that person has "no financial interest in AWSL" as stated..
7. I don't know what the appropriate margins should be under the Bird-in-the-Hand projects. However, I thought that conceptually the Company was taking the short "one-time" money in order to fund future projects. I simply thought that the short money received was very short, since it has yet to cover the Company's modest reduced operating expenses.
Than how can it be said that the margins are low?
8. I've read "Whispers" about there being 7,000 shareholders, but only 1,420 shareholders were reported on the latest otcmarkets.com. We've discussed this before, so I guess the difference represents owners who hold their shares in street name.
I have not seen an AWSL filing stating 7,000.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=55717586 - "there are 7,000 investors already here"
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/AWSL/company-info
9. This isn't my cup of tea, but it's much better than being a common shareholder flat-lined at $.32 a share.
10. My reading comprehension is pretty well developed, but I can wait to see the 2013 financials for the substantiation.
You have already seen the first 6 months of 2013. But I too look forward to hearing your comments on the whole year!
Again, thanks for your always prompt responses. You have a future in PR.
Gilda
Thank you. I just like clarity.
ASDFU
Here is my quick replies. I left your questions up and answers below..
1. Is there any verifiable third-party news about construction in Ecuador? Will we see any revenues from Ecuador in the 2013 financial statements?
No. And a project of that scale does not go from approval to construction in less than 6 months. According to the AWS filings revenues will not begin to get book on this until late 2013 / 2014.
2. Any more comments about the recent AWSL financials or the "2009 lost audit?"
No all the critiques you mentioned were addressed. The 2009 audit was not lost. Email the company for a copy. (I am sure others gave you this advice already)
3. It looks like the share price has flat-lined at $.32 WITH SHORT SELLING! At least the shorts seem to know what they're doing...
Yes they seem to know what to do,to sell short. Bit I think they just don't know how they are going to get the shares to cover.
4. What's the latest news regarding some renewed awareness to get this "baby" moving again?
I was just reading here why you were gone that we should beware of such a thing. Are you for or against?
5. Any updates from the "lost equity investors?"
No idea what this means.
6. Aren't the "Strong Buys" really saying: Do as I say, not as I do? Are the SBs buying on the flip side of the growing short sales?
Could the same not be said for the "strong doubts"
7. Aren't the revenues from the Ontario FIT 1.0 Bird-in-the-Hand projects one-time deals? Why are the gross margins so slim?
So slim? Compared to what? Perhaps you would like to show us the 'appropriate margin' for a similar company?
8. How many AWSL shareholders are there now: 5,000? 7,000? how many?
If you just read the AWS filing, why don't you tell us what you found?
9. Who's funding the purchase of the 12% preferred series A ahares?
Management. ARe you interested in getting some? I believe they will provide the same deal to any shareholder.
10. The recent disclosure statement filed under Rule 15c2-11 indicates under Item 17. Plan Of Operations, the following:
Quote:
Issuer has approximately $20,000 of cash available and approximately $300,000 in receivables net of associated variable expenses expected by the end of 2013. Its current cash expenditures approximate $1,000 per month. Even given variable, periodic but necessary expenses such as accounting fees, auditing fees, legal fees, etc. the net cash from 2013 alone could fund the company for 5+ years.
Even allowing for the payment of salaries and wages to be deferred, AWSL's operating expenses of $515,718 for the six months ended June 30, 2013 exceeded $100,000 after removing the payroll items. How does $1,000 per month pay cash expenses in excess of $100,000 for the second half of 2013?
Reread the paragraph. It is very self explanatory.
1. The increased positive posts I would suggest is because there is much more to talk about than in the past. The Company has filed financials showing its first revenues. These showed that the company has also made significant increases in regards to cost cutting and return on head count and decreased burn rate.
2. The company filed its second financial report indicated even further growth in sales and profitability,.
3. The numbers of posts also relate to how many incorrect assumptions 'accidental' postings of incorrect info etc. that had to be addressed.
4. Finally, to say that "usually means that someone has shares to sell.(like a third party affiliate or a stock promoter, ect) " MIGHT be valid if you see huge promotion and obvious pumping. But lets be blunt. There is no promotion and the only selling is short sales as reported.
I think it is obvious the shareholders are not selling. Additionally I am pleased to see there is healthy debate and not just a one sided broken record.
BTW, what metrics are you using to compare the company's success vs the posts on a message board?
Big surprise.. ANother 100% short volume day!
