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.
New guesstimate: Q2 under $350K, maybe under $325K.
"I think everyone will be pleased over the next few days." Not so much.
I am beginning to detect a certain lack of optimism here.
The timing is curious. Perhaps the Q2 numbers will make it less curious.
Okay, I'll set you up again: Why would 63,333,333 shares be sold? Why that precise amount?
Never mind. Here they come.
Interesting. I didn't realize that the O/S hadn't moved all last week. I just thought no one had gotten updates. So where the hell are those 63.3 million shares?
Today's Un-Fun Factoid: Between 8/7 and yesterday afternoon, the O/S increased by 63.3 million shares. A total of 50.5 million shares traded during that period.
Cost of revenue was $3754, and they plowed through $657K in cash. That's horrible.
I agree completely. As I wrote, "Obviously, Bellissima Z.S. is beneficial to people who wish to/need to limit their sugar intake, and that could be a significant audience."
Yep, I think that "Drink Up, You Diabetics!" is a pretty catchy slogan. I think I'll run it by Rich.
121 is the highest I've seen. The average is about 108. But if 16 calories is important to you, go for it.
A five oz. glass of Bellissima Zero Sugar has 92 calories. A five oz. glass of a "regular" prosecco has between 100-121 calories (not 300). Bellissima Z.S. will have an appeal to people who think they are reducing their caloric intake significantly, but unless they're chugging a couple of bottles a day, the actual calorie reduction is not all that great.
Obviously, Bellissima Z.S. is beneficial to people who wish to/need to limit their sugar intake, and that could be a significant audience.
Sure. Let me go at it this way. Let's say that Q4 of 1016 was artificially high (they were able to place more cases than they anticipated) and that Q1 of 2017 was artificially low (supply line problems reduced sales to some degree). So we have an artificially high $360K in Q4 and an artificially low $300K in Q1. So we'll split the difference and say the basis is $330K. Fair enough?
A 30% increase in sales would show terrific growth, putting Q2 sales at roughly $432K, and we'll use $54 as the average price/case.
$432/$54 = 8000 cases for the quarter (about 615/week). But, toybaby, let me stress this: I truly have no idea. None. I'm just slinging it out there like everyone else. We'll call $432K my "Happy Joseph" guess. My "Bummer Joseph" guess is probably 15% less than that.
The most common (but maybe not most accurate) guesstimate of $/case is $54. If we use that, $600K would equal 11,111 case sold during the quarter or 855 cases/week. I don't think there's any chance ICNB achieved that in Q2.
Okay, thanks for the reply.
I don't discount any possibility at this point.
Yeah, you did. #msg-133385889 And I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm just trying to figure out what triggered the recent lessening of expectations for Q2.
Are you still expecting Q2 sales of $500K or more? If not, what has changed your expectations?
Reportedly (by Rich), there were some sales that didn't occur in the first quarter due to shipping delays. Presumably, some of these sales took place in Q2, but there was nothing to rollover per se.
But to be candid, your expectations have been very much in flux over the past week. Perhaps they will change again before the Q2 release.
I'm not surprised by the turn of events. I'm surprised by the swiftness of the change in perception when there is no obvious catalyst (although more assuredly there was one). I expect Q2 to be above $300K but no way near $500K.
If the Q2 numbers are good enough to significantly rally this stock, I will be more than pleasantly surprised. I will be stunned.
Okay, I could accept that .009 was the trigger for a stop loss. When it hit .009, it fell apart almost immediately. But again, if that is all that caused it, why hasn't it recovered? Even the most ardent supporters of this stock (the Four Horsemen of the Proseccolyse!) seem shaken for the first time.
But it had traded below .01 many times over the past few weeks. Why weren't the stop loss orders triggered then?
One could posit that the drop began with someone who had a ton of shares decided "I'm outta here," and it snowballed from there. But if that was the case, why hasn't it recovered? Instead, there has been a fundamental change in perception.
Okay. Who was coordinating with whom?
Perhaps someone can explain this to me:
Friday was a little rough with a low of .0092 but it closed at its then-standard .01 on 4.6 million shares. Going into the weekend, I got no sense of impending doom.
Then on Monday, it opened somewhat weak, and after the first 10 minutes of trading, the bottom started to fall out. By day's end, it had hit a low of .0071 and closed at .0075 on a whopping 20.7 million shares.
So, what the hell happened between the close on Friday and the open on Monday? Was there news, a rumor, an omen that I missed? Enlighten me.
"No, she doesn't own any shares currently" I used to agree with that 100%. Now, I'm not so sure. I'd like to take a gander at that contract extension.
Although not widely discussed nor referenced on this board, the Dan Kay connection has been mentioned here as far back as 2015, including this succinct post by Tommytbarnes in March, 2016. #msg-120963118.
It's just more of Rich conducting business like Rich conducts business. If we found out that Rich owned a chunk of the bottle manufacturer, would anyone be stunned? I wouldn't.
Or maybe Rich knows that we are still (way?) outside the 30 day window prior to applying for a tier change, so the sub-.01 drop was not all that important to him.
For me, a big question is how many people who come in and buy a bottle or two or three return within a week or two to buy another bottle or two or three. Unfortunately, the Q2 numbers won't tell me that.
If Q2 were good, I do not think the stock price would be down 22% today.
This place is unsupported, stupid shit ground zero.
It's due on 8/15. The five day extension date is a Sunday, so it would be "late" after 8/21.
.0071 is the lowest price since 12/29.
Any standard that can be achieved by a $15 paint job at the close is a standard not worth having. Something so easily manipulated is meaningless.
That article is about their house labels. Is it not?
All they have to do is make sure that ICNB closes with a bid of .01 or higher during the 30 day period before they apply. That shouldn't be hard.
According to my interpretation of that sentence, no, we do not.