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.
Another little tidbit fact about business for ya, whether we are speaking about WNBD or any other business.... You never lock yourself in a box when you may need to get outside of it one day lol. I have no idea how confident Eric is about getting financing soon, but to assume that he checked that box on the form D means he's not confident is a completely irrevelant assumption. In business you never know when capital is required if opportunity arises, so to box yourself in a position where no funding is available would be insane. Now you can spin it any way you like, and I can spin it any way I like, but neither of us know the level of discussion or confidence Eric has.
That statement was simply for the purpose of distortion. Every Form D that has been filed by WNBD has had that box checked, because it's always taken over the 12 month period allowed on the form D to exhaust the amount of capital issuers are allowed to raise. It simply means less SEC filings have needed to be filed over the years, because Eric hasn't raised the maximum amount allowed in the 12 month period. Also, just because you have an open form D doesn't mean you have to raise the capital if it's no longer needed, or if required, it can be closed at any time.
It's because only one leg of the transaction gets booked. These market makers don't want to be caught holding any of these shares, so their transactions happen like this:
Trader A has 15 million shares for sale through NITE
Trader B has a 15 million share buy order placed through ETMM
If NITE buys the shares from trader A, then sells them to trader B, no shotrs have occured and the long sale is booked.
If NITE were to buy the shares from trader A, but before being able to complete the sale, trader B decides to cancel his buy order, then the MM is stuck with the shares. To prevent this from happening they will complete transactions in this order:
NITE will actually sell the 15 million shares short to trader B, then turn around and buy the shares from trader A to cover his position. They have to book this transaction as a short sale. This type of transaction in what they high daily FINRA short numbers reflect. Many peeps want to post that info daily and talk about the short squeeze that coming, but the fact is most of those transaction are covered the same day, but still have to be booked as a short sale because of the order of the transaction.
They aren't shorting just to be shorting, or trying to make money selling short. They are simply protecting themselves from getting stuck with inventory of a stock they don't want.
Man this is so far from reality. The company, and believing in the hype makes people bagholders...The SEC stops other unsuspecting people from becoming new bagholders. It's as simple as that.
Pretty much the response I expected lol.
I've never had a problem with correct number and accurate DD, I will always have a problem with distortion of facts when accurate numbers are available. Although I do find it odd that this post containing accurate number don't provide the corrected numbers for the false information in the last post. Numbers are numbers and can't be disputed whether they are good or bad, but let's try to keep them honest when opinions and speculation aren't needed.
As was stated by US, you do need to read the last 2 years fins because your figures are still wrong. Where were you able to get the international sales managers salary of 50k per year from? If you have information that supports the negating factors you post i would like to see them, and congratulate your due dilligence.
My point is this: The fact he released via PR today the he was decreasing the A/S to 2.8 billion is completely irrelevent in the grand scheme of things....well that depends on what the scheme is. He can, at any time he wishes, increase the A/S to whatever number he desires.
Mark has stated he increased the SS in March to have leverage for aquisitions or other uses if necessary. Now, why would he decide to reduce it at the demand of shareholders other than for the purpose of increasing the current short term share price. If St. James sold a film, what's mikp cut of the deal? Now, if he sold White Space and the cut is substaintial, maybe todays PR makes sense....but I doubt it. Like I said...Play the pump, but make sure you are out of the game when the music stops.
How was it paid for??? Debt??? equity??? MIKP has no revenue lol.
You bet FB, there is a lot of expenses, acquisitions, and other cost mounting here with no revenue to pay for it all. Way too much fluff in the past on Serve Nations all all the other crap that never actually happened for anyone to believe this is on the up and up. Funding is needed to keep the doors open, and I know the financial players in the Fort Wayne Mafia (most are aquantences of Marks) certainly don't play well with retail shareholders haha. My bet is they are the reason this POS won't breath now.
Play the pump but don't get caught without a chair when the music stops. All this BS about reducing the A/S is just that, BS. It's important to remember that exactly 2 months ago Mark raised the A/S from 2.5 billion to 5 billion on the Wyoming SOS filings, but the odd thing is corporations in Wyoming can have unlimited A/S anyway lol. Although i'm sure Mark will make a filing to decrease the A/S (not filed yet) but a week from now if he needs additional shares for funding he can increase them just as easily at no cost to him, and it will take a while before shareholders even realize it happened.
Some interesting reading material about Wyoming Corporations.
The link to the MSDS is on the bottom of this page of the product specific site. Link should take you there.
http://winningcolours.com/about-1000-stain-remover
The only reason for a 365 day quite period is for new meat to enter the market, and some of the old dissgruntled meat to leave. Then a reverse split, a new business model, and repeat the whole process again. Papa already has a reputation in the penny market worse than Chin had, and that doesn't bode well for shareholders.
