Linda is biotch...! LOLz JayKay
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 doubt Rush Bev and RushNet will merge anytime soon especially without any consideration on the part of RushNet.
As long as the volume goes up, but be careful, because if there is no PRs to sustain the rise, it will go down. Short term, I do believe it going up. Mid to long, depends on what deal they ink.
Also, I agree about the products. Very unappealing, but can make money of the hype and pump. Road kill, need I say more... LOL
Edited...check PM
Same effect as reverse split. BUT you are getting something of more perceived value with APRU rather than RSHN for (less) RSHN.
I believe it is VERY ideal for Corr to do this before ALL the lawsuit start fling out at him and company. All he has to do is keep the "loyal" shareholder, the financiers, on his side and content.
How about after RSHN shares are replaced by APRU, RSHN is refloated under a different name (Rush Beverages, RUBV) a year later, strictly as a distributor, and shares are divvied to shareholders of record of APRU
RSHN exchanged for APRU shares. APRU spins off RSHN with shares of RSHN going to APRU holders after the reverse merger.
This is ideal as there will be no reverse split and RSHN retaining E-water, Garden, Georgia, etc. and not having a large float and having a higher PPS. Shareholders become content or happy with situation.
Win - win situation. Why didn't Corr come up with this idea?
Check out this scenario. RSHN has a high float, we all know that. RSHN owns (a portion) of APRU.
APRU is reverse merged into RSHN. RSHN stock is exchanged for APRU stock. After the reverse merger, RSHN is spun off as a marketing entity (as it is now), but E-water is transferred to APRU (e-water portion is not necessary). This will stop any R/S and reduce float and make shareholders very content or happy.
The "loyal" financers, (cough) I mean, shareholders receive their divvy of extra APRU. Loyal shareholders can be defined as of "Dec 06" or "current".
Kill several birds with one stone.
1) RSHN float is reduced to almost nil.
2) RSHN current investors happy CEO is doing this in favor of its loyal shareholders.
3) APRU, investor will by into the stock because of its very viable potential.
4) APRU will have a higher PPS and happy shareholders.
5) ANYTHING ELSE…?
Anyone's thoughts or comments please..... Or if someone has any idea to add or ???
Actually, I see the PPS moving forward with a fairly low float. I wish I had seen this pink sooner.
Good luck.
Hat Trick
Estimated Market Cap
1,215,016.257 as of Nov 13, 2007
Outstanding Shares
173,573,751 as of Nov 1, 2007
Authorized Shares
500,000,000 as of Jul 17, 2007
HKBV did a R/M with a R/S in 2004
Posted by: BirdsOfFire
In reply to: markrhead who wrote msg# 961
Date:11/15/2007 10:22:49 AM
Post #of 963
I'm glad we view them (RSHN) as a distributor of our products instead of a personal partnership with RSHN. I don't agree with the RSHN's management and leadership idealogy. I want HKBV to stay as far, far way from RSHN's management and leadership. If RSHN wants to buy HKBV products, that is fine. They will pay for them (HKBV products) like any other distributor or food store company would.
As for RSHN, a bloated O/S share structure is not the way to run a business and care about shareholders (supporters). There are other ways to raise funds other than ruining the company and hurting investors through dilution.
Although, I am still looking and waiting for a major reputable store to carry HKBV products in my area.
BirdsOfFire
Sincerely,
---------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by: markrhead
In reply to: Spark who wrote msg# 958
Date:11/15/2007 9:30:41 AM
Post #of 963
Larry told me that it was his goal to reach 10 million in revenues as that seems to be the demarkation line between also rans and real beverage companies. Looks like we are on track.
Something to consider is that Rushnet mentioned us in their PR and Larry only mentioned them by way of a distributor in Chicago along with many others. I am glad he did not lean heavily in our PR about a relationship with them
--------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by: hellzhub
In reply to: None
Date:11/15/2007 8:46:27 AM
Post #of 963
Not to0 keen on Rushnet...
