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.
Which one is it dominating now?
Shiny brand new companies don’t have networks of 250k customers chomping at the bit to toss money at them. That is a typical penny stock claim based on a projected market to let the “investor” leap to a conclusion it is bigger than it is.
Fact: Just because some companies had great ideas and made it big doesn't mean that all companies have great ideas and will make it big nor that this company's idea is great and will make it big.
LOL
Yes, interactive videos have been around a long time. So what?
That article was from 2014 and used simply to show that this "new" thing, interactive video for real estate, isn't new at all, been around for some time as well. Who cares about the video?
"Some" interactive videos also don't cost $50k to make.
"Anyone" can also google up other ways to make interactive videos. Like this:
https://www.incomediary.com/ultimate-guide-interactive-youtube-videos
That's just one, and offered only as "food for thought" that "Anyone" has other options as well.
Sound Concepts is a nice little business supporting small businesses with marketing materials, but stating "dominating the direct sales space" as a fact will require proof. Who's their competition and what market share does this "domination" entail.
Fact: every one of those has broad appeal and personal usefulness. VERB is no peer to them, it is hanging its hat on the notion that people will watch commercials on purpose. People don't do that, most SPAM winds up in the trash can.
Look through the S-1, it had a discussion of "digital sales," still ambiguous, but it tells a story:
Revenue for the eleven months ended November 30, 2018 increased by approximately $704,000, or 6%, to approximately $11.7 million, as compared to approximately $11 million for the eleven months ended November 30, 2017. The increase is primarily attributed to digital sales that increased by approximately $568,000, or 21%, in the eleven months ended November 30, 2018, as compared to the same period in the prior year, driven by an expansion of Sound Concepts’ customer base and subscriber base.
Interactive real estate video article from 2014. It's been around awhile.
https://vidzor.com/blog/2014/07/14/virtual-interactive-property-tour/
They'll get those sales campaigns started right after the Oracle PR announcing they finally trained the army of sales people who'll be dedicated to selling nFusz/VERB Notitagg.
Suggesting that "intelligent, experienced" investors are going to see a billion $ company in those financial reports is what is ridiculous. Those guys read those reports for understanding and couldn't care less how the OTC sees VERB as Amazon's peer. One glance at a $12+M deficit and a PPS that slammed down 95% from a peak before a recovery, and they'll be calling their brokers to take short positions.
Ok, so buy 2 shares from the offering and get 3 if the PPS goes up by 25% over the offering PPS, then, right? Or does the investor have to purchase the shares for the warrants once the 125% PPS is exceeded?
I get that, and the market will toss in some premium over value. However, suggesting that a company with products on the market for 2 years, that had an operational deficit of over $12M, that is bolting on a company hardly worth $25M, whose newest products are phone apps, is somehow worth in the billions is ridiculous. It isn't, not by any stretch of the imagination.
R & D development stage? Nope. Products have been for sale for 2 years, and SC has been in business for decades.
How do those warrants work?
I know how to calculate market cap. The statement that the market cap of this company should be in the billions remains ridiculous considering its performance. Market cap should and will be a reflection of the company’s financial condition. Right now, this company is grossly overvalued on irrational exuberance.
The assets were purchased, nothing more, and that is a well documented undeniable fact. The “company” is now an empty shell carrying over $80M in debt.
Their legal problems have come their audits of other companies, where it was alleged they did not recognize signs of those companies going under or misrepresentation of conditions, not blatant lies to judges where they’ve been appointed as caretaker (ie directly responsible to the court for running the bankruptcy proceedings). Whole different animal to auditing books.
Market cap should be a reflection of the company’s financial performance and condition.
New investor, read through the annual report (10K) on the financial condition of this company (it’s horrible), then through the S-1 for the coming dilutive stock sale for a look at the consolidated books.
Please.
The Kepler satellite thing was made up from the beginning, suggesting a business relationship just because of proximity. ANDI/Utopya has nothing to bring into such a relationship, no cash, no assets, and that is very well documented. There’d be nothing in it for Kepler to drag this company along for any sort of business. But, hey, the guys who dumped the 3B or so shares into the O/S appreciated it when folks began making up their own stories, saved some trouble.
Except they went to liquidation when the attempted reorganization failed.
The assets are gone, there’s nothing to reorganize.
It isn’t complex at all.