Historical Short Selling Data For AWSL
Date VolShorted High Low Close Chg ShortVol RegularVol
Aug 07 100.00% NA NA NA NA 5,000 5,000
Aug 06 100.00% 0.32 0.32 0.32 +45.45% 13,404 13,404
Aug 05 0% 0.22 0.22 0.22 -31.25% 0 200
Aug 02 100.00% 0.32 0.32 0.32 +45.45% 249 249
Aug 01 36.82% 0.32 0.22 0.22 -29.03% 500 1,358
Jul 31 84.32% 0.32 0.22 0.31 +47.62% 3,000 3,558
Jul 30 7.69% 0.25 0.21 0.21 -4.55% 500 6,503
Jul 29 0% 0.25 0.22 0.22 -12.00% 0 2,400
Jul 26 0% 0.25 0.25 0.25 -16.67% 0 1,400
Jul 25 1.94% 0.30 0.18 0.30 -3.23% 222 11,472
Jul 24 17.96% 0.31 0.22 0.31 +29.17% 2,315 12,887
Jul 23 0% 0.24 0.24 0.24 -22.58% 0 100
Jul 22 100.00% 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00% 1,200 1,200
Jul 19 12.90% 0.31 0.24 0.31 +3.33% 538 4,172
Jul 18 77.24% 0.32 0.30 0.30 -6.25% 2,141 2,772
Jul 17 0% 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.00% 0 0
Jul 16 100.00% 0.32 0.32 0.32 +39.13% 8,460 8,460
Jul 15 50.70% 0.32 0.22 0.23 -28.13% 400 789
Jul 12 48.97% 0.32 0.22 0.32 +3.23% 2,100 4,288
10,000 bid at .20 was jumped by another bid at .2001 for 10,000 also. Thats 20k above .20
Nice to see.
Further to the below, don't be surprised if a small print goes off at .20 now to make it close down for the day.
I knew that would upset someone.... Bid moved down to .20 now.
CDEL must be watching this board closely. Or is pretty tight with someone here. That only took a minute or two.
Seems the buyer (coverer) does not like to be pointed out.
No one wanted to sell to you at .25 so best of luck bidding at .20! Perhaps time to get a MM to do a cross low to make it look like a sale?
AFter 3 or 4 years, you think a new strategy would be tried. But I guess when you backed yourself into a corner the options start to run out.
Because I pointed out that the bid moved up. They don't want people to notice they want to cover... I mean buy. As for "weird", well after almost 4 years of seeing things like this it is very predictable to me and I am sure, others too.
Looking good so far today. Another 5,000 bought at .3199
Bid also moved up to .25 for 10,000 shares.
Offer moved up to .32 for 5,500 shares.
Next offer .40 for 5,200 shares.
Then offer is .50 for 2,500
Then .555 for 1,000
Lets see if me posting this makes more appear...
I knew that would upset someone.... Bid moved down to .20 now.
CDEL must be watching this board closely. Or is pretty tight with someone here. That only took a minute or two.
Seems the buyer (coverer) does not like to be pointed out.
No one wanted to sell to you at .25 so best of luck bidding at .20! Perhaps time to get a MM to do a cross low to make it look like a sale?
AFter 3 or 4 years, you think a new strategy would be tried. But I guess when you backed yourself into a corner the options start to run out.
Looking good so far today. Another 5,000 bought at .3199
Bid also moved up to .25 for 10,000 shares.
Offer moved up to .32 for 5,500 shares.
Next offer .40 for 5,200 shares.
Then offer is .50 for 2,500
Then .555 for 1,000
Lets see if me posting this makes more appear...
Generally short traders want to sell short as high as possible. When they keep the short sale offer at a certain level or even lower it is more that they are trying to make sure it doesn't go higher. Preferably lower. When they sell short at the bid, that is plain manipulation to make it look like it is trading lower. They don't really want to sell more short at that level. Think of it as doubling down increasing the short bet. No one wants to make the double down at a less profitable and much riskier level.
This leads me to believe the short position is already in place. These trades are only to keep it down.
They don't want to get deeper, but if they don't offer more shares for sale the price will jump up to a level that people would actually sell at. (For me that is a few dollars away). So lets assume the person who bought in the past few months thinks ".80 is a good price and nice profit" well that might be the new low offer.
So if the offer in this example is now at .80 and it trades there, the short margin requirements (margin call) goes way up. The shorts have to put up more money or start buying stock. Neither of these are what they want. We all know that.
