is working (too hard) for a living
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.
I would expect 'uplist' to happen.
Since this is something TOTALLY in BCCI's control -- they seem to meet the requirements (SEC Reporting) -- just need a few dollars to file the paperwork.
Note that merely talking about it has resulted in a 60% increase in pps.
Would seem like a lot of downside to not follow through.
But, there is a negative PR history this year with the third SW FL store, the Knoxville sports bar, the 8 state master distribution agreement, and the additional October airings of the infomercial (reality tv show).
I just think this one will happen. Will be interesting to see pps in early January whether it does or doesn't happen, absent other news will tell you the market's expectation of it happening.
If bikini coffee stands are a growing sector in the Seattle area -- and as you are a local, I have to take the assertion at face value -- then BCCI is losing market share as they have not opened a new one in more than two years.
If you lose market share in your home market, and are losing $0.60 in operating losses for every $1 of revenue -- how can you even think of going national?
Only possibility is that you are going to 'create' this sector in a different part of the country, which is incredibly expensive given permitting and advertising costs.
But, the company is trying -- opening but then closing kiosks in Arizona and Texas.
An apparently successful kiosk in Tampa (I say that because it is still open) was followed by a JV in SW FL. Two stands opened with LOTS of advertising and promotion a year ago, and a third one was announced for opening but has not -- not a sign of positive momentum.
While I understand an earlier comment about 'baby steps,' I would suggest there need to be more such steps going forward, not backward, to prove the operational viability of this business.
Key: 'if you believe it(pps) will go up.'
From a historical perspective, other than the runup due to overall coffee a couple of years ago, this stock has a history of press releases, many of which do not come to fruition but nevertheless result in upward stock movement before retracing.
So, I can see buying the stock on anticipation of the 'next PR.'
However, buying it because you believe in the business model is not well advised IMO:
- The company has had continuing losses (2012/2013 were originally reported as profitable, with much skepticism about the accounting on this board including from yours truly, but upon audit not surprisingly those gains turned to losses).
- The most recent financials, for Q3 14, showed over $0.60 in operating losses and $0.30 in interest expense, for every $1.00 in revenue, with worsening gross margins.
- The company has reduced store count over the last year, resulting in reduced revenue to cover fixed administrative costs such as audits.
- The Q2 14 store opening promised by a January 14 PR, to be the third for a quasi-franchise (actually JV) in SW FL, never happened.
The company has been kept alive by significant stock dilution over the years, including in the current quarter.
I and others on this board would certainly be interested in the business results which you see, which warrant investment in the stock. The counter-argument is failed investments in ice cream, reality show, franchising, Texas, and Arizona.
While the company is to be commended for becoming a reporting company, all that process has done so far, IMO, is to highlight the poor state of affairs of the underlying business.
Tennessee project is dead.
The deal signed by BCCI with BMOC in May involved the purchase of a sports bar -- to be rebranded as Baristas and operated by BMOC -- as well as an 8 state master franchisor agreement, with the initial franchise to be opened by October 1 (per the agreement -- but it also said within six months of agreement signature, which would have meant November, 2014).
Page 4 of the Amended Registration Statement Form 10-12G/A, filed on November 13, 2014, disclosed that the deal was dead, as did page 6.
However, I can understand your confusion:
- A different section of that same Amended Registration Statement, page 19, seemed to indicate the deal was still alive, as it spoke about the risk of whether sufficient funds could be raised to make the BMOC franchises happen.
- The Q3 14 financial statement, issued just a few days later (???), had virtually identical funding risk verbiage (page 20).
I expect the audited 2014 annual financial statements, due out in April, to have no ambiguity on this subject. It is unfortunate that recently released documentation is inconsistent, but TBH that can happen when a VERY small company ($1.3M annual revenue) is doing its best to meet very complex, very laborious, SEC filing requirements.
10x improvement in RLTR MV means $30M MV, triple BCCI's market value. I think we can agree that is a big jump for a company with no revenues.
Even if it happened, worth only .003 pps to BCCI; IMO the jump is unlikely, the latter doesn't mean much.
For those wondering about my arithmetic -- BCCI's stake is worth $100K per its financials, ten times that is $1M to be spread over BCCI's 320M shares. If my arithmetic is wrong, let me know.
