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.
Irrelevant? He predicated the R/S, exposed the pure energy scam, etc.
Ringo, just sift through the other crap. Who knows, some of it may turn out to be correct as well?!
Why Professor?
The reverse split in and of itself does nothing to the value of one's investment. It is what happens after the R/S that matters. Issuing more authorized shares and squandering any and all proceeds is the issue.
As I have said before, Mr. Iehab will not and cannot change. He will squander away any future funds. Always has - always will.
$ value of investment remains unchanged. Fewer shares at a thousand times the price. The issue is more authorized shares, which will dilute the stock price post reverse split.
In a reverse split the value of your stake is the same - you simply own less shares that are now worth more money. That is not the issue.
The problem is this:
1. A large percentage of companies that execute reverse splits will continue trading lower after the split due to underlying negative fundamentals.
2. Additional authorized shares will only dilute the stock price further. Circ needs to pay YA Global and then pay management salaries and bonuses since payroll paid by cash is restricted by YA Global.
CIRC will squander all funds trying to re-brand its energy drink when it ends up not keeping the Playboy license (ala Starbucks Kraft).
Iehab is not likely to change his management style since he has demonstrated over the last 10 years the majority of the characteristics of having a narcisstic personality disorder. Do not expect any change from him.
Narcissistic personality disorder, also known as NPD, is a personality disorder in which the individual has a distorted self image, unstable and intense emotions, is overly preoccupied with vanity, prestige, power and personal adequacy, lacks empathy, and has an exaggerated sense of superiority. NPD is closely associated with egocentrism - a personality characteristic in which people see themselves and their interests and opinions as the only ones that really matter.
Who said he was a good leader? 10 years of losses says otherwise.
You are buying someone else's shares, not his, since he has to disclose if he is selling his own shares.
He must have invested his generous salary and Playbev management fees wisely.
Your hard-earned money does not go to Mr. Iehab. It goes to pay some other investor cashing out. He never sees your money.
I just get sick of someone making up stuff that they know nothing about. That is all. I do not know the Saliba family. Do not know the history. But this guy is making up some statement as to why Saliba left and he has no idea why. He is just making it up. That bugs me.
Point is, you are making up stuff that you know nothing about.
No you are not. You are speculating as to why someone left Cirtran without knowing one thing about it. That is the point. Stating that that family is "well-made" is one thing. Speculating why someone left the company - is simply bs. It is obvious you know nothing about the situation.
Speculation. You do not know. You have no idea why he left.
How do you know that?
Can your magic work on Mr. Iehab as well?
What has changed?
This stock has never been about the company's operations or CEO. It has been a "legal play" all along with the hopes that there would be easy money if the Company won its lawsuit. If the Company wins then other non-suspecting investors will flock to this POS, raising the price and then current investors can cash out.
The flaw in such thinking is that if the Company wins its claim of interference Playboy will still retract the license arrangement. So while Circ has cash, it will not have any operations, since it has nothing else. ZERO. Saavy investors know this. That is why the stock is not moving in anticipation of a possible legal win. Operationally this company has no future - especially with Mr. Iehab living it up.
You should have done some due diligence before throwing your support behind Mr. Iehab.
She has a ring because she is his wife Diana.
So where is your insider information coming from?
Ask Mr. Iehab when you have your appointment. I do not think so, though. Such an arrangement seems like it would have to be disclosed in the 10k's, and is not.
Katana is not owned by Cirtran.
From the 2013 10K:
In an effort to operate more efficiently and focus resources on higher margin areas of the Company's business, on March 5, 2010, the Company and Katana Electronics, LLC, a Utah limited liability company ("Katana"), entered into certain agreements (collectively, the "Agreements") to reduce the Company's costs. The Agreements include an Assignment and Assumption Agreement, an Equipment Lease, and a Sublease Agreement relating to the Company's property. Pursuant to the terms of the Sublease, the Company agreed to sublease a certain portion of the Company's premises to Katana, consisting of the warehouse and office space used as of the close of business on March 4, 2010. The term of the Sublease was for two months with automatic renewal periods of one month each. The base rent under the Sublease is $8,500 per month. The Sublease contains normal and customary use restrictions, indemnification rights and obligations, default provisions, and termination rights. Under the Agreements signed, the Company continues to have rights to operate as a contract manufacturer in the future in the U.S. and offshore. On July 1, 2011, Katana had assumed the full lease payment, and the Company agreed to pay Katana $5,000 per month for the use of office space and utilities. The Company had no Sublease income for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. The Company recorded a rent expense of $55,000 and $60,000 for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
If the Companies were related the 10K would have to disclose such a relationship and would disclose such a situation as being consolidated in the numbers, which appears not to be the case.
