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.
"That isn't the best way to look at things, honestly. You have to fail, in order to succeed, and if some of the 'forward looking statements' never materialized, that is the nature of the universe, and business. What you are doing when you state that the failures 'overshadow' the successes, is focusing on the negative and that is not healthy. I don't quite see how some things that didn't pan out somehow overshadow those that did."
Tell me which ones did?
How much do you have invested?
To not want to see the posts that state (with some proof or legitimate questions) that this may be a SCAM is to invest at your own peril.
I agree that EESO is shipping product and WOWGreen has signed up alot of distributors (who knows what that number is though?)
I also think that the financials Jared put out are a work of fiction at best.
EESO has yet to hit any sales target that it has PRd. Or if they have that one or two they hit are so overshadowed by the many that they have missed.
They are either out of shares or nearly out of them and the last record of cash on hand showed not much.
There is some evidence that creditors are not being paid - I recall the pen manufacturer suing them.
They are not forthcoming with info on the conversion privileges of the preferred shareholders.
Jared misled investors on Dec 1 last year about share issuance and timing of it.
And for those who say, walk away from the buyout, that means you are also walking away from yoru one PRd contract other than WOWgreen.
By the way, anyone else think Bill White may try to steal WOWGreen from Jared or the Lee's contract. He just became CEO of a green cleaner company!
May not be a SCAM but little true value here until we see some true financials as the past ones are either ficitional or troubling and neither one is good IMO>
They need cash to do buybacks and based on the last financials, they have little of that on hand. (If the financials are even worth the paper they are printed on in the first place - I have my HUGE doubts).
Alaskan,
Just like they were PRd at PGYC as buyers in the open market as well.
You did some good DD on PGYC to show how that buyout etc were not real - dig into the financials here and the other PRs and see what you come up with.
There is significant doubt to be found here if you want to find it.
EESO is a real company - so is WOWgreen - so were lots of pinks - Does not mean that they are good investments or that they always make good traders...at some point there is the last opportunity to trade them and I think this play is pretty much over IMO.
Drift
I wanted to go check out the products and pricing as a retail customer. Turns out you can not even do that unless you are referred by a distributor or am I doing somethig wrong at the wowgreen site.
I need to enter a distributor's reference to even buy the products retail.
No Pilot,
I am asking why he claims EESO is owed more than EESO sold in product?
Bounced checks from previous quarters and interest owed on long overdue accounts are the best legal answers anyone has given and neither one should be comforting to longs IMO.
Pilot, just saw your previous response that you must have typed while I was typing this - glad you understand what the issue is that I woudl have and think needs addressed.
Best to you and other longs as this unfolds.
Pilot.
Jared has said that he sold 800,000 worth of stuff in the last quarter of 2008 but somehow he also says he is owed 1.2 million more from buyers at the end of that quarter than they owed him at the end of the previous quarter.
As someone said earlier, might be interest on overdue accounts but that is not necessarily a good thing. if you look at the end of Q4, most of the money owing to EESO has been owing for more than 90 days (and maybe even much longer). How much is truly collectible.
It does not matter how much profit you made on the sale if you never collect what is owing to you. And jared's response has always been, we are make slow progress on the A/R. If some of this is not yet collected - the buyer got their product a long time ago and Jared has now been waiting 240 days and counting to be paid - I see massive write offs in the future of this one if this is the case.
You need auditors on this one NOW and not at the end of Q3. This one is clearly a mess already.
Accounts receivable at end of Q3 was $8,140,671.
Accounts receivable at end of Q4 was $9,341,507.
Sales in Q4 was $832,571.
How can receivables go up by more than sales in a quarter???
This is what I am talking about Steve. Explain how it can be true.
Steve,
Correct me if I am wrong but, let's simplify this. I am trying ot do the simplest of analysis on this.
PRETEND:
I am a start out business with no cash and no A/R.
I make a sale on the last day of the quarter for $100.
I record it as a sale of $100.
If the other side of the entry is not cash or A/R then what can it be. At the end of that quarter, absent any other entries, I have either 100 cash or 100 A/R from that sale.
My point is that it is impossible by most accounting standards to do as Jared presented and say that A/R went up by more than sales in a quarter but I am willing to be proven wrong on this - in Q4 his A/R went up by 1.2 million on sales of 0.8 million - I call BS on that one as it is impossible by GAAP. COrrect or Incorrect???