It really doesn't matter what was disclosed, there would be some who just move right on to the next "what if". Winning Brands volentarily provides a vast amount of transparency compared to the majority of issues in the penny market, and some even promote these other companies, but for some reason wants to hold WNBD to a different set of standards lol. Makes you wonder why hmmmmm? I guess we will have to listen to this same old crap that has been hashed out over and over and over again until something new comes along.
A person without hope and dreams is a person without much of a life. As we all know we can do things that can bring these hopes and dreams closer to reality, which turns the probabilities of these hopes becoming facts much more likely. Seems WNBD has been doing just that by fostering these relationships from a point of phone calls to having vendor numbers and sales through these retailers.
Although we don't have a large presence with these retailers currently, we do hope to someday move onto the shelves of these retailers. From the article you posted it seems the sector we target in this retailer was still a strong performer and saw increases in these departments.
I didn't call that number listed, but I'm quite sure the submission of an application is not the beginning and the end of the process. It's possible some of the regulations aren't quite as demanding, but I'm just as sure there is a considerable amount of due dilligence done on CA Govt. suppliers and vendors prior to accepting them as elligable participants.
Because of this post from this morning.
There is a huge difference between fault and blame. Whenever something doesn't go as expected or planned their is usually a reason (fault) for this result. Acknowledging the reason (fault) for the mistep is responsible regardless of which side it's on. Some retailers want certain things to happen before accepting the product on the shelf which can cause directions to change. The company acknowledging this reason (fault) isn't placing blame on the other company, it simply slates the reason for the delay or change in direction. The hotel sector is a good example: Many of the larger properties are requiring spray triggers on the bottles, and it's now up to Winning Brands to decide whether a production run of this type will be feasible in regards to the anticipated sales to this sector. Not blaming the hotels, just simply stating the reasons (fault) for the delay.
Actually the broker would probably buy the number of shares at .0135 that you are willing to purchase at .04 then turn around and sell you his shares at .03 lol.... you get what you think was a good deal, and he more than doubles his money.
Right or wrong, TrackMoist was under the direction of a guy named Herbie, just like the GSA approval process was being handled by the Dartey's. I'm certainly not throwing the blame for dropping the ball on Herbie, but I know for a fact that several request I have made from the company in regards to these items were forwarded to the appropriate people handling them, while eric and crew focused on 1000+
Not necessairly an acceptable excuse, but company is spread thin, and had confidence in the people in charge of these projects.
You are way off base with your assumptions. Given the passion Lorne has for Winning Colours and Winning Brands, he has an even greater passion for motor sports. He has been part owner of a LeMans car that races the LeMans tour circuit. He has wanted to start doing LeMans racing promotions in the US, in which all race organization, finding and securing venues, among all other aspects of race promotions would fall on his shoulders. I believe he has already begun this venture in South Flordia which is where he was hoping to relocate to in the US. So, I wouldn't see anything more to this story than Lorne getting the Winning Brands footprint started in the US, and then following his other passion while he's young enough to enjoy it.
Ya see pup, that was the premise of the subject lol. Many only want to state the obvious, but don't want to acknowledge the mission or the accomplishments. So, point made right lol. The funny thing is, the potential for success is what keeps those who counter the accomplishments with the current shareprice hanging around. Why in the world would anyone have any interest at all in a .0002 stock if success weren't possible, right? lol
No offense dude, but many of us entered this venture with eyes wide open and don't need to find a switch, because we are grown up enough to realize that things may not always go as planned, but are still worth supporting. We are also wise enough to realize the uphill battle facing the company, but may posess a deeper understanding of some of the accomplishments and what it means to the possible success of the company going forward. Can this be done while the early shareholders still have a chance to reap rewards, or will we lose our investment while waiting for success to be achieved? It's understandable that the dominating forces on the board only like to talk about the pending doom and gloom, but no one wants to acknowledge or discuss the importance of some of the accomplishments, and in fact pin the label of failure on them simply because they don't understand the nature of business or the time that's required to accomplishment certain task.
Let me discuss the deeper understanding statement for a minute, and use the examples of Lowes and Home Depot as an example. The dominating forces on this board have express their views as a lost cause or a failure over and over for the past year or so. Here is what a deeper understanding of this accomplishment actually reveals. This is the #1 and #2 big box home improvement retailers in North America, and Winning Brands has secured a vendor number and fostered a relationship with both of them. Since we aren't on the shelves of these retailers nationwide at this time, what does it really say about this accomplishment? What it says to me is this: There is probably not a product manufacturer in North America that doesn't have a desire to have their products listed in either of these retailers. What gets overlooked because of the vast number of items these retailers carry, is the limited number of manufacturers approved in each product sector. They may have 10 different paint and stain removers on the shelf, but these products may be manfactured by 2 or 3 different companies. They may have 100 different cleaning products on the cleaning isle, but only 5 or 10 different manufacturers providing these products. So, even though the items are many, the opportunity for manufacturers is limited, and Winning Brands is one of the selected vendors.
