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.
mtgman27,
You are correct on that. Many of the OEM's already use stainless steel for the exhaust systems that they use today. Others use aluminized steel and, with the improvements in the materials they last a whole lot longer than one might think. I have one car in the fleet that is over 15 years old with over 186K miles and it has NEVER had an exhaust system part replaced.
'Performance' mufflers are an item that certainly can be ignored, especially when one considers the cost vs. other options.
knowles,
I did NOT say you could replace an 'exhaust system' for $40-$60. What I did say is one can get a replacement muffler for that price as compared to $150+ for an Aero 'performance' muffler......and they are quieter too.
lone_sum,
That's totally irrevalent that the Aero muffler has a 'lifetime warranty' as most cars do not 'last a lifetime'
fourkids,
How 'one comes to market' does NOT affect ultimate retail customer sales.
The real question, AGAIN, why would anyone in NEED of a muffler replacement buy a $150+ Aero 'performance' muffler when they can get a replacement muffler for $40-$60, especially in today's economic environment???????????
mtgmoney,
"Exactly how many of the auto manufacturers and tru auto dealers (not gas stations or retail stores) sell his exaust pipe/system?"
That answer is very simple --- NONE
Hunsaker has nobody to blame but himself for the EXTREMELY POOR showing of Aero.
A better question is how many people, when in NEED of a muffler, are going to spend $150+ for an Aero vs. $40-60 for a 'replacement' muffler --- especially in today's economic environment??
Where's the beef????
knowles,
"Nor do I see cars without sponsorship."
They already exist in NASCAR. I suggest you read the article "The Quitting Game" in the Feb 09 issue of Car and Driver, page 96. It points out some very interesting goings on in NASCAR today. Times are tough all over.
BROADWAY10,
"Blank cars, I highly doubt it."
They already exist in NASCAR. I suggest you read the article "The Quitting Game" in the Feb 09 issue of Car and Driver, page 96. It points out some very interesting goings on in NASCAR today. Times are tough all over.
knowles,
"Back to the point, FACT IS it never went to court, how do you defend something that never occurred in the first place!"
If Aero was to 'vigorously defend' itself, they would have NEVER agreed to a settlement of ANY kind, and, would have demanded it go to court.
To settle out of court is NOT 'vigorously defending' ones self.
LoanStew,
"During the quarter ended December 31, 2008 the company issued 200,000,000 shares of restricted common stock for a reduction in debt of $70,000. The shares were issued were issued under Rule 144 of the Securities Act of 1933."
And Aero also added 51,421,804 additional shares... assume at 0.00035 (same as the restricted shares) that equates to an approx additional $18,000, which probably was used for salaries.
I think we are pretty much in agreement.
cruzdelsur,
"Jones brings cash every month, is profitable and its intrinsic value has convinced bank(s) to lend the money for the acquisition."
Where has it been shown that Jones is 'profitable'????
What 'banks' are doing this lending 'for the acquisition'?????
Maybe kinda like Aero bringing in 'cash every month', however, not much of it.
Where's the beef????
LoanStew,
It's pretty obvious if one really reads the 10-Q that the $50,000 monthly payment to the Millers has been by issuance of NEW shares.
It says they are restricted under Rule 144. However, I believe that the time clock on Rule 144 shares starts from the date of the issuance of debt, not when the shares are tendered for the debt. Therefore these shares are probably already in the market.
fourkids,
The issue was NOT who is involved, the issue is Aero stated they were going to 'defend itself vigorously.'
One does not 'defend itself vigorously' and then negotiate a settlement. Just more of the Aero BS.
fourkids,
Lets take one of those descriptions you cite....
From the item concerning Dolittle..
"The Company believes that the case is without merit and intends to defend itself vigorously.'
This turned out to be absolute blatant BS. Aero negotiated a settlement with Dolittle. That's hardly 'defending itself vigorously'. By the way Dolittle is keeping the suit open ... probably until he gets his total settlement.