More funny stuff from the financials that Jared put out for everyone to read:
Q2 sales are $504,000 - you do know it is a 1 in 1000 shot that the sales number woudl be an even thousand right? Thsi is not a company reporting in (000) - Very convenient number to come up with and highly unlikely to be true.
Q3 sales were a triple ZERO again (7.975,000) - buy a lottery ticket Jared because two quarters in a row of even thousand dollar sales is incredibly lucky - to be exact it is a one in a million chance that these numbers would be true (1000 times 1000 - the odds of each event happening separately)
Q4 COGS is another triple ZERO number at 425,000 - can I rub your belly Jared cause you've got luck written all over you
And before you say that he is just rounding the numbers, these are the only numbers that he has control over that are rounded. In each of these quarters, where sales are triple 000, COGS is non-ZERO to the decimal and where COGS is 000, sales is non-ZERO to the decimal.
Let's not even get into the fact that his gross margin on similar sales numbers went from 19% in Q1 on 630,000 sales (my rounding) to 27% (no rounding) in Q2 on lower sales at 504,000.
Q3 monster sales of 7,975,000 generated a record gross margin of 45% and then in Q4 when sales fell back to earth at 832,571 you would expect gross margin to retreat but it kept going to 49%
I am starting to think that smaller sales volumes may be the route to go as the less this company sells the greater its gross margin.
That bottle they sold to the guy at McDonalds - pure profit if it is all they sell this quarter.
As to tearing into these unaudited (ficticious) financials - I'm Lovin' It!
pinksheets.com has them - go there and then to EESO and then the filings.
Let me know which of the numbers on them make sense to you.
Looks like many of the numbers were made up in my opinion as they jump around with no justification.
I look forward to your analysis.
Accounts receivable went up by 1.2 milllion in a quarter that had 800,000 of sales.
When you book a sale the other side of that transaction needs to be either receivables or what you received (cash).
Receivables went up by 400,000 more than the sales in the quarter - how can that be - it can not IMO.
Past dues (previous write offs) do not come into receivables - they go straight to cash if you collect them after writing them off. And there is no evidence of any past write offs in previous financials.
Tell me how you can believe any numbers from this company if they can not even get their incredibly late financials to add up.
Not so fast doughboy,
You did not answer my question.
Accounts receivable at end of Q3 was $8,140,671.
Accounts receivable at end of Q4 was $9,341,507.
Sales in Q4 was $832,571.
How can receivables go up by more than sales in a quarter???
Since you are basing your projections on numbers that Jared will be providing to you in unaudited form, explain how his previously provided unaudited numbers make any sense at all?
This is not about AR being collectible or not, this is about the numbers even adding up in the first place.
Financial transparency is only good if the numbers are real.
These ones are so obviously ficticious that it is not even funny.
Why does anyone care if they get Q1 financials or even Q2 financials? If they are not audited then they will be a wonderful work of fiction IMO.
Kind of like how this can not be answered from Jared's last batch of financials?
Accounts receivable at end of Q3 was $8,140,671.
Accounts receivable at end of Q4 was $9,341,507.
Sales in Q4 were $832,571.
How can receivables go up by more than sales in a quarter??? Nothing of Q3 receivables collected in the entire 90 days of Q4 AND some bounced checks from previous quarters??
Anyone got an idea how they creatively accounted for this discrepancy?
If I was an auditor I would not even touch this without making the company undergo a full prior audit so I at least know that I am starting with the truth...
Doughboy and dishonorable,
How much of that profit goes to Preferred holders in dividends before you do your PE ratio? Would need toknow how many preferreds are outstanding as well as what dividend rate is - any idea on either one?
How much to taxes?
And while you are computing numbers, here is a puzzle that I am sure you can solve.
Accounts receivable at end of Q3 was $8,140,671.
Accounts receivable at end of Q4 was $9,341,507.
Sales in Q4 was $832,571.
How can receivables go up by more than sales in a quarter???
Anyone????
Thanks.
No one is stuck Jerad. You and others who are in at higher levels need to determine if EESO is the best opportunity for whatever amount of cash you can get for your shares now.
The "breakeven" philosophy of investing when you have a loser is what make people lose even more. They want to wait until they get back to what they paid before they sell so that they do not need to admit a mistake to themselves or others around them. That waiting game costs them in opportunity lost and can also be much more costly if the stock never regains its ground.