Thus my lack of understanding of this board's RLTR interest.
I agree, BCCI's core business is bad.
I was discussing the mobile kiosk as a marketing concept. I agree, appropriate uses are limited. If they break even on it, who cares. If they lose money on it, enhanced kiosk sales may be offsetting.
But overall, BCCI's kiosk business is not viable (see: financial statements), you and I agree on that.
They have no cash, their only hope is franchising. And how is that working for them? They have had franchising gurus on staff -- at least according to press releases -- with filings in 26 states as of 18 months ago. They had national franchise availability recognition in various publications last spring.
The results:
- The SW Florida JV is close to a franchising concept. Two stores opened, a third was announced in January for 'early Q2' opening but nothing heard since; BCCI website still has a placeholder for that site.
- An 8 state master franchising deal with BMOC, an established franchise distributor, was signed and announced in May, including brand extension to a sports bar to be purchased by BCCI and operated by BMOC. This deal is now dead.
Not encouraging. Audited (annual, quarterly not required) SEC reporting of financial results has only turned previously reported profits into losses, not a surprise to close readers of the previously published non-GAAP financials, with commenting posts here. It has been kept alive by stock issuance, frequently in exchange for services, sometimes in exchange for cash at a significant discount to the traded price (BTW, ihub investors who want to buy stock should contact the company, it will be cheaper there, but likely with some sell restrictions -- shouldn't be a problem for those who believe in this company).
Availability of stock on a 'higher' exchange does not change the viability of the underlying business, key to any long term stock price increase.
Note: I have no 'inside' knowledge of this company, just what I read in press releases and published financial statements.
Not sure why BCCI shareholders care about RLTR.
BCCI's total stake is about $100K (market price less company used liquidity hit of 15) -- as it was at the end of September (it did fall to less than half of that after the Grounded in Seattle 'premier' in early October, surprising given the 'positive reviews' reported by BCCI and RLTR......).
But if you look at the historical graph http://ycharts.com/companies/RLTR even at its (brief) peak the stake would only be on the books at about $250K, tiny for a company (BCCI) with about 320M shares outstanding (including preferred, convertible into common at 1:1). Worth less than .001 per share at the peak, about 0.0003 today.
If we are discussing RLTR. Historical financials through September 30, 2014 show no revenues, with less than $10K/quarter of expenses -- will be interesting to see the amount of revenue generated by GIS and the weed show. And, whether the anticipated 'national distribution' of the weed show occurs.
'Mobile kiosk' could build brand awareness, and hopefully volumes at the 6 Washington stores which are desperately in need of revenue, as BCCI is losing money at a rapid rate (BCCI financials show operating losses of $0.63 for every $1.00 of revenue, with an additional $0.30 of cost for interest expense).
As a side benefit, it can provide employment opportunity for the Grounded in Seattle girls while they wait for a major network to pick up their show.
Where are GIS showings currently media promoted -- link?
And, advise of showing where/when; I just went to the weTV schedule site and googled 'Grounded,' and 'Seattle, no hits. Same results as I consistently got in October.
Perhaps they are somehow showing in Seattle -- but definitely not everywhere on the west coast, I am in a major west coast population center and no repeats here, at least that are advertised (disclaimer: the original episode never appeared on a weTV schedule listing, either).
I can believe the 'stars' would still be 'out and about,' promoting -- hopefully that will be reflected in increased Seattle kiosk sales. But what is the source of the statement:
constantly filming
Interesting data on ice cream availability.
But, how important/valuable is ice cream to BCCI?
In the recent registration statement, 'ice cream' does not appear anywhere in the company's business discussion. The only place it appears is on the balance sheet with $125K in 'intangibles'; in terms of investment value, it is worth noting that $500K worth of stock was spent on ice cream two or so years ago, so this 'investment' is already down 75% in value, in the auditor's mind, in addition to normal depreciation of intangibles.
Your data needs correcting/updating.
- The Forbes (and other publication) franchise visibility came in spring 2014, IMO as a result of (paid for by?) an advertising program purchased with the issuance of company stock on October 1, 2013 (not sure why that PR is no longer on the company's website).
