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.
So wait for a year and then buy. No sense tying up capital in this stagnant pond, when there's flowing rivers of gold to invest in elsewhere.
What I'd like to know is, since they are not themselves "Traders" per se, how on earth would they know this?
Given that there is little or no news that is going to pump the price back up in the near term, whose to say that insiders or close friends thereof, are not part of this SS syndicate making thousands in profits per day in the knowledge that there is no imminent catalyst and pure speculation from the likes of this group, will be enough to give them the daily mini pop they need to cover the previous days short (and so on).
All I'm saying is that for anyone at NS to know this, there must be someone intimately involved in this (as has been pointed out not illegal) activity.
There's no finance and no new orders (orders for what, they haven't even grown the product yet). So there are in effect zero catalysts to move this stock before year-end and it will sit range bound probably between 11 and 13 cents until the end of the year at best. That 2 cent range is plenty for the syndicates to play with and make hundreds if not thousands on a daily basis. The market where I live, is rife with such activity, indeed the OTC market in the US is also.
No hoper this company, until they release some real news and not just the fluff and nonsense they keep spewing out.
Advertisements are different to a Business Plan, which is what they are attempting to pass this off as.
Advertisements have the joint objective of educating and creating brand awareness. The clever ones tell a story knowing that Advertisements 'Tell', Stories 'Sell'. Highly appropriate for general release to the masses. Not fitting at all for a Micro Investor Conference where the SOLE purpose, is to try and cultivate interest in the Business Model and Customer Value Proposition so that investors will want to sink cash into it, based on an attractive prospective ROI.
The old cliche 'horses for courses' is befitting here and your analogy of company "adds" (ads I presume, or are they adding something up, because if they are 0 = 0 is still 0?) being equated to what they should have presented at the conference, is not very convincing to me. jmo.
Advertising as part of the overall promotional mix, is a very different thing to a business plan. No one at this event needs to see an Ad. they wanted to see what NS has going for it, when compared with other, mutually exclusive business propositions that were seeking funding at that same event.
The silence since the event and absolutely zero feedback whatsoever, I think provides a convincing answer, as to what this mish mash of a presentation achieved.
Back to adding up those zeros again!
He means that most (if not all) of what's in this Business Studies 101 level presentation, has been put out before in other PR's and this is simply a re-hash cobbled together in a rather perfunctory fashion, for the consumption of a captive (non-industry) audience, who may well not have seen this stuff before.
Having been here 6 months and done my due on this company, I concur with his sentiments wholeheartedly.
This is old wine in a new bottle and a not very attractive one at that.
Yes and the price at retail will have been marked up considerably from the price that the producer sells to the retailer at (that's assuming they have a direct route to that retailer and are not selling through other channels first, who would also require a margin).
Typically for example (and this is an area in which I have some 25 years experience internationally), a retailer will mark-up the price from the factory by 100% to account for all costs and an acceptable margin plus the risk that the goods may perish or not be sold by the "use-by" date (since this is not sold on a consignment stock basis, the retailers effectively absorb all of these risks and the attractive mark-ups act as compensation for it).
Therefore, it seems to me to be a nonsense that this product can command a retail price increment of some 5 to 8xs the industry norm ($20-30/lb instead of $5-8) even if it is of premium quality.
Which brings us to the revenue model.
Quoting their own numbers now, (6000 x 4) x 12 is the total output (correct me if I'm wrong)? So 288,000lbs annually produced and even if they sell (Retail) at double the current norms (say $16/lb) only 50% of this nets back to NS. That gives a projected revenue steam of $1.53MM which is half the "Yearly Revenue" figure given on page 19 of the fairytale presentation @ $3.12MM.
AS previously stated, heir projections and their numbers don't add up, hence the reason investors are not buying into this.
"Well, ostensibly, they will have no difficulty getting financing. With their, by then, proven ability to sell quantities of shrimp at great prices, they will be able to get bank loans at excellent terms, if they want to go that way, or they can rent appropriate facilities, INSIDE THE CITIES, using their cash flow, if they want to go that way"
ALL ASSUMPTIVE AND NOT BASED ON ANY SOLID FACTS OR ANALYSIS.
BTW if you're going to quote words back at me, at least understand where they belong in the English language and "ostensibly" does not belong in your sentence.
My point was that if they had secured finance for the expansion plans into 9 further locations (AKA as dreamland) then we would know about it, because they'd be crowing about it ad nauseum. Therefore to use the word "ostensibly" (in other words, seemingly, or on the face of it), they did not get any finance for these absurd one-size fits all, expansion plans, was appropriate.
In the above case, it is not.
Fair enough, but this is not going to cut it with potential investors (and I don't mean us drips that hang out here).