They’re bankrupt
The assets were sold, most notably the plant that was the only revenue source
The company has over $80M of debt
The asset sale proceeds of $4.34 M barely covers any of that debt.
The secured creditors aren’t getting full recovery
The unsecured creditors get nothing
The shareholders get nothing
There is nothing else coming. In order to even construct a false narrative that there is, you have to start at “PWC is lying to the judge,” and that is utterly ridiculous.
Shareholders will lose 100% of their investment in this stock
Not my opinion, those are the facts as documented by the court appointed monitor and particularly in their 10th report.
The “E” doesn’t stand for “revenues” in PE ratio, it stands for earnings. Guess what the earnings were for the company on the consolidated cash flow sheet in the S-1? If you guessed negative, in the red, etc., by nearly $12M, that would be correct. This company needs to sell stock to stay afloat.
Seriously? $1.5B to $2B, with products that don’t sell to anyone but shareholders, $12+M operational deficit, and bolting on a $25M company hardly worth that amount isn’t a multi billion $ company by any stretch of the hyperdriven imaginations on display.
SMH
Welcome to the BIOAQ bagholders exchange program
Shareholders will lose 100% of their investment in the stock.
This company is an empty shell. The operating assets have been sold.
This company is carrying over $80M in debt, and the proceeds of the asset sale will only cover a small fraction of that.
There has been no transaction for the “company,” that is completely false, a narrative that has been constructed using snippets and parses if words and phrases, trying to sell the bags. Read the court appointed monitor’s 10th report and leave the bags with their current owners. In that report, it is clearly stated the shareholders get nothing, and FINRA has been notified. Share cancellation can happen at any time and will happen without warning.
Does it make any sense at all to invest a penny in an empty, bankrupt shell?
Yes, that’s why your numbers and my numbers never jived exactly. When I looked at the people who received the shares labeled “restricted,” I couldn’t figure any reason for them to be, at least not a regulatory one. I thought that might simply be another form of deception by the company. Still, there was a gap between the O/S and the float of over 1B shares the last time both were updated on the same day, so I knew there’d be additional pumps. I really want to see the float updated just to know if the benevolent CEO sold his 600M shares while he was “out” of the CEO chair. That would be very telling.
The motion was specifically for a stay to the proceedings, nothing more. Did they intentionally withhold it? I doubt it, there’s nothing in it for them to do that at all.
Lol
The court appointed monitor is not withholding anything from the court, that is ridiculous on its face. There is no $80+M transaction that will allow shareholders to see a penny of recovery, they’ll lose 100% of their investment in this stock.
They bid on all the assets, not the company, and that’s all they bought.
And yet they did not want those rights.
Seriously, if those rights were worth “billions and billions,” would BioAmber be bankrupt today?
Why would LCY Chemical pop in and absorb $80M in debt just to give shareholders some money.
And every bit of that stuff subsequent to the motion for the stay that the “phrase” is plucked from shows clearly the two bid on the assets, one of the two was selected to purchase the assets, a motion and order approved the sale of the assets, and then the sale of the assets closed in October. That’s all they wanted, and that’s what they bought. Company is now an empty shell with massive debt.
Later on, in the tenth report, the monitor confirms once again the company has not been sold, but I guess we have to cling to the false narrative they’re lying to the judge and holding the $80+M transaction out of sight.
They did not, that is false. Only the assets were sold, the company is now an empty, debt ridden shell.
Sorry. The judge did sign the order authorizing the sale of the assets for $4.34M. The sale is closed. Another undeniable fact.
The assets sold for $4.34M, that is an undeniable fact. This company is in bankruptcy, pennies on the dollar isn't unheard of. All that is left is debt, shareholders own shares in debt.
The company has not sold, nor is there a deal in the hopper for it to sell. PWC told us that in the 10th report.
And after the stay was approved that motion was for, what happened?
Answer: The two offers for the assets were compared, one was accepted, and the assets were sold off, leaving the company as an empty shell with $80M in debt.
No, they didn't increase the O/S. The company did that themselves prior to going into bankruptcy.
LOL
They own about $35k in stock! Oh my! All they need is just over $80M more in order for shareholders to get some money! That's a bargain for a company that has zero assets!
Forget that the monitor has stated clearly there is no other transaction either completed nor in the hopper, they're lying to the judge, anyways, slap the ask!
Shareholders will lose 100% of their investment in this stock.