- The multi-state BMOC master franchise program is the only franchise program announced since then. Announced at the same time (May 2014) was the purchase of Pavilion 117, a sports bar which was to be operated by BMOC and rebranded as Baristas, to open in July. A reasonable brand extension, although Seattle would seem a better location.
BUT, I am surprised you have mentioned BMOC -- page 5 of the company's recently amended Form 10-12 G-A, filed November 13, 2014, reported the deal is dead. But you get some slack on this -- page 21 of the subsequently filed Q3 10-Q (November 19, 2014) noted that capital would be needed to make the sports bar and BMOC franchises happen, as did page 20 of the aforementioned amended Form 10-12 G/A!!! (Side comment: huh???)
- A year ago BCCI announced a franchise-like JV In Florida which resulted in the opening of two stores in Cape Coral, accompanied by initial significant advertising. A third SW FL store was announced in Feb 2014 for opening in 'early Q2.' This third store has yet to open.
Net, there are not really any proof points for the appropriately desired franchise model.
- There is no evidence of an ongoing reality TV show.
A single episode of Grounded in Seattle (GIS) aired during 'infomercial time' on weTV (an October Saturday morning at about 0600 on the west coast, perhaps 0900 on the east coast). Prior to its airing, it was not visible in the weTV listings -- although other infomercials were. Mr. Henthorn announced there would be other October showings of this single episode -- but I could never find them in weTV listings, perhaps other posters can advise as to when they aired.
The company has not said that the show has been picked up by a network.
- On the positive side, points for audited financials and becoming a reporting company (despite the above-mentioned inconsistency), even though as a result previously reported profits were turned into huge losses -- in 2013 the loss was greater than revenue!
However, it is not obvious that the company's financials will attract significant institutional interest. Consider that in Q3 14 the company had $0.63 in operating losses and $0.30 in interest expense for every $1.00 of revenue. Although positioning as a 'growth story,' the company has closed about 25% of its kiosks since the beginning of Q4 13.
Also, the company is nowhere near qualifying for NASDAQ listing -- although the market cap is almost there, they have less than half of the co-required $5M of shareholder's equity.
Interesting float numbers.
In June of 2010, it was 17M out of 164M shares O/S (per ihub numbers, above), now 249M out of 295M O/S.
Share structure should also include preferred, which is convertible into common 1:1. As of the publication date of the Q2 financials, approximately 15M outstanding, out of 30M authorized, before the next paragraph.
The subsequent events section also noted that 7M of common shares had been exchanged for 7M of preferred shares, suggesting that additional common shares might well be issued this quarter. So, if Yahoo's information is 'up to date,' there are 22M preferred shares outstanding in addition to the 295M of common.
Initially didn't defend BCCI, but then I did.
Just because one doesn't like the accounting treatment, doesn't mean it is unacceptable.
I would argue it really doesn't matter; Q3 operating loss of $.63 per $1.00 of revenue and an additional $.30 of interest expense per $1.00 of revenue speak for themselves, and are reflected in six month 70% pps decline.
I wasn't defending BCCI, just giving possible explanation.
To your point on accounting systems, I expect the company knows exactly how much of its labor, facility, utility costs, etc., are attributable to individual kiosks. That data is needed for state tax returns and was likely used in the decision to close 25% of the then-operating kiosks in Q4 of last year.
I would also like to see barista salaries 'above the line,' but I can see where that may not be required per the source I cited. And I can imagine why the company might not want to expose that information, dependent on what that methodology would show.
BCCI's decision appears to be supported by its auditor. When multiple choices are available, companies of all sizes tend to make the choice which shows them to their best advantage, or least disadvantage.
Not sure how much cold will help BCCI:
- Company's registration statement says that coffee revenues slow during the holidays.
- Q1 14 was $317K in revenues, Q3 14 was $297K. Not much difference -- perhaps because ice cream sells more in the summer, or because there isn't as much seasonality as one would think.
In fairness to the point, I would project Q1 15 revenue to be somewhat higher than Q1 14 because prices have likely been increased somewhat this year (at least they have at Starbucks, I know that from personal knowledge, but note comment in my last post re: declining margins suggestive of a lack of BCCI pricing power).