I understand it's just a distribution agreement, i'd much rather have seen an association developed w/ a more reputable company, not a penny printing press. Wonder if HK will get paid in shares of RSHN stock. We'll see how that plays out, its minor at most in terms of impact. I'm hopeful Larry is not influenced by the heads over at Rushnet or else or share count could get a little insane like theirs is. How many billion O/S do they have?, my gosh. I'm still hoping to hear about those dead shares,..lets not hope they have a resurection...lol
As for the PR,,,is he stating that 3m could be added before year's end??
lets see some green today...been a lil while..
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by: markrhead
In reply to: Spark who wrote msg# 950
Date:11/15/2007 8:01:37 AM
Post #of 963
Spark, that was not a pump in my opinion. I think it was a legitimate observation and question. We should welcome new interest IMHO,without hostility, esp from other people already invested in the beverage industry. Maybe they will see what you see and invest here.
Everyone wants distribution and that is all it is, a distribution agreement. Hopefully we get more out of the show in the coming days. With the bloated share structure of Rushnet I just hope they are solvent enough to pay their bills to us. When they first came out as a stock I mentioned them to Larry and he was not familiar with them so I don't think they have ever met before the show, but I may be wrong
_________________________________________________________________
Posted by: twitchey01
In reply to: BirdsOfFire who wrote msg# 944
Date:11/14/2007 9:15:16 PM
Post #of 964
The first one is easy Birds, they have 3.6 bil O/S, that's why it's at .0001, and an A/S of at least 12 bil.
2) With HKBV's product line they have more GOOD products that they can distribute, that they will be paid for by HKBV to distribute. Not a last ditch effort, they seem to have quit the holdings as well as a solid distribution area.
3)This one I can't say for sure but HKBV does have a good product line, especially with Pumped fitness and soon Bevball, and RSHN seems to have a wide distribution area, so it should be a win win situation for the companies. In HKBV's case with the lower O/S and a promise of no dilution the shareholders should profit as well. In RSHN's case, it seems that dilution is the norm and the shareholders may just get a R/S and more dilution, but that remains to be seen.
I would have sooner a company that didn't have such a high share structure, but more distribution companies can only better HKBV as long as they are professional in their salesmenship. I think it will help us shareholders both in the short term and the long term.
GLTA
Twitchey
Posted by: flaflyersfan
In reply to: ninjaturtle who wrote msg# 41082
Date:11/15/2007 3:16:35 PM
Post #of 41148
ninjaturtle, beat me to it;
http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2005-08-07-twombly_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2005-08-11-hat-trick_x.htm
Good luck.
At least we know that Alex and Tom are not part of Rush Bev. so in that light, they may be policing on there behalf (and indirectly for us).
This was an update with new contacts and added revenue stream.
RSHN exposes our drinks (we market) their distributors and Hat Trick is exposed to our distribution network. This will bring expose for both products.
An Agreement is formed between the two companies and disclosures what works for each other in terms of marketing and getting on to shelves. This can be very educational for both parties, especially for Corr. This Agreement will (could) also show that Corr is talking to an other CEO of another company. Look at Hat Tricks' PPS, it is going up... may be Corr will getting pointers for our PPS.
We get revenue from the marketing side through RSHN and revenue through Garden as the distributor. Another good thing, is that we probably did not have to buy the inventory upfront and are on a 60 or 90 day invoice (bill me later). So no money out of pocket while we receive money flow and pay later.
I can see how longs are tried, but there is progress. Still a few steps in the right direction rather going backwards or the wrong direction. We can see Corr is "working hard as opposed to hardly working." He just needs to be more transparent.
One thing Corr needs to understand, is that Corr works for us, the SHAREHOLDERS, NOT the other way around. This true at least in the corporate world, may be not in Corr's world.
imo...
At least it looks like RSHN will getting some more revenue with this Agreement and it appears that the Midwest is untapped for Hat Trick.