If you are waiting for PRs to be released to move this or any other stock back up, then you also need to look and see what PRs have done in the past to the stock price to see if your breakeven price is even a remote possibility.
Make up your own mind but the "breakeven" philosophy often cost people more than it needed to. May not be the case here but NO ONE is STUCK.
Went thru 1.5 billion shares in less than a year, another 300 million will not do much good IMO.
Headway on receivables - I would like to know who the $8 millions of sales was even to in Q3 - then determine what may be collectable of that. Selling receivables may be a good way to manage cash flow but they still need to be saleable and these may not now that they are at least 8 months old!!!
Everything in my post is way off base???
He is out of shares. FACT
Accounts payable are massive and receivables seem uncollectable given that at end of year there was 8 millon plus over 90 days. He even mentioned in an earlier CC that he thought of trying to sell off the receivables - that is desparation talking. FACTS
He is a newbie in pinkieland and he got involved with some who know how to work it better than him. FACTS
And much of the rest is FACT too....WOWGreen seeking a new supplier may turn ut to be FACT if he does not find some more magic beans soon.
I have heard a few people say it sounds like he does not care anymore, he did not sound excited, he sounded defeated, etc.
Here is my take on it fwiw if that is the case (I have not listened to CC)
He is out of shares so can not raise money from issuing more.
He owes a massive whack of money and his accounts receivable are mostly uncollectable so the debt collectors are hot on his heels - watch for liens on property soon or locks on the door if this is the case.
He got involved with some people who know pinkyland better than he does and is now in much deeper than he ever intended to be or can figure out how to get out of.
He did not completely understand the contract with Belmont Partners (maybe - need to see what was agreed but expect this was a death spiral conversion where they may end up owning the whole company again)
He sounded defeated because he has no way out now and his refusal of a real or fictional .10 offer could look absolutely ridiculous a few months from now.
If WOWGreen is going to make it, they may even look for a new supplier now that Jared looks like he is circling the bowl.
All hypothetical and IMO but how I see it right now.
I will give him credit and say he started out with good intention but he may not have known what he was getting into when he went for a listing. OR, he knew exactly what he was doing and has a nice bank account right now.
I thought the 200,000,000 shares set aside in Q3/08 as per Jared's Letter to Shareholders were for Allie. He mentioned in that Letter that they were for a party that could not yet be mentioned as they were in negotiations.
Sounds like WOWGreen/Allie for the 200 million common - maybe some preferred as well as those numbers were going through the roof at that time as well.
Did not listen to call but am interested in hearing any info on number of preferreds and conversion rate.
Did that get answered at all?
Nothing "inside" about that information at all and he should know those numbers.
Those were my questions so hopefully they were asked and answered and judging by the posts I have read, I do not want to listen to the CC as it sounds like a massive waste of time for the most part.
Just listened to last conference call again and he sure did dance around that question. He never answered the question about preferreds then. Let's see if he answers it this time around.
You are correct. Let's hope Jared is completely honest when one of the longs on this board asks him a very basic question like:
How many preferred are O/S. How many were O/S a year ago. If there has been an increase, what did the company receive in return for the increase, cash or services?
What are the dividend rates on them?
What is the conversion rate into common shares?
These are huge unknowns in my book.
Balihi,
He gagged the TA once he realized he had ran out of commons to issue and right around the time that the preferred numbers starting going through the roof.
Why not ungag the TA since there is no dilution that can occur without an increase in the AS number of commons
Quick question for you and others that is very basic DD.
How many preferreds are outstanding and what is the conversion rate into common for them? Anyone ask Jared for that info since their value on the balance sheet went from 200,000 into many millions of dollars (during the gag period)?
I really don't get your point AT ALL. Don't
all companies tend to puff their products as being
better, different, with secret ingredients.
All started when a poster claimed that EESO was the only multi enzyme cleaner around. CATEGORICALLY NOT TRUE as many of the longs know but chose not to correct - perhaps they were not here to do so.
Then Balihi challenged us to name one enzyme cleaner with the same ingredients, capabilities and tests as EESO. I think I have one in m cupbaord that I have been using for a while but, logically, to do so, I asked where to find this info so I could take him up on the challenge - he claimed that my not being able to find this info meant there were no enzyme cleaners as good as EESO. I say that this reverse logic makes no sense.
