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.
Today would be ideal for 1st quarter audit results! The dow-jones looks to be up close to 200 points. I can not understand the delay when the unaudited details have been posted for almost a year. As a reminder SCRC had revenues of close to 10 million and a 400,000 dollar net profit.
Your numbers appear logical for the pain creams. However,you should include profits or losses from the other SCRC divisions such as the Diabetic supply group, Dispence Doctors, PIMD wholesale/retail group and other possible ventures.
I did not state that SCRC would have endless riches.I merely extrapolated the commission rate with potential sales volume. As you well know, revenue does not necessarily result in earnings,especially at SCRC. However,there is hope that the rate was lowered and not raised by Mr. Brosius.
You are 100% correct.However, shareholders can bring an action against SCRC if the delay persists. Thus, it is evident why Bob sold some of his shares at a big discount.
Most of the pipe shares were registered when SCRC was in compliant and so can trade freely. Others will have to wait for the 10k and 2015 first three quarters to be audited,before getting a green light from the transfer agent and then be accepted by brokers. As you can imagine I and other shareholders are very unhappy by the delay.
Any and all shares unless they are in a brokerage account now will not be accepted at this time. I have contacted six houses that specialize in penny stocks and not a one will accept my stock.In order to be accepted ,the Transfer Agent has to be able to give their "blessing". Old Monmouth will not pass the stock while it is non compliant. I am stuck with 2.5 million shares until SCRC gets compliant.If you want to research on your own , you can call the agent at 732-872- 2727.
The shares were sold privately and so no restrictions.The low price was set because the buyers also can not sell the shares unless they want to do it privately.The discount was made because the shares are not liquid at this time.
Unfortunately, SCRC is non compliant and as such transfer agent Old Monmouth will not approve Mr Schneiderman'S stock, purchasers of the private sale, and even pipe sales that are not already at some broker. AS a result my stock and many others now have their stock in cigar boxes at home.
Appreciate your concern but the "show" is not over until the fat lady sings.
To compare one sanction against one of 32 CPAs in 32 years to a SEX molester, a murderer or Hitler is way out of bounds. Also I do not appreciate you referring to me as a member of the SCRC Core. I bought 2,000,000 shares of SCRC at about 6 cents and still own them. I have not received any remuneration from SCRC. I simply try to report on any positive SCRC news to counter your daily negative slants on SCRC activities. Unfortunately, the 10K situation has limited any positive news and thus silent message boards result.
Sorry, my message stated 42 years of business. It should read 32 years.
In checking into your evaluation of the new SCRC auditors(KMJ Corbin), I found only one sanction in 42 years of business. That appears to me to be an outstanding record for 32 employees. However, if you or CHP have other information, I'm open to reevaluation.
I don't know what the legal ramifications are, when one considers that approx. 80 million shares traded at 10 to 20 cents after the holding period was completed. Thus, we all had ample opportunity to sell at a very significant profit. As for myself, I sold 300,000 shares but still am under water at the current price. Do you think I am eligible to sue for my losses?
Again, I am flattered that you consider me a member of the 'core' despite the difference in our opinions on its effect on SCRC. I would like to point out that I purchased the 5 cent SCRC stock when it was 9 to 11 cents on Jan. 3 1914 not the 20 cents you stated. There was considerable risk since I had to hold the stock for one year and not the sure fired investment you alluded to. As you know , I now am deeply in the red. I guess that I should have
reacted to all your message board red flags.
I am flattered that you consider me a member of the 'CORE' although we differ on the effect on SCRC. I would like to point out that I purchased the shares Jan 3 2014 when the stock price was 9 to 11 cents. I do not think that I harmed the future of SCRC and did take on risk considering that I had to hold the stock for one year. As you know I am deeply in the red.
Am I a member of the 'core'? If so, I am flattered that I helped save SCRC during a period of near insolvency. The company continued only when obtaining financing through loans at usurious rates with gift warrants attached as per the blood sucking Ironridge. Also by issuing 5 cent Rule 144 stock they were able to survive. As for myself I purchased 2 million shares of the 5 cent stock which I still own after almost two years. I use the message boards once a month to convey my thoughts. I have never been paid for my efforts. I repeat Am I a Member of the 'CORE'?.