I can predict who is going to disagree and post links to the Otcmarkets short position page. But mark my words these 13,404 shares shorted todat won't be in that list on the next report. They never seem to appear on that report.
Short Selling Data For AWSL
Date VolShorted High Low Close Chg ShortVol RegularVol
Aug 06 100.00% NA NA NA NA 13,404 13,404
That's right ladies and gentlemen. 100% of the volume was short sales.
A week ago we discussed and you acknowledged that the company is not required to file audited statements as it is not SEC reporting. It is OTCMarkets reporting. We discussed how management said it would rather spend the money on the business growth instead of auditors until it is required to do so. I am sure if you offer the company to pay they auditor you will be taken up on it.
Should I go find the quote?
Well of course, the shorts have MUCH more to lose then the long shareholders. At least the longs can only loose what they invested. Short positions have unlimited potential losses. This is often why shorts will pay people to do things that might help keep people from buying. Think pump and dump in reverse.
Longs do not need to do anything, no need to buy more. Sure it might help, but not needed. Mainstream will notice the rapid growth. Perhaps the Company will get even more shares pulled out of DTC or maybe even a corporate spinoff or action to cause a squeeze. But I think it would be best when the Tier is CURRENT and when they are ready to roll out even more great news. Just my personal opinion.
Isn't there some point at which you have to concede that the short sellers are more motivated than the "Strong Buys" who apparently aren't buying?
I wouldn't short a two-bit stock that's already so close to ground-zero, but I give the short sellers kudos for having the courage of their convictions.
Sentiment: Squeeze those shorts if you believe the endless rhetoric about the millions and millions of naked shorts.
Gilda
Update:
In addition to the below quote...
So with the 5,300 shares offer at .3199, we now see another 3,404 buy at this offer and it now reflects 4,800 offered. DO you notice the math here does not compute. In other words more shorting.
Trading today:
The offer at .3199 was for 9,300 shares. Yet 10,000 shares bought at .3199 and the offer is still there. This is because it is a short sale offer. Not real shares for sale.
I am glad we agree on this. Take a look at the link below to see what Wikipedia has on the subject.
But the interesting thing is AWSL does not carry "intangible assets:
Firstly, accounts receivables are NOT intangible assets.
Secondly,notes and loans receivables are NOT intangible assets.
Thirdly,, prepaid expenses are NOT intangible assets.
Frothily, accounts receivables are NOT intangible assets.
Deposits paid are NOT intangible assets.
The above ARE the assets on the AWSL books.
Finally and most importantly, it has been pointed out many, many times here about AWSL's accumulated losses / shareholder deficit.... (accumulated before the AWS sales started)
Well approx. $2,500,000 of this was due to the management taking the same very conservative opinion on R&D assets and they decided to write off these "intangible assets". So it seems this move should be applauded, despite adding the extra accumulated losses. Might I add these losses will offset the future income taxes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intangible_asset
Sounds like this is standard practice of US companies. Can you provide by example,a symbol of a company that doesn't put this at the end of there PR's?
Under U.S. law, section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, businesses must comply to standards of communication that limit risk factors. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a "safe harbor" for certain forward-looking statements. Businesses usually include a form of a disclaimer that states that any instance of a forward-looking statement found in their material is only true at the time it was written, and they further claim that they are under no obligation to update such written statements if conditions change or that unexpected occurrences happen to affect the statement afterwards. Such forward-looking statements, however, must be identifiable by the use of certain prescribed words.
Linguistic perspective[edit source | editbeta]
Sentences and phrases are forward-looking statements when they include any tense from present to future or similar inflection. Words, such as "believe," "estimate," "anticipate," "plan," "predict," "may," "hope," "can," "will," "should," "expect," "intend," "is designed to," "with the intent," "potential," the negative of these words or such other variations thereon or comparable terminology, may indicate forward-looking statements, but their absence does not mean that a statement is not forward looking.
Quote:
AWSL Disclaimer: Shareholders and investors are strongly cautioned against placing undue reliance on information set forth in these communications in making any investment decisions concerning our securities. The matters set forth in this press release are forward-looking statements.
Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the safe harbour clause you refer to below:
Under U.S. law, section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, businesses must comply to standards of communication that limit risk factors. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a "safe harbor" for certain forward-looking statements. Businesses usually include a form of a disclaimer that states that any instance of a forward-looking statement found in their material is only true at the time it was written, and they further claim that they are under no obligation to update such written statements if conditions change or that unexpected occurrences happen to affect the statement afterwards. Such forward-looking statements, however, must be identifiable by the use of certain prescribed words.