This is much like me saying I am the fastest runner in the world since I have unlocked the secret to making my legs move faster than anyone else.
What do you need to see to prove that my claim is BS? Someone else run really fast or me run really fast and an independent third party verify that I ran real fast?
I would have to say that not all companies tend to puff up their products as better, different, with secret ingredient. In fact, most labeling requires that the ingredients all be labelled.
But I will admit that you seem to have found a company that tends to puff up their PRs, contracts and buyouts as bigger, better, and with secret second buyers. (sarcasm intended - could not resist!)
Actually Balihi.
I think that is very good reason to be skeptical.
This claim from WowGreen site is especially suspect:
The developers of Wow Green products have unlocked the secret to combining enzymes, which allows them to work together to break down organic matter, naturally and effectively.
Really? Given that I have already mentioned one multi enzyme product (http://www.kleen-free.com) with the same three named enzymes (protease, lipase, amylase) as the base formula of EESO products that pre-existed Jared's time in the enzyme business, I find this statement by WowGreen/Jared a tad boastful (read blowhard).
As for your attempt to wiggle out of my challenge. Once again, I will spend the time to find at least one product with the same capabilities, ingredients and tests as EESO multi purpose cleaner but YOU, who believes that the company has discovered some "secret" enzyme formula, needs to provide me with this info on your product. Otherwise, you just have an enzyme cleaner that works (like most enzyme cleaners do) and boastful statements that it is better than the hundreds of others out there with no PROOF of those claims.
Show me what I need to match and I will spend the time to find it.
Simply put in response to you:
"That was reason for my question,if you or any other skeptical pessimist,dont even know what the formula is,and what capabilities EESO's products have,how can you criticise or claim other companies have the same products?????"
How can you so strongly claim they DO NOT!!!
Drifter,
Just pointing out to AceofSpades and Balihi that EESO is NOT the only company to have multiple enzyme blends like they state as FACT. Some of what is stated as FACT on this board by the believers needs a little more research and reality added to it.
My question would be why some of the longs that would know that what Balihi and Aces were saying was incorrect would not have corrected them first. That would go a long way towards creating board that was balanced - those who believe in the stock and company and products correcting those who seem to be pumping it up a little more than it deserves.
Protease, lipase and amylase are the primary enzymes in Kleen-Free just like EESO. Been around for years. Much older than EESO. It also contains other enzymes as well and they also make many other products under other private labels for other companies that are enzyme blends.
Anyone telling you that EESO is the only one that can or has done it needs to move their smoke filled lips a little further away from your ___.
And you should be more protective of that area too.
Balihi,
"SAME INGREDIENTS,SAME CAPABILITIES,SAME TESTS"
Where might one find these for any of EESO's products? I am not aware of any tests that have been run on EESO products based on my DD. Which ones are you referring to?
I would be especially interested in seeing the latter two prepared by an independent source rather than the company itself.
Once you produce that for me, I will see if I can find some that are the same.
Why don't we use "All Purpose Cleaner" as the category. You show me EESO's ingredients, capabilities and tests. Again, preferable if the latter two are independently proven. (By the way, I already have two under my belt that are protease, lipase and amylase based and then blended with other enzymes - one is in my hand right now)
Thanks.
Pilot,
As I said yesterday, not going to be buying this one because my DD has led me to believe there is nothing but maybe a trade or two left on the buyout rumours but even those are not of a high enough likelihood to be worth risking all of my money that I would invest in this one.
On the multi-enzyme products, whoever told you that EESO is the only one to do multi enzymes is a flat out liar. If that was some one inside the company then add that to your "doubts" file.
I mentioned an enzyme cleaner called Kleen-Free (http://www.kleen-free.com) which has been around for about ten years and has always been a multi-enzyme formula. Made by Ginesis Natural Products out of Alabama but used to be Indiana based if my research is correct.
Multi enzyme formulas were being researched, packaged and sold long before Jared got involved. I also know that Kleen-Free has independent laboratory research for some of its products - EESO would be advised to do the same if they are going to compete in the big leagues. I use Kleen-Free in my home and some of their other products as well. Have been doing so since long before EESO even started.