But it is hard to see how the company will be able to turn a profit, which at the end of the day is the objective. Consider that Q3 operating losses were $188K, and interest expense of $89K, on revenues of $297K.
There is a reason for the serious pps decline of the last few months. Could be the 'fat lady' is warming up the vocal chords... Or at the very least there will be significant additional dilution to obtain cash or pay operating expenses (subsequent events section of the Q3 report already reported some in the first half of Q4).
Coffee may be high margin, but for BCCI?
What we do know:
- In the most recent quarter the company had an operating loss of $0.63 on every $1.00 of revenue.
Unfortunately, it is hard to assess BCCI's 'gross profit'; according to http://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/figure-gross-margin-restaurant-4194.html, it is calculated as (revenue-direct costs)/revenues, where direct costs are defined as variable costs of production: "Variable costs are costs that change with production level, such as food costs, hourly wages paid to cooks and servers, and gas used for your stoves."
BCCI takes the position that barista labor costs are not part of variable costs, perhaps on the basis that if a barista is not on duty, no products are sold (note restaurant manager costs are not included in the variable cost definition above). Apparently the auditors support this presentation. Not clear how utilities of the kiosks are shown.
So that leaves the physical cost of coffee as the only direct cost shown; but even then, we can't analyze quarterly costs in detail because inventory levels are only calculated annually (not unreasonable for a small company). However, with that constraint, we can observe that reported direct cost percentage has increased over the last three quarters, from 31% 37% to 39%, feels high but perhaps consistent with the reduced pricing power of BCCI versus Starbucks, Peet's, etc., as coffee costs have risen this year: http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/coffee.aspx?timeframe=1y
Interesting that more franchisee ads are starting to appear -- can you advise as to where, so we can listen/watch??
If you go back to March/April of 2014, the company put significant resources into a campaign to attract franchisees, funded by a 'media buy' made October 1, 2013 in exchange for company stock.
It turned out much of the effort was for paid (?) insertion into lists of attractive franchise opportunities. Some of the results show at the top of this ihub page.
The only published result of this intensive campaign was the 8 state BMOC master franchise plan announced in May, but since canceled.
The recent registration statement said that company planned to find ten franchisees over the course of the year, subject to availability of financing.
And that is the issue for the company -- is the business model sufficiently robust to attract franchisee capital, given the risk of inappropriate behavior by baristas (see recent 'bust' of a different coffee kiosk company in the Seattle area), regulatory constraints, etc.
With Q3 financials showing operating losses of over $0.60 for every $1.00 of revenue -- without the 'overhead' of franchise fees, and with senior management taking no salaries -- that appears to be a difficult question to affirmatively answer.
The problem faced by the company is lack of proof points. More stores have closed then opened over the last year, company owned or otherwise; the one program which is close to a franchise situation with significant third party capital involved, SW FL (Cape Coral), opened two stores in Q3/Q4 of 2013 with great fanfare and advertising support. In February, a third store was announced for opening, but it hasn't happened; to the best of my knowledge, reason for non-opening has not been publicly disclosed.
"Announcing" locations won't be enough, must actually open.
So far in 2014:
- In February, BCCI announced a third SW FL kiosk with their partner for early Q2 opening, hasn't happened yet.
- In May, BCCI announced an 8 state master franchise deal in the east, with a required first kiosk opening by October 1. More interestingly, this announcement included purchase of a Knoxville Sports bar to be rebranded, suggesting brand extension beyond the apparently failed ice cream initiative.
Unfortunately, the recently amended Registration Statement said that this deal is defunct -- won't happen.
In previous years, the company announced a New Jersey franchisee, and a 5 site franchise deal in Arizona, these didn't happen (although, two AZ locations opened then closed). Two TX locations were opened then closed.
The company has announced franchise papers filed in 26 states -- but actual store openings are not happening. Indeed, the company's store count has reduced from 13 to 10 over the last year, causing reported revenue to decline.
BCCI carries $125K of 'defined life intangibles' for ice cream on its balance sheet. This amount is depreciated annually, and is significantly less than the $500K of stock issued in Q2 12 for ice cream distribution.