They need to show scores on the doors, revenue drivers, sales to date, projected sales underpinned by firm enquiries, advance orders, product distribution enquiries, large key accounts visiting the facility, meetings with top flight industry specialist procurement managers.
None of which is self-evident overtly or as even on the grapevine.
It doesn't matter how great your product is, buyers do not just suddenly pop up out of thin air. They should be producing to order and not ramping up to (so called) full production, without a ready made market for the output.
That's the Supply side covered bro.
What about the Demand side? Everyone is taking it as a given that this ramped up production has a commercially viable market. But we never hear anything about potential key accounts they have on board (one off sales aint gonna cut it) and what about the pricing model?
How do we even know that their cost model is sufficiently fine-tuned such that they can sell at an industry standard (or better) profit. They are too early doors yet in the market to even know what their ongoing COP's are going to be aren't they?
Remember, this is "Fresh Shrimp" never frozen, so the logistics strategy also better be a good one or they'll end up ramping up costs on bringing the product to market and/or incurring huge losses through wastage. Forget the further 9 satellite locations for now (aint gonna happen without massive investment that's ostensibly not forthcoming), they still have a lot to do to prove that this operation works and that the production efficiencies are there such that they can survive in a highly competitive (supply side driven) landscape.
I wonder why we never hear anything about their customer acquisition and retention strategy (and cost of same). Could it be they don't actually have any?
Yes but the important thing is, do they tidy their room!
How long?
How long have you been waiting to add cheese to the shrimp lol
I feel sorry that you of all people (with the amount of time and patience you've applied to this stock) did not benefit from the pump to 90 cents (if indeed that's the case).
There and again, you're a long term investor I know, but still, would have been great if you'd taken some $$$$$$ off the table when the opportunity arose. I wonder if you'll change your mind and sell, should the price start pushing a buck again in the near.
Rhetorical question not requiring of an answer.
GLTY mate
Those that bought above 0.50 must be feeling like they ate a pound of off coloured Shrimp though.
Why do you suppose there has been no press release on the investor's reaction to their little twenty minute show in Belaire Ken?
Strong fundamentals :D:D:D. Always nice to start the week off with a good laugh.
"desperately" being the operative word!
desperation being the all pervasive sentiment!
Assuming it's successfully developed into a desirable product, how does this tech get monetised? Is it a subscription based app model or...........?
Not my intention. Truth is. Not dreams and rumours.
So where are the financial backers from said event?
The post was about the Old Testament which I believe has nothing to do with Hinduism in which religion the cow is holy.
:D:D:D
Because as I wrote in my post #60558, a multipage comprehensive plan, is NOT what that slide presentation is. Very far from it. To me it is more like a first year Business Studies undergraduate initial attempt at a business plan presentation (and I've seen many so I think I'm qualified to judge).
Here again for your consideration and education are my comments on this amateurish document, which no doubt, did not achieve the objective of raising a dollar bill in finance (especially when you see some of the offerings of the other contenders at that event, for what is clearly, limited and mutually exclusive tranches of funds)!:-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1) I hate round numbers and numbers that match in these slides.
Why would it be the case that the "full scale Facility" produces exactly the same per week as the pilot plant does per month? Is it approximately 4 times the size, or is one more efficient than the other?
2) 2019 - 2020 "Finalizing Major Commercial Agreements" is indicative that discussions are already at an advanced stage. If they were, we'd know, as the rumour mill would have already started grinding. I think discussions are very early on and therefore to say "finalising" is somewhat putting the cart before the horse. Since there's an annual revenue figure of $3MM+ (which underpins their bizzare one size fits all, costings), it's rather important they can guarantee investors a ready made market for what each facility produces.
3) As for the "Multi Regional expansion" 10 further sites across country, you don't pitch up to a micro-financing event ike this and tell potential investors you want to replicate a facility that does not yet exist, across 9 further sites without a cent to finance the expansion plans. They are just too ambitious. Also, why 10 sites? Anyone in business knows that to pitch a nice round number like 10 is just a pipe dream. They should have opted for a more realistic and believable growth trajectory like 3 further facilities in 2021, followed by an additional 5 each year thereafter. To say 10 facilities by year end (presumably, it doesn't actually say this) 2021, without any evidence that they've carried out feasibility studies and costings for the same, is mind bogglingly ridiculous and shows a very amateurish approach to the business imho. Are they really trying to suggest that each new location will have identical costings and Internal Rate of Return as given on page 19. Why also is there no discount rate given (based upon which the IRR is calculated), nor number of years, both of which should underpin the IRR and give investors an idea of the BE and payback periods for their investment? Assumptive it may be, but it's key to Capital Budgeting when using the DCF method to project profitability. I mean as a rudimentary finger in the wind calculation (which audience members will have done for themselves on the day), cost outlay is $4.5MM sunk cost with a projected annual profit stream of $1.5MM Gross (probably netts to <half that). So we're looking here based on NS numbers of a payback period of 3-6 years as a minimum. Too long for most micro investors.