Win - Win for both.
Hey, why don't you email your picture on your signature to Boob Corr.
Why don't you tell us what you know or PM what you know. I know you know something...
One interesting thing to note. There were people who sent in their CD to convert to shares. The PR stated mandatory, yet the Wall Street type brokerage did NOT convert the CDs to shares.
Just an opinion here: CDs are callable or noncallable. I do not think that what PAIM did was legal re: mandatory conversion of CDs.
Bottomline: People who sent in their CDs exchanged them voluntarily while the CD holders w/ brokerages did not convert, ie PAIM is liable at maturity date.
Without looking for the old original PR re: receiving the CD for shares, I do not recall that these CDs as being callable until 2010 or 2011. I can not remember. Anyone wanna lookup and post.
In my opinion. I am not an expert or portray to be one.
1. A R/S imminent?
Reply: I have not heard of any. Your invest value would not change if that was to happen, but we have not discussed one.
It does NOT affect the shareholders in management, BUT affects the common shareholders, US.
The way management has it set up is that they will always retain a certain percentage of the float even if they were to dilute the shares we COMMON have. Therefore will NEVER feel the effects of dilution. I call it unjust enrichment at the expense of the loyal shareholders.
Ladies and Gentlemen, please grad you angles!!!
On Topic and Off Topic:
The example below shows a president of a company who responds an analyst's (negative) comments about E-Trade.
Why can't Corr do something similar? I don't expect Corr to defend every little comment but do something . . . to support YOUR company and it's image.
Show that you are LISTENING and doing something. A Letter to the shareholders is a good starting point.
BTW, it has nothing to do with BK nor analysts. Only to point that a corporate officer supports it's corporate image and defends it. Nothing more.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E*Trade says can absorb writedown up to $1 billion
NEW YORK (Reuters) - E*Trade Financial Corp (ETFC.O: Quote, Profile, Research) told customers on Monday it can absorb a writedown of as much as $1 billion and it is well capitalized, after a Citigroup analyst said credit woes put the online brokerage is at risk of bankruptcy.
Shares fell to their lowest level since April 2003 a day after Citigroup analyst Prashant Bhatia said in a research note that there is a 15 percent chance of bankruptcy and downgraded the brokerage to a "sell" from "hold."
But E*Trade President and Chief Operating Officer Jarrett Lilien said in a message to customers posted on the company's Web site, "We could absorb an immediate writedown in excess of $1 billion and still remain well capitalized."
Lilien also acknowledged that because "news in the market" will get worse before it gets better, E*Trade is taking "prudent measures" to manage its balance sheet.
E*Trade said last week it expects more write-downs in its $3 billion asset-backed securities portfolio and would no longer meet previously issued earnings forecasts.
"The continued negative news flow about charges resulting from its mortgage and CDO (collateralized debt obligation) exposure, an SEC inquiry, and continued deterioration in its financial condition, all increase the likelihood of significant client attrition," Bhatia wrote.
The $15 billion of deposits in 57,000 accounts represent roughly 25 percent of the New York-based company's funding and deposit attrition could lead to forced selling of the assets that are supported by these deposits, he said.
"There may be layers of protection for customers, but in our view, customers may withdraw assets first, and ask questions later," he wrote.
E*Trade on Monday said its total retail client assets in October rose 4 percent sequentially to $226.7 billion. Continued...
Whole story: http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSBNG26847720071112?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews
Interesting to note that Corr filed for 59 M which alludes me to believe that the float is at 5.9 B.
MMs short at .0001 because MMs think that it can NEVER RECOVER... If you have been around the block you would know that.
Hard to tell because the indicator show money coming into RSHN but where the hell did the 1 B come from. Must be a handful of investors (large holder and combination of smaller panic selling) or the MMs are now shorting RSHN ???
Only time will tell unless the spy from HQ wants to chime in...
Well, I know that the Hawaiian water is still in Hawaii and the Georgia water is still in Georgia.