BCCI has put out PRs speaking to ice cream availability at New York area supermarkets and kiosks. But, ice cream revenues have never been publicly disclosed.
In the registration statement, Discussion of .... Operations, Overview, BCCI says:
Baristas provides its customers the ability to drive up and order their choice of a custom-blended espresso drink, freshly brewed coffee, or other beverages
All of our revenues are planned to be generated through the sale of coffee.
BCCI's RLTR shares DID increase $100K, BUT...
That is because they had decreased by almost that same amount since September 30, as the market was apparently unimpressed by the ongoing prospects for Grounded in Seattle following its October debut (PS. Does anyone know whether even the 'pilot' informercial ever had another airing?).
But it is worth talking about why this week's RLTR increase. It was because of the debut of an RLTR radio show, Loudmouth News, which covers companies in the legal marijuana business. It debuted in Lake Tahoe, a New Mexico station has said it will carry it, and RLTR says they are in talks for national syndication.
So, RLTR stock could well go higher, helping BCCI in the process. However. today's RLTR valuation for BCCI of $109K (using the methodology per the 10-K) amounts to only .00035, or about 1% of BCCI's valuation.
Net: hard to move the BCCI pps needle with RLTR. Need more and profitable coffee kiosks, or profitable brand extension; current model of losing $.93 (operating loss plus interest expense) for every $1 of revenue is not sustainable.
No value for BCCI's BUCS shares is appropriate.
BCCI owns about 2.6M shares of BUCS. At the current .01/share, the value would be $26K. This in turn works out to .00008 per BCCI common share equivalent -- IF you could sell the shares in a market where trading volumes are very limited (25K today, for example, and many days with no trades at all).
So, company's decision to reserve 100% of $26K seems appropriate, and for sure hardly worth debating.
I have now reviewed the Q2 financials. Comments:
- Revenues flat from Q2 14, down from Q3 13. No surprise, with no increase in open stores from Q2 14, and a decrease from Q3 13.
- Operating loss increased by 20% from Q2, from $.53 on every dollar of revenue, to $0.63. About half of the increase is attributed by management to 'compliance costs' (re: registration statements, audit costs, etc.).
- Compounding the problem, interest expense is $0.30 per dollar of revenue.
Clearly not a sustainable business model, so how is the company still alive? Not surprisingly, the answer is dilution -- the issuance of preferred and common stock to acquire cash, retire debt, or pay for vendor expenses.
Common stock is roughly .035/sh today; worth noting that issuance of shares to insiders, converters of debt, and vendors was between .015 and .025/sh between July 1 and the present day (based on the 'subsequent events' section), with one outside investor paying .05/sh for preferred stock during Q3. Note: I am not differentiating between common and preferred as the latter can be exchanged 1:1 for the former -- although there are not sufficient shares of common stock authorized to enable conversion.
I continue to not understand the gross property and equipment increase this year of $158K, or almost 40%, with no new store openings. If there was an explanation in the 10-Q, I couldn't find it.
'Grounded in Seattle' is on the list of 'defined-lived intangibles' assets for $72K; if the show is not picked up, I would expect this to hit the Q4 P&L during the audit process. But having said that, last year the auditors did accept $125K in this category for ice cream, which is inexplicable given the company's statement in the registration statement that
All of our revenues are planned to be generated through the sale of coffee.
Company's Registration Statement re: Fall revenues:
The Company's liquidity may be affected by general decrease in revenues during the holiday months
BCCI filed an NT 10-Q yesterday.
Says that quarterly results will not be timely posted, but will be filed within five calendar days of the due date. Due date was Nov 15, postponed to the 17th by the weekend.
Net, investors should expected quarterly results this week or next Monday (not sure how weekend effect of the initial due date fits affects the revised due date).
Surprised no discussion of today's revised registration statement.
Go to www.secfilings.com, and you can easily find.
No PR about the filing, so we can only speculate as to why the refiling. The only significant change I saw, was that BCCI announced that the sports bar acquisition, and related 8 state master franchise deal with BMOC, is dead.
No surprise to me, given the lack of performance, but certainly a negative for those hoping for logical sports bar brand extension.