All doesn't add up to me. I want to be positive, but in this day and age, this presentation is simply not good enough on paper either visually (1990's tech), or more importantly on the numbers.
Nice fairy story but not likely to bring the finance in imho when $5MM a pop is the min entry level price, with such a long time to recoup the initial investment, in a highly risky investment climate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
We're saved. Spy factories coming to your area soon.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48515956
"adopted worldwide" you're either delusional or naive. I live in Asia and have been around almost every country here multiple times n the last 30 years or so. You think the average shrimp farmer in these parts of the world is going to simply "adopt" the technology.
Do you know how they clear fields here for crop rotation? By burning the entire field and causing catastrophic haze wherever the wind blows it. They do this because a box of matches and some petrol is cheaper than a field of men with scythes. You think they'll pay for these facilities, think again.
Besides, there'll be no licensing, they'll just steal the IP.
Bill probably hahaha
Hmmm
Nice fluff but I have my doubts again:
1) I hate round numbers and numbers that match in these slides.
Why would it be the case that the "full scale Facility" produces exactly the same per week as the pilot plant does per month? Is it approximately 4 times the size, or is one more efficient than the other?
2) 2019 - 2020 "Finalizing Major Commercial Agreements" is indicative that discussions are already at an advanced stage. If they were, we'd know, as the rumour mill would have already started grinding. I think discussions are very early on and therefore to say "finalising" is somewhat putting the cart before the horse. Since there's an annual revenue figure of $3MM+ (which underpins their bizzare one size fits all, costings), it's rather important they can guarantee investors a ready made market for the what each facility produces.
3) As for the "Multi Regional expansion" 10 further sites across country, you don't pitch up to a micro-financing event ike this and tell potential investors you want to replicate a facility that does not yet exist, across 9 further sites without a cent to finance the expansion plans. They are just too ambitious. Also, why 10 sites? Anyone in business knows that to pitch a nice round number like 10 is just a pipe dream. They should have opted for a more realistic and believable growth trajectory like 3 further facilities in 2021, followed by an additional 5 each year thereafter. To say 10 facilities by year end (presumably, it doesn't actually say this) 2021, without any evidence that they've carried out feasibility studies and costings for the same, is mind bogglingly ridiculous and shows a very amateurish approach to the business imho. Are they really trying to suggest that each new location will have identical costings and Internal Rate of Return as given on page 19. Why also is there no discount rate given (based upon which the IRR is calculated), nor number of years, both of which should underpin the IRR and give investors an idea of the BE and payback periods for their investment? Assumptive it may be, but it's key to Capital Budgeting when using the DCF method to project profitability. I mean as a rudimentary finger in the wind calculation (which audience members will have done for themselves on the day), cost outlay is $4.5MM sunk cost with a projected annual profit stream of $1.5MM Gross (probably netts to <half that). So we're looking here based on NS numbers of a payback period of 3-6 years as a minimum. Too long for most micro investors.
All doesn't add up to me. I want to be positive, but in this day and age, this presentation is simply not good enough on paper either visually (1990's tech), or more importantly on the numbers.
Nice fairy story but not likely to bring the finance in imho when $5MM a pop is the min entry level price, with such a long time to recoup the initial investment, in a highly risky investment climate.
Concern is that ramping up to full production without buyers of the output is to me, dangerous.
Should not they have sold properly costed out batches of Lot 180 as a pilot, to ensure off-take of the product prior to upscaling?
Anyway, what do they mean by "full production"? It's an open ended output equation isn't it, or is there an "optimum" tank/factory ratio that they equate to a full production facility or something.
Keep hearing so much about the supply side and v. little about, who's actually going to buy this highly time sensitive, perishable good.
Sorry Mr Delightful but I do think these are valid questions that investors need answers to.
That was a factual post.
Exactly. They ain't sold chit yet.
At the right price point maybe.
There will not be massive demand at any price.
Full production lol.
All Supply side. Where does it address the Demand side?
Commercially viable product that has buyers queueing around the block?
I don't think so somehow.
They're not going to dilute with their own shares, when the second they do, this is dead. I would consider DTC locked down but yes, further dilution seems inevitable.
So, for those thinking this company is a $1+ stock (or 10x's where we are today), is this really a close on $1bn MC company?
Any serious potential investor will have already done their Due on NS. So he'd better come up with something new to say and not just regurgitate the same old chit we've heard 100 times before in podcats and through Press and Fakebook channels. Otherwise, this is dropping some more imho and what will happen if no one wants to invest? As certain a nail in the coffin of NS, as would be an angel investor a confidence boost!