Linguistic perspective[edit source | editbeta]
Sentences and phrases are forward-looking statements when they include any tense from present to future or similar inflection. Words, such as "believe," "estimate," "anticipate," "plan," "predict," "may," "hope," "can," "will," "should," "expect," "intend," "is designed to," "with the intent," "potential," the negative of these words or such other variations thereon or comparable terminology, may indicate forward-looking statements, but their absence does not mean that a statement is not forward looking.
AWSL Disclaimer: Shareholders and investors are strongly cautioned against placing undue reliance on information set forth in these communications in making any investment decisions concerning our securities. The matters set forth in this press release are forward-looking statements.
Trading today:
The offer at .3199 was for 9,300 shares. Yet 10,000 shares bought at .3199 and the offer is still there. This is because it is a short sale offer. Not real shares for sale.
The bid has been at .22 for days. Now it is .219. Do you think they really dropped it hoping to save $10.? Of course not. It is that way so they can down print it later on the bid and the stoclk will look down again.
These are some classic moves. LLOL
No we are not. The interest payable in the 12% Pref shares currently get paid each quarter in new Pref shares.
But since the trend is:
Sales
$ 1,650,000 2013 (6 months)
$ 1,880,000 2012
- $1,100,000 2011
- $2,700,000 2010
And this seems to be negative somehow according to your posts, why don't you take a short position?
I like this trend and feel it will only get better. I continue to put my money where my mouth (and key strokes ) are.
Fair enough. I know you have been "waiting for financial statements" for ...?
The 2012 annual report was filed and the 6 months ending June 30,2013 was recently filed also. Can you tell us in your own opinion what the sales or earning would have to be for you to change your sentiment on this stock. Is there even such a number?
No I think you might be looking at another companies financials.
The 2013 sales of $1,600,000 represent ONLY 6 months.
The 2012 sales of $1,880,000 represent the WHOLE YEAR or stated another way 12 months.
Here is where the AWS: financials can be found: http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/AWSL/filings
Are we looking at the same interim financials? AWSL's revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2013 were $1,477,105 compared to $1,655,234 for the comparable period in 2012.
The total comprehensive income (loss) for the six months ended June 30, 2013 was ($174,848) compared to ($81,309) for the comparable period in 2012.
Gilda
Based on what I have been reading tonight, I hope everyone else won't believe everything they read too. ALWAYS DO YOUR OWN DUE DILIGENCE
Where are these projection that you say the company needs to borrow against? If you read the financial reports, the company was clear they do not need any new funding, hence why they cancelled the public offering. (great news for all AWSL shareholders)
keep in mind that those receivables are projections,... speculations,...hopefullness,...time will tell all whether this is just another round of whispering or if there is really any substance to a company that has had 9+ years to prove itself to shareholders and has yet to do so.if they can,...i'll ride the wave.
After stating for 3 year + "I have no financial interest in this company or stock" The below statement puzzles me???
Are you telling me that I can't take AWSL's projections and their receivables to the bank to pay my bills, nlightn? Perhaps, if I point out to the bank that the Company is no longer concerned about once being qualified by their auditors as a going concern...
Account receivable is not a "projection" as you stated. Here is what Wikopedia has to say on this:
Accounts receivable represents money owed by entities to the firm on the sale of products or services on credit. In most business entities, accounts receivable is typically executed by generating an invoice and either mailing or electronically delivering it to the customer, who, in turn, must pay it within an established timeframe, called credit terms[3] or payment terms.
The accounts receivable department uses the sales ledger, because a sales ledger normally records:[4]
- The sales a business has made.
- The amount of money received for goods or services.
- The amount of money owed at the end of each month varies (debtors).
The accounts receivable team is in charge of receiving funds on behalf of a company and applying it towards their current pending balances.
Collections and cashiering teams are part of the accounts receivable department. While the collections department seeks the debtor, the cashiering team applies the monies received.
How Ecuador will play out, we will have to keep in suspense for the moment. BUT YOU WILL KNOW. REST ASSURED YOU WILL KNOW! :)
As for your financial analysis, well I am sure the error in it was just an accident. But let me help clear things up.
