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.
AAGH moving off the bottom
Up 13.6 % now at 0.05
AAGH moving off the bottom
Up 13.6 % now at 0.05
AAGH moving off the bottom
Up 13.6 % now at 0.05
AAGH moving off the bottom
Up 13.6 % now at 0.05
AAGH adds two new media sales agencies in China
http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/popups/story.jsp
rjc
I agree on the tax loss selling ULTRA.
The underlying trigger of tax loss selling (dropping share price) can also trigger psychological selling pressures too.
How do we shareholders feel about our investment today? We were labeled as a looser with a one-time non-cash accounting entry that was charged against a single quarter despite its long term application. Enough of the whining. Lets look at the short term fallout. Multiply your current share count by 4.6 cents. What have you got? Crap right? How do you feel? Angry right? What are you going to do? Sell? … Some will.
Some sell because they’re mad (bad reason). Some sell because they want to move their cash into another stock with the chance of doubling what cash is left. Let me recommend a good place for your cash.
It’s a stock with a strong growth pattern (see post 6061 on this board) that comes from sales into a huge and growing market. It’s AAGH. What are the prospects? About 4 months ago the share price was at 40 cents … almost 9 times higher than today’s closing price. With the company’s now proven revenue generating ability, the company should be valued today, higher than it was when it traded at 40 cents. The potential exists that we will be trading above 40 cents shortly after the next financials come out.
Your stock used to be worth a lot more than it is now. Don’t dwell on it. Do your evaluation for the future instead, and look for a place for that cash that has the potential of generating a 10 bagger for what you have right now, and fairly soon. You might have already found it.
Sell if you think it is the right thing to do, but don’t sell for the wrong reason.
rjc
PS: My T/A friends tell me that the unusually high volume of the last two trading days is likely marking a bottom.
Someone with a lot of shares decided to get out.
To take advantage of this sort of year end activity we must have our bids in, read to buy the tax loss shares. Some folks are looking for a very quick profit when buying a stock. When it doesn’t happen for them they have to get out.
Tax losses might sound like a good deal, but they aren’t. “Buy low” is a better deal.
rjc
AAGH is an acquisition company. If any of you don’t like that, perhaps you should have read the filings before investing. For others, it could be the reason that they have invested. Company or property acquisitions happen with an exchange of cash, shares, or a combination of both.
If shares transfer for the purpose of acquisition, some people refer to this as dilution. I consider it to be an investment. If a company or property is acquired at a price of, say, 10% of AAGH’s then current O/S count, that offers the expectation of a new revenue stream greater than 10% of AAGH’s then current revenue stream, this so called “dilution” should increase the AAGH price per share, even though the O/S count increases.
AAGH now have the A/S in place to allow flexibility in the financing of acquisitions that they determine to be appropriate, with no penalty for having more shares in the A/S than are being used.
If someone finds any particular acquisition to be either a good or poor deal, then I want to hear about that. To say though that the company should restrict itself only to acquisitions (no matter how good they are) that can be funded by the then current income stream (no shares) is both unreasonable, and not in line with the way business is normally done. The available good (great?) deals should not be ignored just because it requires part of the funding to be done through a share transfer.
“Dilution” is a bad word to some people. Don’t make investment decisions based on the words being used. It is usually better to make your decisions on the performance of the company, and on the soundness of the financial decisions that they are making.
Make no mistake; the AAGH board is ready to grow the company, based on solid recent sales and through acquisition. The A/S shares are for growth, not for dilution.
rjc
AAGH launches its China TV Entertainment Division
With AAGH’s Q2 revenues at about 2 times the 2005 average rate, and their Q3 revenues at about 4 times the 2005 average rate, it’s clear that they have figured out how to sell in the advertising market.
Today’s PR tells us of their expansion from print and internet advertising into the almost $28 billion Chinese TV advertising market (and growing at 22% per year).
http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/popups/story.jsp
Sounds good to me.
rjc
I also have an account with RBC Action Direct (now known as RBC Direct Investing), but I DO see the .15 cent value for my BCIT.
rjc
Ok. Found him now under PalTalk Live Chat / Live Chat Photos / Member Photos
The supplied photo was not particularly informative.
rjc
Breakouttrading.com didn't work for me, but Breakouttrading.net did. Am I at the right place?
I couldn't locate the "pictures" that you referred to. Do I need to be a registered user with one of their paid subscriptions?
rjc
Who or what is EVO? I'm interested in learning more about the source. A link would be appreciated. The news itself certainally sounds reasonable enough.