What period of time do you relate to your term for a "while" ?In your statement that "if there isn't sufficient buying interest his (B.S.) constant supply flooding the market every week could potentially dampen the market for a while". For a while (6Mos), he can only sell 100,000 shares per week and in fact may buy shares not sold under the 100,000 cap up to a million shares in 10 weeks. He can not sell any significant amount for 9 mos. I believe that the meaning of a while is much less than 9 mos. and that was the reason for my previous reply to your message. P.S. B.S. is 73 and not yet an octogenarian. However I'm an octogenarian and do not appreciate your referring to me as a moron.
For your information, B.S. is limited to sell a maximum of 100,000 shares per week which should have no affect on price. If anything, he may be buying some last week.
I regret that I brought up the issue of convertible preferreds. I was under the false impression that Ironridge received some in addition to the shares.
By using a convertible preferred. I mean that if any shorts are called in, they can be covered immediately by conversion of some of the convertible preferred. In this manner, if the shares are not called in, Ironridge can not be considered to have sold some of their SCRC shares.
Couldn't IR short stock using its convertible preferred received from SCRC as back-up?
What about shares sold short before and after the contract in order to drive the stock price down?
The MAV data released today was truly superb. The 3.5 million was much more than the 1 to 2.5 million street estimate and considerably more than the 1.4 million of March. The results are especially relevant because it reduces the CVS-Caremark anticipated effect. Most important the bottom line will be greatly enhanced by the reduction in sales cost and the change to in house billing along with other efficiencies. In previous months the company had produced a 9 to 10% margin. I now look for at least a 15% margin. Its a wonderful way to start the second quarter! Contrary to your criticisms of Bob, I must congratulate Bob and his team for one 'Helluva' job!
My reply to your asking about me is I'm still around. In fact last Friday, I turned 86. Since I became involved in Wall Street at 21, having a position in UM&M [United Merchants and Manufacturers] I must correct myself and report 65 yrs. instead of the 50 last cited. Unfortunately, the long years does not make me any wiser than the next guy. When it comes to SCRC I still believe the co. will resume its growth after the past 2 quarters and I look for a 6 to 8 cent annual earnings rate. This should produce a share price of 75cents by next June. Remember, Wall Street looks ahead not behind in evaluating a co..
I disagree with you completely! Chad Beane is our sales manager and has done most of the hiring for PIMD. IF anyone has contributed to PIMD ,it is Chad who is overseeing their moves. In fact AB is working with a company in Tenn. which is helping out on some of our sales.
I believe we will do 3 million at MAV for March. The first 15 days of March were not impeded by Feb. weather or copay insurance and so we should do 2 million instead of the 1.88 million in Feb.Since the 16 day half of March left, was hit by Caremark at about 50% loss, we would figure only 1 million approved. Thus, we total 3 million vs. FEB. 3.75 million.
You are correct but I asked whether Alleyba1 knew any buyers. Possibly you know some buyers. You don't know me but I did buy today at .1149,.1280 and closed again at .1280 when the last trade before mine was an unbelievable .1130.
You say no one you know is selling. I'm curious. Is there anyone you know who is is buying.
In previous posts you stated that sales to MAV by PIMD were a waste for PIMD as they are eliminated from financial statements. Instead they should sell to companies outside of MAV. and thereby get credit for there efforts. You were 100% correct and my doubts led me to question SCRC. At the time, they verified your conclusions and said that PIMD selfishly sells all they can to companies unrelated to MAV. and very little to MAV. Therefore, I would expect February's remarkable numbers were essentially correct!
I agree the sales at PIMD were absolutely amazing! The results were even more spectacular when one considers February's abbreviated month. PIMD has actually surpassed MAV's initial growth rate. These results are certainly worthy of recognition by the media. Lets go GREGORY FCA! Here's is an opportunity to shed light on SCRC and help stabilize the share price. WE really need your help.