Stock went down -- but given the newly announced terms of the acquisition, a good thing for the company. Consider:
- total acquisition price for a money losing property, 1.2M.
- price included $275K of cash (closing plus delinquent taxes -- where did BCCI think they were going to get this??), plus $739KK+ in shares (pps not stated, but at .05/share would be about 15M shares, which the company does not have available without new shares which some posters have advised that per Mr. Henthorn, would not happen).
The biggest negative, maybe responsible for the pps drop today, is why the company would pay the legal and due diligence costs to enter into such a negative proposition in new geography without the cash to pay for it?? Hard to have faith in management on this one.
The cynics might say, the plan was to do a 'pump and dump' -- but I tend to view people as 'legal' and so for me just pure management incompetence. Take your choice -- or suggest a third alternative.
Looking at other things, the company's business discussion continues to say NOTHING about ice cream as part of the product portfolio. Talks about 'new revenue streams,' but nothing about ice cream -- much less the recently announced cigarette, etc. sales. $125K of ice cream intangibles continue on the Balance Sheet, have to believe a write-off in the next audit.
In fairness, perhaps not required to update the items in the above paragraph with this Amendment, I don't know the rules.
There is reference to the reality show, saying it will 'continue to air...over the next few weeks on we.' However, today's search of "Seattle" on the we.tv schedule again shows no planned airings (other than Sleepless in Seattle, a fine movie but irrelevant here)-- but in fairness the initial airing could not be found on the we.tv schedule and it was seen by some, albeit not at BCCI's announced time in much of the company (I am west coast; company announced 9AM, I saw it at 6am).
BCCI bought Pavilion 17, with May hoopla. But:
- BCCI had to come up with $30K+ cash for remodel, my guess is they didn't.
- As part of that deal, their partner had to open a kiosk by October 1. No PR to indicate that happened.
My guess has to be, deal is 'dead.' Note that BCCI does not do PRs for deals which are announced, but then 'die' -- not saying they should, just saying they don't.
One poster was in the area, promised to report back on status of the building, and what might be said outside, not sure we have heard.
All in your definition of 'big.'
At this writing, up <3% on $6K in volume, versus a 50% drop over the last three months or so. The term 'dead cat bounce' comes to mind.
Need some REAL NEWS to move this higher -- although in fairness, 'puffy' PRs have worked short term in the past.
Q3 financial statements are due out in ten days -- perhaps they will show a drastic turnaround from Q2, when the company posted losses of $0.50 per $1.00 of revenue, which in turn was down 15+% from the prior year as several non-Washington stores were closed.
Some have speculated that the financial statements will be late; Q2 was late, but that was the company's first standalone quarter as a 'reporting' company, hopefully they are now in the groove.
Hope you can find him, report back re:
- Sports bar financing.
- Master franchisor status on meeting the contractually obligated October 1 kiosk opening; and
- SW FL store 3 opening.
Perhaps there will be some good information in the Q3 financials, due on the 15th of this month.
Need positive news for pps to go up.
What the market knows at the moment:
- Store count going down.
- Losses of $0.50 on ever $1 of revenue in Q2, even with management taking no salaries.
- Audited financials showed that previous profits were actually losses; in 2013 loss equaled revenue.
- Company unable to finance opening of sports bar.
- 'Reality show' was a one time infomercial.
Market price represents the above knowledge. Need better things to happen to reverse trend.
Great if an announced store, opened: Arizona 5 (2 opened, not sure if by the announced partner, closed since), New Jersey (three years ago!!), Texas (10 announced, two opened and closed); SW FL #3 (announced for Q2 14 opening), Knoxville Sports Bar (announced for July 2014 opening).
To say nothing of the recent 8 state 'master franchisor' agreement that required a kiosk to open by Oct 1 (truth in advertising, same company as Knoxville partner, should only hold company culpable for one screw-up, not two).
Even an unannounced 'stealth' store would be great. But unlikely, as the company is prone to announcing things that do not happen, versus announcing surprise successes.
Problem is, cash. Takes cash to open the stores. And with the company losing $0.50 for every $1.00 in revenue, even with the key management team (Barry, Troy) taking $0 in salary -- hard to rustle up the necessary up-front capital as the business model does not appear profitable from an ongoing cash flow perspective.