Thanks
rjc
And who is the Plaintiff in this particular claim/hearing?
So what does a one-time non-cash expense look like?
The chart below assumes that the growth in revenue, gross profit, and income seen recently will continue at the same rate into Q4. If you don’t like that assumption, feel free to use your own, as that’s not really what I’m dealing with here. This chart is meant to show the real role of the one-time non-cash transaction which was charged against the Q3 2006 Administrative Expenses.
As we learned from the Q3 10-Q, there was an assignment of shares, or share options, to cover both past and future obligations for management services, business advisory, and legal and professional services rendered. This share allocation was valued at $1,819,250 in accordance with the required calculation as detailed in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and was assigned in its entirety to Q3 because that is when the commitment was made.
For more detail on Revenue, Gross Profit, and Net Income: see my earlier post 6033 at http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=14968621
rjc
"is being registered as" is a little concerning. I would have expected "has been registered as"
rjc
Reading the 10-Q filing
There was a bit of a disconnect today in the 10-Q. What used to be easy to read suddenly became difficult, and the resulting confusion lead to a drop in the share price. The price drop was triggered by a Net Income value that was so low (in fact it was negative $875,053 when we were expecting roughly a positive $900,000) that it actually looked like a mistake to many … at least it did to me. So what went wrong, and where did this Net Income come from?
Net income starts out with Revenue .. roughly the cash that our customers give us for the products or services that we provide. Relative to the very good Q2, our Q3 Revenue was 69.5% higher, so that’s not the problem.
From The Revenue you have to subtract the Cost of Sales … the stuff that directly supports the sales effort or the costs of the products or services provided … to get the Gross Profit. For Q3, there was an increase in the Cost of sales due to increased printing and distribution costs resulting from increased sales of printed advertising. Even with the Cost of Sales increase, this wasn’t the problem either, as the resulting Gross Profit for Q3 was still 63.3% higher than the Q2 value. So what’s left that caused the problem?
To get from Gross Profit to Net Income you have to subtract the Administrative Expenses … rent, salaries, and lots of other stuff. Since the beginning of 2004, and before Q3 of this year, these expenses were pretty steady at about half a million dollars per quarter (more or less) except for a couple of years ago in Q4 of 2004 which came in at $1.04 million. Today’s 10-Q had administrative charges of $2,259304 … about $1,750,000 higher than normal, driving what would have been Net Earnings to be proud of, into the toilet.
During Q3, Mr. Mak (the president) received 2,000,000 shares of 144 Restricted Common Stock, and 500,000 shares of Asia Global Holdings Corp. Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, convertible at a ratio of 200:1. This has been discussed here before, but the reason I’m mentioning it is because of how it is handled in the financials of the company. Even if Mr. Mak was restricted from selling (or converting) any of these shares, this award still has to go into the books and be accounted for. In the old days (before 2002), this share award might not have had any effect on the Net Earnings at all. Perhaps you have heard of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 though. It is a United States federal law passed in response to a number of major corporate and accounting scandals including those affecting Enron, Tyco International, and WorldCom (now MCI). In general it is a big problem for small companies. It’s expensive to administer, and has been described as punitive, and misleading, in what it does to the companies bottom line.
As stated in today’s 10-Q concerning Administrative Expenses … “Increases are primarily attributable to a non-cash charge of $1,819,250 representing the fair value of common stock issued for management services, business advisory, and legal and professional services rendered.”
This is what hit us ... the Sarbanes-Oxley accounting entry covering share awards to employees, and had nothing to do with Q3 other than that is when the commitment was made. The shares are for both past and future service, and were awarded (in part) to offer an incentive to management to run the company so as to drive the share price up as high as possible.
It’s done. It had to be done to comply with this new law. Get over it. It is time now to decide whether the company has, or doesn’t have the right stuff to make themselves (and us) a pile of money.
The chart tells the story. The top line is our increasing revenue. The middle line is our increasing Gross Profit. The bottom line is our “interrupted” Net Income … the one that many people look at first.
NOTE: We’re only dealing with a potentially confusing interruption in the expected flow of Net Income here. It is my expectation that the Net Income figure will be back on the expected line again next quarter, marching along with Revenue and Gross profit as if this quarter had never happened, and giving us a Q3 to Q4 increase in Net Income so large as a result, that once again it will look like a mistake. The Q4 “mistake” will make us all much happier though than the Q3 one has.
This is an extremely strong company, and it might not take long for the market to notice what actually caused today’s aberration.