In looking online at the Utah Business license website, the registered Agent for Katana Electronics is: Shaher Hawatmeh, the former COO.
The 2010 10K states:
"Mr. Shaher Hawatmeh resigned from the position of Chief Operating Officer of the Company on March 5, 2010."
Katana has taken over the lease of the building and Cirtran rents "office space" from Katana for the 3 full time employees. So apparently, Cirtran has no operations at that location.
When you have your meeting with Mr. Iehab, having him show you Cirtran's "office" space.
Please drop by the office and tell us what kind of operations the 3 full time employees are running.
Definition of Accrual Accounting since you still do not understand.
Definition of 'Accrual Accounting'
An accounting method that measures the performance and position of a company by recognizing economic events regardless of when cash transactions occur. The general idea is that economic events are recognized by matching revenues to expenses (the matching principle) at the time in which the transaction occurs rather than when payment is made (or received). This method allows the current cash inflows/outflows to be combined with future expected cash inflows/outflows to give a more accurate picture of a company's current financial condition.
Without it the financials are misleading!
paid vs accrual is totally different. I already explained that to you but you simply do not get it. Even though they do not have to pay YET, GAAP accounting says that CIRC needs to record the expense on their books and show a liability, especially if they are still "using" the trademark. Basic GAAP accounting. Do not see it anywhere. So the results are inflated. Recording revenue from sales using the royalty but not recording the expense for using the royalty. Totally different than paying cash. Cash vs accrual accounting. Very basic accounting.
Nobody's offering why the royalty expense has stopped being recorded, a big reason the results are inflated and looking better. I will keep talking about it until there is an answer as to why Circ can generate revenues and not record the royalty expense for those revenues.
The WSJ stated this about the Monster/Coke deal:
"As part of the asset swap, the Atlanta-based company will transfer to Monster the ownership of Coke's energy-drinks business .... meanwhile, Monster will transfer its non-energy-drinks business, including Hansen's Natural Sodas, Peace Tea, Hubert's Lemonade and Hansen's Juice Products, to Coca Cola"
"Energy drinks face significant regulatory headwinds amid concerns about their potential health effects."
Coke is trading away their energy drink business for natural soda and juice products. Coke obviously knows more about this than the speculation on this board of potential upside and does not want to take such a risk. Let Monster take the future risk.
As Dupa has said:
“Legal play for sure.” – Rudadupa post 30053
Nothing more than a legal play which will likely end up like the Starbucks / Kraft lawsuit.
since no royalty expense is being accrued for the past two years. That will help the financial results.
It is a legal play, like you said. Don't count on anything more.
It is 11 years of losses, actually:
Loss from Operations
2003 $(2,523,665)
2004 (1,876,333)
2005 (527,708)
2006 (2,667,164)
2007 (4,801,900)
2008 (4,205,916)
2009 (4,342,761)
2010 (2,972,488)
2011 (7,043,410)
2012 (1,787,643)
2013 $(1,015,316)
Like you said Dupa, is is a legal play.
“Legal play only!” - Sparky post 30052
“Legal play for sure.” – Dupa post 30053
10 years of losses is pretty real - not deceptive.
It is already down the drain. Time for reality to kick in.
Ten years ago was the last time the stock price was $.05. Keep dreaming.
With only 3 FTE my guess is that CIRC does not even have their own bottling operations - they must contract it out.
It is all about the legal play. Just ask Dupa:
"Legal play for sure.” – Rudadupa post 30053
There is no chance CIRC can compete. CIRC does not have the management ability nor the distribution necessary.
Only thing going on here is a legal play. After that, same ol results.
Years of losses says it all about Mr. Iehab's management ability, so this crap about defamation is a joke.
Circ has not done close to anything like that - not likely in the future either.
Legal play only - isn't that what you said? Why all the talk about operations. Circ has no chance operationally to compete.
“Legal play only!” - Sparky post 30052
“Legal play for sure.” – Rudadupa post 30053
Playbev was in bankruptcy. Cirtran was not in bankruptcy. Different entities. Get the facts correct please.
What is your source?
Makes sense since CIRC has only 3 full time employees.