RapiMed and the radio interview details were FANTASTIC After more than one and a half years, Bob has vindicated our faith in him and RapiMeds. This will be huge in Hong Kong followed by China. Considering that the MAV business along with PIMD will continue rapid growth and the diabetic new plant in Clifton will be making strong progress, we can look forward to an unbelievable second half. In addition, our 4 million credit line together with our self generated cash will enable Bob to delve into new money making acquisitions. GO SCRC GO!
CHP, in your example you say PIMD sells MAV at $45 for materials that cost them $40.Why on earth would they do this when the $5 profit has no effect and is not recorded? ON the other hand, MAV would then have a lower cost basis if PIMD charged them their $40 cost. This would give MAV an additional five bucks profit when they sell to a third party The $5 profit would then follow through on SCRC's bottom line. After checking several sources, I found all my conclusions to be completely verified.
My statement referred to any manufacturer vs. a buy/sell middle man. I'm not going to debate the point further as it seems obvious to me that a manufacturer has many more requirements than a simple buy/sell operation. That is why I used the term "as such" for any manufacturer's requirements.
With Feb. being short 2days and the President's Day holiday along with the blizzard like storms in the Northeast, MAV may lose at least 5 days. Therefore, I believe they may record 3.25 million in approved orders for FEB. However, they should still be profitable. These are my best guestimates to date.
Countrmike, I agree with you in that inter company revenue from sales are meaningless as they are eliminated from corporate reports. However, MAV is indeed selling to outside customers and thereby ,they and then SCRC record any revenues and profits. You might say PIMD is a victim as it gets nothing from its sales to MAV while MAV receives all the credit which is passed on to SCRC. Naturally, PIMD would prefer to also sell to outside customers but in this case you might say they are taking one for the team.
When I say a manufacturer is more limited in capacity as such, I refer to the fact that space for ingredients must be available, that specialized equipment is required, that electronic items are needed to prevent theft, that careful controls are in place, that behind the scene paper work is necessary etc. etc.. How can you compare this to the requirements of a co. who simply buys an item and ships it out. Sometimes the company may even have the product sent to their buyer directly without any handling on their part. Thus, they only require some controlled storage space and back office paperwork along with some trucking. This is what I meant in comparing capacity of MAV vs. PIMD.
No profit disappears in thin air. When MAV profits from lower cost of raw materials, it results in profits that SCRC will show quarterly and annually. If the profit would not be recorded, the IRS would have a field day. The dealings between MAV and PIMD may be eliminated from their books as you say, but SCRC will record any profits made.It is true that PIMD can charge a nickel or a billion dollars, but MAV uses PIMD's cost as its cost for determining profits which only show in SCRC's bottom line. I hope the above clarifies the complex accounting.
Pipedream 1, you are correct on your post. A profit to MAV on a PIMD sale to MAV must be recorded by MAV when the cost of the item is lower than what MAV is presently paying. The difference in costs lowers MAV raw material cost and thus represents an increased profit to MAV and in turn to SCRC. By rule, PIMD must sell the item at its own cost and this results in a wash-sale for PIMD.I hope this clears up the DD.
In reply to your narrative,in comparing PIMD's capacity to MAV, I must say that you are out in left field. MAV is a manufacturer and their capacity is limited as such. On the other hand, PIMD does no manufacturing, but simply buys and sells with little or no restraints. In fact people who have visited the Doral facility tell me that the place is enormous with receiving and shipping docks along with huge storage space that include refrigerated areas. Every thing is under lock and key along with various electronic devices to prevent theft of restricted drugs. AS many as 10 offices are part of the complex. Secondly, I wonder about your interpretation of US GAAPS rules regarding intra company sales having a wash-out affect. It is true that neither company may add dollars to their sales. However, MAV must use PIMD's cost of raw materials as their cost and thereby lower there cost which increases profit margins for MAV. Thus, you can see there is some benefit to SCRC's bottom line despite the wash-sale rule.
There are two points that you are over-looking in your narrative. PIMD is not losing revenues elsewhere by selling to MAV. They have more than enough capacity to sell MAV and others. Thus no loss in potential revenue elsewhere because of sales to MAV. Finally, you only discuss PIMD's compounding cream raw material sales. They do have a rapidly growing stream of income from diabetic supplies and drug sales as well as other potential streams that Bob Schneiderman may introduce down the road.