But a small publicly traded enzyme company is what caught my eye about EESO a few weeks ago when I stumbled on it. That is why I came here - read lots of posts - had lots of questions - did lots of DD - and came ot the conclusion that my DD led me to say avoid as a long term investment and even as a short term flip. There may be that opportunity but I think Jared is at the end of his rope in the next few weeks even with whatever PRs he has up his sleeve.
Jared and EESO better be careful if they start claiming that their blend or process are unique - they just may not be as unique as they say/think and as may be built into the current price and expectations - and certainly as is built into the balance sheet on the formula line.
Thanks for the comments flo-bee.
I am done here because there is nothing worth buying here. WOWGreen may end up being a good MLM but not sure that the provider of products to MLMs ever make out that well and with 2 Billion shares OS this is worth about a penny a piece and that is based on speculation of buyout premium attached to it.
If Allie wanted to go public with WOWGreen he would get a cleaner shell than this IMO with way fewer OS. I may even look at that if he does.
I like green products. Great future. A green product company like EESO with primarily unverified contracts and 2 billion shares os...and a CEO that has trouble with the truth IMO - I am passing. WOWGreen revenue alone will not help this one given how far they have diluted it to this point.
As for Leo, I checked back to see if Leo ever answered my question where I was accused of making assumptions in my posting of how, when and why the OS doubled in a quarter and how Jared flat out misled investors about that. Leo has still not answered what part of that post was assumption versus straight from the misleading horse's mouth.
Like you, I will periodically check back just to see how things get spun in the future since this is getting comical to those who are not financially attached. The reecap of the conference call should be good to see what is answered and what is avoided that people who understand DD should ask.
Off topic at this point.
I read a great quote the other day that I want to pass on - not that it applies to this board but I really liked it.
Think of how stupid the average person is...now consider that half of the people in the world are even more stupid than that average person!
That is also a very valid part of DD for message boards.
You are correct, I do not own any EESO. I had thought about it but as I continued to dig deeper I can not assure myself that this one is not rigged against those potential shareholders who are just finding it now.
Those who are in at much lower prices are in good shape for now - I can not resolve myself to buy this on promise of a buyout that is completely in the hands of the CEO when I have found that the CEO can be proven to publish inaccurate statements and figures in the past.
So, given that none of those who have been here for a while can show me that Jared has dealt with correcting this inaccuracy in the past, I will move on and let you ponder whether or not you truly think that he can be trusted.
Your opinion may be much different than mine but honesty on the part of a CEO is something that is crucial for me and my investigation of these statements has not led me to think that is what I have gotten here in the past nor in the future.
Yes, I too only invest what I can afford to lose but when that statement looks like it may be too much of a reality, I also choose to not lose anything.
Good luck to those who stay here - I may post once or twice again if anyone responds to this or my other posts but will generally head elsewhere.
And I honestly mean the good luck part. No hard feelings - I hope you all get a good rally at some point in the future and are able to cash out with what you put in plus more but my gut is telling me that this one may be almost over rather than just starting for the non-insider investor.
Leonidas,
My questions about the shares issued and the timing are not assumptions and the inaccuracies provided by jared to momentarily calm investors are all from the horse's mouth. There is not one shred of assumption in it as they are all pulled from what Jared has provided and stated to shareholders.
I challenge you to take this info and label the assumptions as such and the parts that are exactly as presented by Jared as such: THANKS.
June 30 2008 shares OS = 864,252,500
Sept 30 2008 shares OS = 1,692,609,857
Dec 31 2008 shares OS = 1,692,609,857
These are Jared's number as presented to you as shareholders.
You want ABSURD - tell me how on Dec 1 you can tell shareholders that "3 weeks or so" ago you issued some amount of shares that can be interpreted as no less than 450,000,000 based on the wording of the Letter to Shareholders on that date and then several months later when you publish your financials which Jared approved and trumpeted as good news it shows that the "or so" part puts the actual issuance as at least 8 weeks prior since his own figures show no shares issued in Q4. Wouldn't 7 weeks or so have been more accurate?
Not asking you to work against yourself - just to smell the coffee that is righ tunder your nose.
Oneinamillion,
The numbers are from the following sources:
Q2 Financials that Jared posted (shows about 800 million shares OS)
His December 1 Letter to Shareholders says how many shares issued and vaguely to whom and specifically when (last 3 weeks or so). This can be interpreted as anywhere between 450 million and 820 million shares that were issued in Q4.