I think one of the insiders had an idea of counterfeiting the water (of Hawaiian and Georgia waters) and using their Garden (hose) plant to replace the water.... shhh. I heard there are now using tap water... lol j/k
This will diff hit some radars...
This is almost like McDonald's... "Over one Billion served..."
Now would be a good time to get on a radio/talk show and advertise his company and bring attention to RSHN/APRU especially since there will be an announcement of the APRU IPO'ed to RSHN shareholders.
New money = volume = movement in PPS.
Come on Bob... ball (has been) is in your court.
Someone leaked about the IPO/Divy. Remember, you have to be a shareholder to get a piece of APRU/divy before it is actually IPO'ed.
.0001 is the best price as a retail can get.
Wonder who leaked... imo
It think they can, but I am not an expert in any way. Corr just has to deliver the divy on a specified date or x-date T + 3. Who knows, he may just give a Dec 2006 divy... That has been rumored for soooo long.
Let see how this story pans out...
I do not think the IPO is the divy. RSHN shareholders rightfully own a portion of APRU already and when it is IPO'ed, RSHN shareholders will see their portionate percentage owned of RSHN reflect the same percentage owned of APRU.
We have yet to see if RSHN shareholder will get a divy...
My opinion only.
I think I have figuered it out. 12% will not be IPO'ed. That 12% will remain with the new shareholders from D-Cap. Whatever amount you actually have in RSHN, figuer it out in terms of what percentage you have from either 6b or 12b shares. When you have that percentage, that will be what you have of APRU.
Hardly seems like a divy when you already own APRU through RSHN. Only diff is that it becomes free floating. Hopfully we actually get a divy.
We will see.
If anyone is good at math, please figuer it out for the rest of us. I am bad a t math. You also need to factor in the 45% RSHN owns of APRU.
Thanks.
Post it...
Shouldn't the decrease be shared amoung the "joint venture" ? 3% decreased on each side of the joint venture instead of RSHN taking on the entire 6%?
Inquiring minds want to know...
How about 187 on you... lol
I just re-thought about your question.
I say it is 100% FALSE because the A/S for RSHN is 12b and APRU is 3B ish. That said, it is not possible.
We still have not found out or confirmed if there is a pea under any of the shells. lol
Man, i wish that were true because I would have a huge amount of APRU. Then i started thinking that this sounds too good to be true... so it must be "too good to be true..."
I will wait until the official word from the horse's mouth...
Micro, sorry, my math skills are lacking. I really don't know.
For everyone else, lets wait until the Official PR (or other type of medium of communication) comes out as to what will come re: APRU before we get a panties in a bunch.
Cheers!!!
Clarified:
Original:
RSHN 51% Majority
Rush Bev. 49$ Minority
PR only states "largest minority interest"
Current (Scenario 1):
RSHN 45%
Diluted 5%
Rush Bev. 49% "largest minority interest" - NOT POSSIBLE since RSHN is the "largest minority interest"!
Current (Scenario 2):
RSHN 45% "largest minority interest"
Rush Bev. 55% majority interest.
As rumored, yes, but only time will tell. I'd say, give it about "two weeks . . . "
I have found my decoder ring from my last Cracker Jack Box!!! yay!!
Until very recently, Apple Rush was a joint venture between RushNet, Inc. and Rush Beverage Company. Apple Rush operated as a division within RushNet, which holds the largest minority interest in Apple Rush. RushNet originally held 51% of the total shares before the company went public. After the public transaction was completed, RushNet's share ownership of Apple Rush decreased to 45% because there was dilution from the original shareholders of the public shell.
Original:
51% Majority
49$ Minority
PR only states "largest minority interest"
Current (Scenario 1):
45%
5% Diluted
49% "largest minority interest" - NOT POSSIBLE since RSHN is the "largest minority interest"!
Current (Scenario 2):
45% "largest minority interest"
55% majority interest.
My opinion.