LoanStew,
NASCAR went for injunctive relief... wonder what was granted!!
knowles,
Gosh golly gee --- Why don't you make the *phone call* and find out what's holding up the SEC investigation of Aero.
Tic Toc.
knowles,
The SEC operates on their own timeline, and a year or so with the SEC not publically stating anything re: Aero is not necessarily a sign that they are not involved ------ but you knew that.
Tic Toc.
Where's the beef???
don't worry fourkids,
I'm sure the SEC has been informed as to Aero's shortcomings, and inaccuracies in their filings.
knowles,
One should be able to get answers to most all questions by reading the SEC filings.
However, in Aero's case, the filings are either missing, contain erroneous data, contradict themselves, or are incomplete.
This certainly shows either an amateurish operation to say the least, or, intentional deceit.
Where's the beef????
xanadu,
Maybe the check bounced.....
"Bank overdraft (7,310)"
xanadu,
The DA was signed Dec 17,2008, which is covered by this 10-Q. The DA says the $25,000 was supposed to be paid upon signing of the DA,
The $25,000 payment does NOT show in the financials. Plus there are many other errors in the financials.
knowles,
There is absolutely NOTHING in the Definitive Agreement or the 10-Q that states that the $25,000 was to be placed in escrow. To the contrary, it says payment.
Now the question is still valid,
Where does the $25,000 show in Aero's financials????
fourkids,
Again, sorry you did NOT answer the question.
Also... "aero filed the q ~ and imo
~ the q wouldn't have been
*signed* off by ~ gruber and aero's
legal counsel ~ if it wasn't *accurate*"
Let's talk about just how accurate the filing is.... (NOT)
Posted by: GOLDENBOLLOX Date: Friday, February 20, 2009 7:24:30 PM
In reply to: ronning999 who wrote msg# 149713 Post # of 149778
Sales From Last 10Q Sales 3months to 30th Sep 08 207,303
From This 10Q
Sales 3months to 31st Dec 08 63,332
Sales 6 Months to 31st Dec 08 277,484
Now 207,303 plus 63,332 adds up to 270,635 not 277,484.
Where did the extra 6,849 in sales come from?
As always, the filing is a joke.
fourkids,
Sorry, you did NOT answer the question.
Where does the $25,000 show in Aero's financials????
What you posted was a note to he financials, however, the $25,000 does NOT show in the:
1) Consolidated Balance Sheet,
2) Consolidated Statements of Operations, or
3) Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
Now the note says they did pay it, however, the financial statements don't show it.
Hmmmmmmmmm.....
Where's the beef???
fourkids,
My original question still stands unanswered....
Where does the $25,000 show in Aero's financials????
Reseller Mike,
Not after the cut-off date.....
"On December 17, 2008, the Company executed a stock purchase agreement to purchase all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of Jones Exhaust Systems, Inc., a Tennessee Corporation."
fourkids,
"not taking my eye off of what i consider
to a remarkable prize ~ that is aero's
acq of jones exhaust"
Please show everyone just where in Aero's financials just presented in the latest 10-Q where the entry for the $25,000 downstroke required by the Definitive Agreement is for the acquisition of Jones.
Did they pay the downstroke????
If so, there's no entry in the financials.
If not, welllllll, no DA.
fourkids,
Aero = TTR
"The accompanying financial statements represent the consolidated operations of Aero Performance Products, Inc., formerly Franchise Capital Corporation, and TTR-HP, Inc. (DBA Aero Exhaust), its wholly owned subsidiary"
fourkids,
I did read the paragraph and the key sentence is "The fourth lawsuit was brought by Nascar against TTR-HP for perceived breach of contract and failure to pay." What could be more simple???
"my questions to ir .. were very basic
it's ttr who made the decision not to
renew based on *events* that happened
in 2008 ~"
Now let's see ----
IR's version -- "ttr who made the decision not to
renew"
OR
The 10-Q filing -- sued for "failure to pay"
Now which is a more reliable statement???? Andrew Ethan Beyer, or, a signed under penalty of perjury 10-Q???