Which is reflected in the fact that BCCI open kiosk count dropped from 13 in Q2, 1013 to 10 in Q2, 2014.
And that the company has sold (or valued, when shares are provided in lieu of cash) shares for $.01 when the market price has been much higher.
Good analysis.
I just went back to the Form 10 in detail, and found detailed information on the arrangement with BMOC which included purchase of Pavilion 117. Worth noting that it was not a formal agreement, but rather a 'binding' LOI (before editing my post said LOL, that too....) -- but I didn't see the conditions which would 'unbind it,' perhaps they were there.
To get the sports bar rebranded and open, BCCI had to come up with CASH -- and with Q2 losses at 50% of revenue, not something they had readily available.
I have hesitated to call this a scam; but, other than for 'pump and dump' reasons, why would a company enter into a transaction requiring cash, which it did not have?
An interesting part of the transaction was the requirement that BMOC had to have a kiosk franchisee 'within six months,' which the agreement separately stated to be October 1 (calendar management not a strength for the BCCI management team -- this agreement was signed on May 20), else BMOC would suffer consequences. But, since BCCI didn't come up with their portion of the cash to open the Pavilion, not sure where this goes.
Probably somewhere similar to where New Jersey's Cuppa Joes went 2-3 years ago. The ether.
Net: I would not be holding my breath for a Knoxville Sports Bar, or franchisees within this 8 state agreement.
Or, to your point, for anything else. The 'uplisting' announcement created a flurry of buy and sell -- but not by sophisticated investors (except on the sell side), since there is no way the company could meet the capital and/or profit requirements. But the fact that merely applying for and receiving a NASDAQ symbol could create a big jump, says the world about 'pinkie land,' has educated me.
Past due sports bar is a big deal.
This was a brand extension, announced with significant fanfare. And to your point about seasonality, fall/winter is huge for sports bars, with football and basketball -- college and pro.
My concern here is management; it appears that BCCI made the deal without determining if it could be financed. Indeed, the recent Q2 report says that the company does not have 'any current financing available to it' although it hopes that operations will generate cash. But, with Q2 loss at 50% of revenue, that does not appear to be happening.
I agree your point about Florida seasonality -- my point was that BCCI put out a PR in January, announcing the early Q2 opening. They set an expectation, and didn't meet it. Perhaps your point is that they shouldn't have been thinking about an April opening anyway, won't argue with that, but again reflects on management acumen.
But, looking at the Form 10 Q1 financials, it appears as though equipment was purchased for use in that store (could be wrong on that; $100K+ was spent on equipment for something, not specified but nothing else was announced for opening).
PS. Thanks for your comments, I try to be balanced and factual, although sometimes I will express an opinion on what I report as per above.
What about third SWFL store and sports bar, many months overdue? Or the New Jersey store, and the five Arizona stores, and the now you see them now you don't Texas stores? Or, big picture, the 100 stores (50 company owned, 50 franchise) it said it would open in 2013 in the sponsored Prime Equity Research Report?
There is the company who has outperformed and delivered what it said it was going to do
Baristas operates a specialty drive-through beverage retailer with attractive female theme-costumed models as servers. Baristas provides its customers the ability of drive up and order their choice of a custom-blended espresso drink, freshly brewed coffee, or other beverages. We generate revenue by offering our patrons the finest hot and cold beverages, specializing in specialty coffees, blended teas and other custom drinks. In addition, we offer smoothies, fresh-baked pastries and other confections
I said creative, not that it would work.
They don't have room to carry much selection' -- and you can absolutely expect inventory 'shrinkage' issues.
Note the first stores are those which are funded by their Florida JV partner, perhaps they have the controls/knowledge to pull it off. But yes, I would take the 'under' on this one.
Kiosk sale of beer/wine & cigarettes is creative.
I am surprised that Florida allows it, but apparently they do; sounds like it is not possible -- or the license is too expensive -- in Washington, or it would have been done.
Perhaps now the third SW FL kiosk, promised on January 22 for 'early Q2 opening,' will now open -- though that subject was not raised in the PR.