The process in which Winning Brands or any company has to go through to reach this level is probably more scrutany than they ever experienced before. From product and package testing and acceptance, to corporate review from insurance to financial and credit standings, from operating and logistics standards to vendor performance with other retailers, ect... Winning Brands passed all these standards and was awarded a vendor number to do business with these retailers, and there are those who can't see the merit in this accomplishment. Whether or not this will relate into national accounts with these two retailers is yet to be seen, but these accomplishments are huge for a company like Winning Brands, and have the potential to turn this company around in a moments notice with one simple word..."YES"
That makes him 2 for 2 today, because he also got those 9mm bombs today....oopps those were on the bid lol
LOL, with all these up-standing you reason you state for promo's being done in the penny market, why would you make reference to POS penny companies constantly. Seems a bit contradictory to me. You and I both know that is the intent for the purpose of the sec, but that's not the way things go 99% of the time in this market. As some say....the proof is in the number, I would venture to say that pretty much every company which has had a promo last year, that is at least 3 months outside of the promo ending, is right back or below where they started prior to the promo.....and that is fact. You can take the promo good intentions for company growth and future funding and blah blagh blah, and peddle it elsewhere. I have checked before and know the ultimate outcome because the promo's are pumping garbage the majority of the time.
Certainly doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that the market places a value on every public company whether the dilute or not lol. The market dictates the demand on shares while a diluting company dictates the supply. If the market feels a company is undervalued they will absorb the supply driving the market cap of the company higher. The market always determines the public value (market cap) of the company.
Haha, I certainly understand why most companies or funders fund promo initiatives lol, and unfortunately it's usually for the purpose for them to line their pockets. I'm not saying that awareness isn't an important part of the funding process for legitimate companies, but their is a fine line that maintains the seperation between integrity and BS. If a company needs funds, and has material developements to support such an initiative without blowing smoke up the butts of the investment community then there isn't an issue, but with 99.9% of what goes on in this market in the promo arena the BS is exactly what you get.
It just seems unusual for some to see a company in this market trying to do the right thing.
Right, wrong, or indifferent, but for whatever reason this is where the market has valued the company today. So, with no new material developements what would support a higher share price when the promo is complete??? or would it come back down to where the market has it currently valued???
I personally feel the market has it wrong, and I'm sure Eric does as well, but by what margin I'm not sure. From a fundamental position I feel the value is considerably low considering the value of the products WNBD owns, the relationships the have fostered, and the minimal value of the brand within certain retailers, although the revenue potential hasn't yet been realized.
That is my opinion, and thus my reasons for speculating. Would I have rather things went differently than it has, certainly....but I also understand Eric's reasoning for waiting for a sustaining developement with measureable results.
A very nice compilation on the CEO and his intent for awareness when the time is right. Whether or not either of us agree with the timing, he has been very consistant about who, when, and why he would use such an event. Actually there are a few very glaring things that may get overlooked when people look at the compilation of material you have posted, and they are below.
1) What some may refer to as prattle on this subject, it's important to notice that 99 percent of these blogs or correspondence have been initiated by shareholders. He is simply answering questions on the subject as opposed to throwing unwarrented information out to the public.
2) The consistancy of the type of awareness he is seeking, their track record of relaying truthful information, their standing with the SEC, and cost are all factors involved.
3) Probably the most important is the timing of such an event, which has also been consistant. He has stated numerous times that growth, material developements, and the ability of these developements to sustain a higher share price would be cause for awareness. Given what type of awareness firm he is seeking, it wouldn't make much sense to require such integrity from them if he didn't hold himself to the same standards.
In other words, he has consistantly stated when the time arrives that Winning Brands has progressed to a point that a higher share price is warranted due to financial and operational accomplishments he will be the first to shout it from the roof tops by means of an awareness campaign. If he engages in this type of initiative prior to having the goods to support such an initiative, what exactly what is he selling to the public other than possibilities. He would be selling a goose with the possibility it might lay golden eggs in the future, as opposed to waiting for the right time and selling golden eggs...which will have a sustainable value well into the future.
As I stated earlier, it doesn't matter if we agree with the timing of such an event, the fact remains he has been consistant. He has answered these questions posed by shareholders, and stated his objective for such an event in the process.