PS: The Net Income in today’s Q3 report would have been a profit of $944,197 rather than a loss of $875,053 if the Sarbanes-Oxley required entry of a charge of $1,819,250 had not been required. Plot the $944,197 Net Income (the “real” Net Income) on the above chart your self to see where it would have landed.
rjc
Just as we saw a one time write down for the share distribution for Q3, there will be a one time write up (if there is such a term) for the return of deposit of $435,897 on the printing factory in the next Quarter.
From today’s 10-Q:
"Capital commitment. The Company’s subsidiary operating in Hong Kong committed to purchasing a printing factory, Tung Sing Printing Factory, in China with a purchase contract price of $641,026. The purchase was expected to be completed on November 15, 2006. A deposit of $435,897 was paid as of September 30, 2006 with a balance of $205,129 is due on completion no later than November 15, 2006. Certain obligations that were to be fulfilled by the seller before November 15, 2006 for the purchase of the printing factory to be complete were unfulfilled as of the November 15, 2006 deadline. We had previously issued notice to the selling company indicating that if all obligations were not met by November 15, 2006 that we demand a refund of the deposit and cancel the transaction. Given that the obligations were not met, the purchase of the printing factory has now been cancelled and the refund of the deposit has been demanded. We expect to receive a refund of the entire deposit amount of $435,897 within the final quarter of this year therefore."
rjc
The published loss appears to be rather artificial. It comes from a net profit of $944,177 less the non-cash allowance for the shares distributed of $1,819,250 for a recorded net loss of $875,053.
We have already seen the effect of the share distribution in the drop in price as the O/S increased.
To account the same thing effectively twice, may not be appropriate.
If we eliminate the non-cash share distribution effect, we see AAGH’s biggest quarter ever, at about triple the income of the previous quarter.
Bottom line … AAGH continues their rapid growth pace in income from sales. The company looks great (other than needing to collect better on their accounts receivable), but the Q3 10-Q could be misleading with the necessary (by accounting rules) net income loss that is being shown.
I have only scanned the 10-Q. I’ll have a closer look this evening.
rjc
NASDAQ or NASD Get it right please!
The NASD (the National association of Security Dealers) is an administrative body that regulates the Pink Sheets, the Bulletin Board system, the NASDAQ, and others.
The NASDAQ is one of the exchanges regulated by the NASD.
BCIT is not now applying for a listing on the NASDAQ exchange, nor have they done so in the past. The NASDAQ rules are of no direct interest to BCIT. It is the rules and actions of the NASD that are of great interest to BCIT.
It is the NASD (and others) that BCIT informed of the new CUSIP.
rjc
Some comments on A/R
The Accounts Receivable (A/R), and Net Income do appear to have at least a loose (and in my view, expected) relationship. See the two charts below for a general relationship in the shape of the curves. The underlying data cones from the 10-Q and 10-K filings since Q1 of 2004, plus the PR of the expected Income for Q3 of 2006.
AAGH management has not been commenting in the filings on the changes in the A/R, but in the Q2 10-Q (the most recent filed) they apparently felt that they should offer us a note of explanation and said: “At June 30, 2006, our working capital was $1,278,645 versus $754,491 at December 31, 2005, with the increase primarily due to our increased accounts receivable due to our significant increase in sales during the quarter.”
While I don’t think of the A/R level as extreme, management at least considered the change (but not necessarily the level) to be notable. I was unable to find any detail indicating that any of the A/R was beyond 90 days due, although it wouldn’t surprise me if some were.
ULTRA … please pardon me for my earlier inappropriate comments on this topic. Your point was definitely worth investigating.
rjc
Issuing a dividend is just one of the options available to AAGH.
The point of issuing a dividend now would not be to have the stock treated as an investment certificate, bond, or “mature blue chip” stock. If issued, it would be done as a “trick” to encourage the shorts to cover. Don’t expect a large dividend (if they go this route at all) … perhaps something in the order of 1%, and delivered in the form of shares added directly to your account.
If a dividend is declared, anyone shorting the stock would be required to pay the dividend (or to provide the dividend shares) to the registered owner of the underlying shorted shares. If you are a short, you wouldn’t want this to happen, and would likely make plans to close your short position by buying AAGH shares in the amount of your short position before the effective date of the dividend.
There are a number of ways to make trouble for the shorts, and this is only one of them. We won’t know until it happens, just what plan the company will put in play once the NOBO results are received and assessed.
rjc
ULTRA; you ask: “RJC...what is your opinion on the extremely high level of Accounts Receivable?? Its huge!”