No choice there at all. Just another lie in which Andrew Ethan Beyer has been caught.
Where's the beef????
fourkids, your words after talking to IR....
Posted by: fourkids_9pets Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 7:57:02 PM
In reply to: Agent1107 who wrote msg# 146938 Post # of 149699
i wouldn't be so sure about that statement
like i said .. ir has the info
folks want to call and ask the
questions ~ no. is in the ibox
as for nascar ..
3 year contract ended eoy 0f 2008
<started in 2006>
the decision not to renew was aero's
i asked if aero would be doing other
*versions* of marketing .. and was told
yes ..
again .. suspect this is part of a bigger
*strategy* of where aero sees themselves
over the next 12 to 18 months and while
there will be some aspect re: racing ~
the choice right now is focused elsewhere
Now obviously Andrew lied to you if he said that it was Aero's choice not to renew. My posting of the following was not out of context...
"The fourth lawsuit was brought by Nascar against TTR-HP for perceived breach of contract and failure to pay."
fourkids,
This pretty much puts to rest the total BS you got from calling IR, Andrew Ethan Beyer, regarding the lie he told you about the company not renewing the NASCAR contract.
"The fourth lawsuit was brought by Nascar against TTR-HP for perceived breach of contract and failure to pay."
So much for IR being a reliable source of info.
Where's the beef???
Guess what ------
The $25,000 cash downstroke for the Jones acquisition DOES NOT show up in the financials.
Hmmmmmmmmmm....
Where's the beef????
Sales for the quarter ------
$63,332
What a DISASTER, to say the least!!
Outstanding at February 13, 2008
Common Stock, $0.0001 par value
2,595,878,822 shares
Looks like 251,421,018 NEW shares of DILUTION ---- approx. 10.7%
So much for all the 'short' selling
cruzdelsur,
"A few days more we will have the details of the acquisition and the finalization of the DEFINITIVE AGREEMENT."
A lot longer than a 'few more days' cruzdelsur .... kinda like Aero providing details on the IB in 'the next several days'..... we're still waiting on that to happen after well over a month.
Hunsaker has up till an August 31, 2009 drop dead date as set forth in the DA to consumate the deal..... if it ever happens.
knowles,
"mom & pops like AERO and Jones."
You're surely correct with that statement..... and that's all they will ever be, a mom & pop operation in a very crowded segment of the business.
Selling an overpriced muffler in today's business climate is a realllllllly TOUGH sell. The vast majority of people needing a muffler replacement never even consider a 'performance' muffler ----- and for very obvious reasons.
hemi345,
To even think that little old Aero could even emulate Tenneco, let alone be a competitor, is a VERY, VERY LOOOOOOOOONG stretch of the imagination, to say the very least.
hemi345,
Aero will never be in the same class (not even close) as Tenneco which is a $6 billion company.
And by the way, Tenneco's major muffler brand is NOT Dynomax or Thrush, it's Walker, which is an OEM Tier 1 supplier.
With the performance of their stock recently, that should be a perfect indication of what the automotive parts business is really like.... in deep trouble.
fourkids,
No it's not clear they included in the 6 indy contractors (which I doubt are there also).
I doubt very much they are even there. Show me in the financials where all these people are being paid.
Where's the beef?????
BROADWAY10,
5 days to delinquincy
fourkids,
"hiring a national sales manager and 2 regional ones"
Wonder what they are being paid (if they are really there)!!
The last 10-Q showed Salaries = 30,849. Take out Hunsaker's salary and there's barely enough for one person, at a paupers wage by the way.
By the way fourkids, what's a 'national sales manager' worth these days ---- $100,000+ ??? 'Regional sales managers' --- maybe $80,000 ????
Sure doesn't show up in the financials.