Now, if industry players have declined to put money into this business, why would non-industry financiers do so, unless the capital comes with major strings attached in terms of toxicity. Step in the additional 300MM AS?!
Further dilution followed by an AS increase and then a RS, as is the way with most of the pennies at some point, does now seem somewhat of a foregone conclusion, unless they start to drive revenue to fund operations.
Approx. 300MM OS
Approx. 300MM held at DTC
= 600MM
Leaves 300MM available from AS of 900MM
Last time I looked, 300 was 50% of 600
Perhaps you need to get your abacus out again!
Certain members of the management team of NaturalShrimp Incorporated (the “Company”), consisting of Gerald Easterling and William Delgado, will be attending the LD Micro 9 th Invitational Investor Conference in Bel Air, California on June 4 th and 5 th 2019. Mr. William Delgado will be presenting the Company on June 5, 2019 at 10:00 AM Pacific Time.
09.40 Track 2
https://www.ldmicro.com/events/presenter-schedule?day=2
I wonder what the purpose of this "event" really is?
Share Structure
Market Cap Market Cap
33,897,03 06/04/2019
Authorized Shares
900,000,000 05/07/2019
Outstanding Shares
308,154,880 05/07/2019
Restricted
12,580,310 05/07/2019
Unrestricted
295,574,570 05/07/2019
Held at DTC
293,338,016 05/07/2019
Float
1,600,000 04/13/2015
BS numbers on OTC too. What are these July 2019 figures?
Are we to understand that they have an OS of 600MM meaning they can dilute another 50% if needs be?
Float figure is nonsense.
"from what I gather" being the operative words.
Friend, these Shrimp must be geriatric by now considering as I recall, they were supposed to have been harvested back in late March (I remain to be stood corrected on the exact date, but I think they were at the 24 weeks stage at the end of March, which puts them at 34 ish now?). Geeze they must be the size of lobsters by now!
I think someone somewhere needs to properly "gather" something and start making some money, instead of dicking investor's around with soundbites and regurgitated PR and updates that we've all seen a hundred times before.
Hahaha
Always a pleasure dear Mr Delightful!
Agree 100%.
Consider this. Why oh why after attending two of the premier industry events, can they not secure an injection of capital from knowledgeable interested parties. Could it possibly be that they see huge cavernous holes in one or all of:
a) The Patented Technology
b) The Management Team
c) The Business Model
d) The Commercial Viability of the product
Let's face it boys and girls, if this old dog had any legs, the industry would be banging down the door not to invest, but to acquire the company outright.
What would Shark Tank make of an investment in a business like this given that their key criteria would include KPI's like a to d.
Sharks eat shrimp don't they?
That's the supply side. What about the demand side?
You're assuming that even if they get all their ducks in a row on expanding production capacity, that they can produce a product at a commercially viable price?
Incidentally, we have no proof they can even sell what they currently produce, by virtue of the fact that there are no major buyers announced (and were there to be any, you can be sure they would have crowed about it by now).
Comical to see so many delusional bag holders here. Are you trying to talk yourselves into still believing in this hyped up windbag of a company, or someone else?
Sorry that's nonsense. They need revenue drivers not more cost. They still have not shown any proof of concept despite bragging about the tech since the patent was granted last Christmas. No one is buying the patented tech just like no one sensible should buy what you are saying.
This is a done company. They've failed and the tech is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Completely bogus no one wants it. End of.
There were 2 shows in New Orleans and Boston. Despite all the hype from Peter (not even a NS employee), all we got were happy family FB pics.
This is unproven tech which will at best deliver a similar yield to currently available production processes, except only twice a year because the product takes so long to grow to saleable weight.
A bogus technology and a badly managed business, which still can't bring commercially viable product to market after 18 years of trying.
Hence the reason we see institutional level volume sales, as corporate investors sprint for the exit, while retail investors cling on to their shares through the pure hopium of a repeat of the previous parabolic rise in share price.
SHMP became Krill.
Paying the price now for fluff Fakebook boasts by Peter and 2 massive industry events with the square root of feck all to show for it.
* No report on survivability.
* Extended production cycle 28 weeks plus(which is twice as long apparently to get a survivability rate of +90%.......why bother?),
* Hence < 2 harvests per year possible as opposed to the industry norm of 3-4 with survival rates at 50-60%
* No major key accounts buyers acquired (too expensive I guess)
* No financial backers to pump cash in (can't see the commercial viability perhaps)
* No subscribers to a Patent (probably easily gotten round (if there's any validity to it), or outcomes can be replicated by other means)
* Hence zero proof of concept
Who knew it was all BS....somebody did!
A grave disappointment and well deserves to be pressed down out of existence pps wise.