It's important for people to understand how shares of a company enter the public market. Comapnines don't dump shares directly into the open market. They will sell discounted shares to funders, who in turn sell the shares into the open market. To avoid problems from the SEC these funders are supposed to be purchasing these shares for investment purpose from the company. This is where some of the confusion comes into play.... what constitutes the length of time shares must be held in order to be considered "for investment purposes"? The point I am making is this: Just because the TA has the same O/S numbers today as they did yesterday, doesn't mean the shares being sold today aren't discounted shares sold to funders 3 months ago. If funding is being done properly, the O/S should remain the same until the next traunch of funding is required from the company. At that point the company will recieve capital from funders for discounted shares, and the TA will reflect the increase at that time, but those shares may not be sold into the market for months to come.
With this in mind it easy to see that the shares hitting the market are dilutive shares, but not necessairly shares which would have increased the OS totals within the past month or so.
If those certs were issuued then they would be included in the 7.4 billion O/S, but they won't show up in the float if they haven't been converted. The issue is it seems to read that they are going to retire 1.5 billion shares from the float, and that can only happen if the company buys these public shares, or someone surrenders them to the company for retirement. I'm not saying it would never happen, but clarification is needed to keep the article from sounding like the same old line of BS.
You are correct iblong, and I'm not even sure where this news information originated, but it really needs to be corrected by the company, or it continues to shed the same old light of deciet on the company in the eyes of potential shareholders.
Pretty obvious where the misinformation is, or it could be an honest mistake, but either way using the figure of 5.4 billion as issued is incorrect.
I understand that, but I still think it's important for KA to clear this issue up. If the news would have stated: The company aims to cancel 1.5 billion of the of the 7.4 billion outstanding...that would have made sense, but I can't understand how they intend to cancel shares already in the public market without buying them back, or having someone return them to the treasurey.
I would also love to see good things here as well, but maybe you can get KA to explain the misinformation in the news article I have listed below. You can't just ignore the fact the numbers are wrong, and it doesn't look good on the company or the new CEO.
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Ash a 25 year veteran of the other side of the market, has stepped up to become CEO of a restructured Indocan Resources, the company will not dilute shareholders and aims to cancel 1.5b of the 5.7b on issue as well as initiating a buyback.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just has to make you wonder who wrote this misleading piece of information that's called news lol. I'm all for giving anyone willing to take over a castrophie and try to build something for shareholders the benefit of the doubt, but this information leans heavily on the side BS, and leaves questions unanswered.
The OTC was updated on APR. 28, 2012 and states the following.
Issued and outstanding: 7,407,945,445
Float: 5,590,110,208
Question #1- Since the 5.9 billion share mentioned in the news release are actually already in the float (not restricted)according to the OTC website, then who is he going to get to surrender 1.5 billion shares he states are going to be cancelled.
Question #2- On top of cancelling 1.5 billion shares, he also states the company is going to initiate a share buyback. To make a buyback meaningful with the amount of shares outstanding would take a considerable amount of cash, and I wasn't aware the company had those types of funds.
Would love to see clarification to question #1, and the answer to question #2.
Wasn't directed at you Frankie, but your post contained the news release I was refering too.
You certainly have some valid points there, but when it comes to the GSA issue you speak of there is little concern over two lost bid contracts. I have posted this link before, and it shows the vast number of GSA bid solicitations that take place on a monthly basis. This is mainly only state GSA solicitations and not federal of military. It will take a while for Winning Brands to fully understand the GSA bid process, but once they get their feet wet there are plenty of opportunities for contract awards. If/when they recieve a few contracts, and if the product is well recieved, then word travels through the system, and could be a changing point for this initiative.
http://www.governmentbids.com/government-browse-category.awarded-1033-1034-en.jsa
For those who may not know a lot about how the bid notice solicitation for GSA contracts work, and a little about what Eric touched on in the email I will explain. GSA cannot require a specific product for a contract, but they may list a brand or product by name, but it will always be accompanied by "or equal". Where WNBD or any desired product can gain an advantage is in the product description for the contract, if a specific product is desired. In other words, if a particular facility wanted to insure their contract to be fulfilled with 1000+ they couldn't necessarily put out a bid notice for 10,000 gallons of 1000+ but they could approach this in two different ways to increase the odds that they recieve the products they desire.
1) They could solicit a bid for 10,000 gallons of 1000+ stain remover or equal. This allows other stain remover distributors or manufactures to bid on this contract if their product is GSA approved as a stain remover. This manner only gives slight odds to the desired product if other products are effective for the desired job.
2) Here is the way it usually happens when a particular product is desired. They will simply include variables in the product description that most products can't rival, or be considered an equal based on description. In other words, the description could read.... This contract is for 10,000 gallons of stain remover, de-greaser, and hand cleaning product.
Now I'm certainly not saying this will be the case with winning brands, but I will say if the product is what is wanted by a particular facility, then they will usually find a way to insure that's the product they recieve through the contract process.