Good the company published a PR re: show. RLTR published one as well.
I noted reference to 9AM showing to a national audience -- at least in my part of the west coast, on Comcast, it was 6AM; what time did it show in Seattle, via what provider?
Other than the self-congratulatory BCCI and RLTR PRs, I have been unable to find independent reviews of the show -- can anyone provide a link??
Not sure what is meant by the following:
The show will continue to air in different time slots over the next few weeks on WE tv
Thanks for posting BH's words, but they confuse:
- Did he say who is paying for the runs? It did appear during a 'paid programming' time slot.
- To what 'other networks' is he referring? I thought we TV was the only network carrying the show?
- I don't understand the Will & Grace reference; Will & Grace was on at 9 AM on Comcast in my west coast location, as shown by the Comcast guide. The reality show was on at 6 AM as 'paid programming.' Is he suggesting that the show should have been on at 9AM in place of W & G?
Curious: What time did it show in Seattle?
- He seems to imply that the listing problem is straightened out. You may wish to advise him that my Comcast guide for October 18th at this writing shows Will & Grace at 9 AM -- and a different paid programming show, 'Clean Floors,' at 6 AM.
Recalling that the initial press release said future shows would be on 'during the week,' I searched my guide for 'Seattle,' found no shows with that word during the next two weeks.
Did Mr. Henthorn said when the next episode will air? Perhaps he will put out a PR, announcing the success of the first show and the air times for the rest of the month, with clarification on time zone.
And (perhaps wishful thinking) include updates on the third SW FL kiosk (now six months past the expected opening date) and the sports bar (almost three months past).
Thanks for sharing the link.
I have quickly looked at the report:
- It is positive that the 10-Q format is being used for financial reporting, with the additional disclosures required.
- Revenues down 30% year on year; management attributes that to reduction in the number of kiosks from 13 to 10. Both are not good for the self-acclaimed fastest growing espresso stand company in the land.
- Operating loss was more than 50% of revenue in the second quarter.
- There is a forecast of ten new franchises over the next 12 months, each with a $25K fee to BCI. This is the same fee quoted in the Prime Equity Research report of two years ago. I would have thought BMOC (the 8 state master franchisor) would get some of the fee; either BMOC grosses up the fee, or perhaps no franchises are forecast for BMOC.
- Including subsequent events, about 12M of new preferred stock have been exchanged for common stock, some of which was used to finance certain operations in the second quarter and in the third, and likely will be so used again in the fourth. But, didn't a poster report that Mr. Henthorn had advised him that the use of common stock to finance operations would not continue to happen?
- The only specific mention of the Knoxville sports bar was the fact that capital is needed for start-up costs. Strange -- the May 28 PR said that the company owned 51% of the JV which had acquired the sports bar; that it would stay open during much of the remodeling; and that as a consequence revenues would double in the third quarter. But under that scenario, Q2 revenue should have been impacted with a month of revenue, I would have thought. Perhaps something was lost in the translation of what I am sure was a very detailed contract, and the PR.
- There was a mention that liquidity will be under pressure due to lower holiday sales. Interesting -- on Dec 14, 2011, the company put out a press release about holiday sales, headlined "BCCI Local Holiday Sales Surge..."
- The company found there to be material weaknesses in internal financial controls during the period ended June 2014, but does not believe that had an impact on the accuracy of the published financials. I expect that such weaknesses are pretty common in a company this size.
Fascinating email promoting 9:00 premier -- is 'Jim' James Hodge, Chairman and CEO of RLTR?
Did anyone outside of Seattle see any sign of the
aggressive national promotional campaign which includes radio and television spots across multiple networks
Sorry for 'bot buy' before weTV schedule check.
Several previous posts have pointed out that the show is not showing up on the weTV schedule, or on the Comcast schedule (which is more detailed than the weTV schedule), despite the PR.
Hopefully the show does happen, versus the other announcements this year which have not happened (SW FL store ('early Q2'); Knoxville sports bar (July)). But even if it does happen, will not be at the time expected by readers of the PR (PR: 0930, no mention of time zone; my expectation, if it does happen, per overall weTV schedule review: 0930 eastern, which translates to 0630 on the west coast).