He does not, as I understand, need to inform the TA or shareholders about increasing OS for a set period of time after he does so. So, when rumour got out that he had done so, he made it sound quite recent (3 weeks or so).
A few months later he posted financials indicating that shares were actually issued in Q3 and not Q4 (check the OS on the Q3 and Q4 financials) as indicated by his Dec 1 statement of "the last 3 weeks or so". This statement was incredibly inaccurate and misleading for someone that so many on here trust and say is honest etc. Not a good quality in a CEO (pink sheet or not). This should IMO cast doubt on just about everything else that is issued and said by Jared IMO.
I have no doubt that the math makes sense but the timing that he said and then the follow up he has provided do not match up.
IMO he is quickly getting caught up in his own web and time will tell how many investors get caught up with him.
"Inconsistency" is a very generous word to use about this.
NewEESOBeliever. Drifter, Leonidas and others who either think Jared is honest and decent or belive EESO has your best interest at heart.
Please respond to my Post 142508 and the inconsistencies in it that I uncovered as part of basic due diligence on this company and then let me know what you think of Jared's honesty and whose best interests he has at heart.
Thank you.
Not absurd. You read the Dec 1 2008 Letter to Shareholders and tell me which one it is (450 million, 650 million or even higher.
I will be waiting for your interpretation.
Let me help you with a bit of info from Jared's financials.
June 30 2008 shares OS = 864,252,500
Sept 30 2008 shares OS = 1,692,609,857
Dec 31 2008 shares OS = 1,692,609,857
These are Jared's number as presented to you as shareholders.
You want ABSURD - tell me how on Dec 1 you can tell shareholders that "3 weeks or so" ago you issued some amount of shares that can be interpreted as no less than 450,000,000 based on the wording of the Letter to Shareholders on that date and then several months later when you publish your financials which Jared approved and trumpeted as good news it shows that the "or so" part puts the actual issuance as at least 8 weeks prior since his own figures show no shares issued in Q4. Wouldn't 7 weeks or so have been more accurate?
Was it just in Q4 that the transfer agent (now gagged) let someone know that the OS had gone up by 800,000,000 million shares in Q3? Jared refers to the rumours of a share issuance in his Dec 1 Letter and addresses it with what is now proven by his own statements and filings as incredibly inaccurate and misleading (read this as a generous representation of what I actually think). He got caught and then later forgot what he said in the past and now his story does not line up with what he has PRd and filed.
Can anyone explain these inconsistencies to me. It is half of your OS shares that were issued to who knows who at who knows what price and who knows when.
This is not bashing, it is where my DD has led me. Overlook at your own peril.
Never said they did...JonPro did.
Jared said that the 650,000,000 million shares he issued late last year had some type of restriction on them but we do not know what time period etc. (Maybe 180 days which brings us close to NOW)
Conspiracy theory alert! Hmmmm....String along the "supposed" buyout news until everyone (friends, family??? - go back the three to five years in the PR and see who funded the original company to see who likely got this whopping number of shares - if you like due diligence the most likely answers are there) you have handed 1/3 of the company to can actually sell their previously restricted shares?
Asking how long they were restricted and who they were given to is due diligence IMO. Getting an answer will be interesting.
Jon Pro
I read the 200 million shares as additonal to the 450 million and I read the equipment shares as additional to both of them and this fits fairly well with an 800 million share increase during the period in question.
If you look at prices 3 weeks prior to Dec 1 you can find .0012 but you can also find .0004 near there as well and in the wording of the letter it does not say 3 weeks, it says 3 weeks "or so" - so the maximum cost basis for these was .006 but the minimum is frighteningly lower at .002. The "or so" gives lots of wiggle room to find the lowest price and then choose it as the settle price for these - it puts the maximum number of shares into the hands of the people that EESO wants to move them to. (Now if you had 450 million shares at a cost of 0.002 per share, would you sell into every PR and everything else that is coming out of head office - especially knowing that the company is out of shares to print and based on most recent financials is also nearly out of cash to pay bills?)
As for restrictions, I do not think SEC restricts for 12 months if they are shares paid for services etc.
Have submitted them to Mark so presume he will put them on the list of questions for Jared to answer. Will not be on the call myself so will listen to answers after the fact on recording when posted.
If any posters who think these are worthwhile find that the call is ending without answers, feel free to ask these questions on my behalf.