There was no sales prior to Q2 2012. Not for the 4 years the company existed was there any. So we are clear now I hope
How can someone say the expenses and losses grew for Q1 and Q2 2013 compared to the year earlier, when the year earlier did not have any sales? So if Q1 and 2 2012 had only expenses and Q1 and 2 2013 had over $1,600,000 in sales how is this possible? Exactly, It is not.
The company increasing profitability over the past 3 years has resulting in the removing of a going concern risk disclosure from the financials statements. The company did everything that the naysayers said they could not or did not do. I can paste a list of the statements and prediction again if you like?
Please everyone take this as a lesson to ALWAYS do your own due diligence. Read the financials and disclosure filing for yourself.
Not to mention for almost 2 months the same ceremonial signing picture that is on the company website (see 3rd picture from top) was also used on the main page of CONELEC in the rotating banner.
http://atlanticwindandsolar.com/news-71.html
Now there was many "interesting" post this afternoon. I will be quick...
Atlantic is not 9 years old as stated. Less then 5 years according to the filings, OTCMarkets and the companies annual report and 15c2-11.
So according to these posts the company cannot be trusted. The financials are false. So ignore the assets and accounts receivables. But the accounts payables and liabilities are discussed as a matter of facts. So what one is it?
Again the "going concern" comment. Perhaps you missed the last financial report where they were pleased that the accountants no longer felt it was necessary and they had it removed.
Let me me break it down for those who seemed to miss it:
Sales - highlights for Atlantic Wind & Solar
$1,600,000 + 2013 (6 months)
$1,880,000 - 2012
(1,100,000) - 2011
(2,700,000) - 2010
Is the above the...
Quote:
- revenue growth,...nada,...all conjecture
and ....operated by questionable management who has yet to prove they can do anything except continue the agenda of deception.
As it is hard to find an OTC company with sales, let alone rapidly growing sales and profitability, I am confused by these statements. What is the extremely high bar the company and management should be measured by?
Regarding "projections" Here is a couple points we might of missed:
Something else we have all seen is that deals no longer get announced until they are irrevocable. This way no potential interference can jeopardize the deals and contracts. Which is good and bad. The bad is no longer will we hear of deals that are in place and almost done. ie LOI or MOU. But the good news is when they are announced they are 100%.
In reality surprises like a $150,000,000 deal in Ecuador is a nice thing too. Hopefully we will all be reading about how the rest of the pipeline is coming along soon.
Sales - highlights for Atlantic Wind & Solar
$1,600,000 + 2013 (6 months)
$1,880,000 - 2012
(1,100,000) - 2011
(2,700,000) - 2010
Is the the:
Is the above the...
Quote:
- revenue growth,...nada,...all conjecture
and ....operated by questionable management who has yet to prove they can do anything except continue the agenda of deception.
As it is hard to find an OTC company with sales, let alone rapidly growing sales and profitability, I am confused by these statements. What is the extremely high bar the company and management should be measured by?
Can you tell us how you got to the position that management needs $10 million for this? Perhaps you missed this:
Wow that is an "interesting" perspective.
Let me shed some light on this.
Company intends to retire these pref shares within 24 months. This will be accomplished through a refinance at much better rates, repaying through earning from FIT 1.0, 2.0, 3.0. and Ecuador and or other deals not yet announced. This has always been management's intent and. Further it is abundantly confident on its ability to do so. *By the way this does not even come close to the $10 million figure you stated.
By now I am guessing shareholders believe this is more than just possible. After all the track record of predictions ie "insolvent" or statements like "stick a fork in it. This thing is done"."out of business", "management took the money and ran". "lets face it, the elephant in the room is the going concern disclaimer". In fact we can go back years to NO OPA applications, NO OPA contracts... I could go on for hours.
But time and time again, management proved these statements to be false.
Something else we have all seen is that deals no longer get announced until they are irrevocable. This way no potential interference can jeopardize the deals and contracts. Which is good and bad. The bad is no longer will we hear of deals that are in place and almost done. ie LOI or MOU. But the good news is when they are announced they are 100%.
In reality surprises like a $150,000,000 deal in Ecuador is a nice thing too. Hopefully we will all be reading about how the rest of the pipeline is coming along soon.
Sales - highlights for Atlantic Wind & Solar
$1,600,000 + 2013 (6 months)
$1,880,000 - 2012
(1,100,000) - 2011
(2,700,000) - 2010
Is the the:
Is the above the...
- revenue growth,...nada,...all conjecture
and ....operated by questionable management who has yet to prove they can do anything except continue the agenda of deception.