In my experience, “Extremely” is usually bad. Let me give you an example. An extremely low level of accounts receivable (close to zero) could indicate that there was no immediate source of income available to AAGH.
I hope that you weren’t trying to insert some sort of editorial opinion into your question. I do not normally respond well when I observe that I am being told what to think. Your opinion is both welcome, and encouraged. Your “question”, as stated, was less useful to me.
As to the related question … “What is your opinion of the current level of the accounts receivable?” I do not have an extensive enough background in the transactional norms of this industry sector in China to offer a useful opinion at this point. I would however be interested in hearing of what relevant industry experience you have that has allowed you to label the accounts receivable level as extreme.
rjc
AAGH has a habit (in their PRs) of understating the official news which follows in their SEC filings. I first mentioned this in my post 5395 on this board, and gave some examples, at: http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=14028328
It is good to find a company that is low on hype, strong on results, and willing to offer the occasional clue as to what to expect.
Just to follow up on matching this thought with the 10-Q expected Monday; I don’t mean to suggest that the $900 k income mentioned in their recent PR is actually a million or more … I expect that the number given is actually a reasonable approximation of the final number. What I do see though in the PR, is that they are telling us that things are going very well. I’m expecting that the 10-Q will flesh out this message with detail that will demonstrate that things are going very well.
rjc
I misread the NT 10-Q that we got on Nov 15. I understood that it gave AAGH 15 more days to get the 10-Q submitted.
The 15 days does apply to the 10-K (year end) filing, but for the 10-Q (quarterly) filings, the extension is 5 days, and that’s 5 calendar days. Calendar days include weekends, so AAGH will be filing by Nov 20 … and that’s this Monday coming.
Here’s the applicable section from the NT 10-Q:
“(a) The reasons described in reasonable detail in Part III of this form could not be eliminated without unreasonable effort or expense;
(b) The subject annual report, semi-annual report, transition report on Form 10- KSB, Form 20-F, Form 11-K or Form N-SAR, or portion thereof will be filed on or before the 15th calendar day following the prescribed due date; or the subject quarterly report or transition report on Form 10-Q, or portion thereof will be filed on or before the fifth calendar day following the prescribed due date; and
(c) The accountant's statement or other exhibit required by Rule 12b-25(c) has been attached if applicable.”
rjc
SEC does not show tham as having filed an 11K
What they filed today was an NT 10-Q ... a delay in filing the 3rd quarter 10Q that was due today.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1171689/000114420406048133/v057827_nt10q.htm
rjc
AAGH files NT 10-Q
This gives AAGH an extra 15 days to get the 10Q submitted.
rjc
The 10Q for the 2nd quarter was due on or before Aug 15. It was published about 1 hour before market close on Aug 14.
The 10Q for the 3rd quarter is due on or before Nov 15.
rjc
The Berlin exchange is not where the naked shorting is being done. It is being done in the US by the US Market Makers. It is just the existence of any foreign exchange listing that allows a US loophole to be used to illegally short the shares in the US. Essentially, the US MMs are allowed to claim that they believed that shares were available on the foreign exchange to cover their shorts, even if there aren’t any there. It is not required that any shares trade at all in Berlin for this to work. The same thing could happen if there were no Berlin exchange, but there was an AAGH listing on the Toronto exchange instead (which there isn’t).
The big deal with the Berlin exchange is that a listing can be established there for AAGH by some party other than AAGH. This is not so on other foreign exchanges. Berlin will normally remove the listing if the company underlying the Berlin trading symbol requests it.
Shutting down the Berlin listing will remove part of the problem. There are still other ways for the MMs to naked short the stock, but it entails more risk for them. Some other companies have forced the issue by issuing a surprise dividend (which the shorts must pay), or by recalling and reissuing all the shares (which will force a full short cover). Guesses as to how high the share price could go in a forced short squeeze are beyond me, but the peak that will be hit will definitely make share holders very happy.
On this board, jacobboaz says “Shorting is not illegal and is not Naked unless the shares are "never" covered.” Shorting by using existing borrowed stock is legal. Naked shorting (except by MMs on a very short term basis, and only to provide market liquidity … normally just for a few days) is not legal. The existence of a foreign exchange allows the pretense that there is existing borrowed stock involved in what is really illegal naked shorting.
rjc
Today’s PR says 4 things.
1) The company believes that there is illegal shorting going on
2) It is taking steps to stop it (Berlin exchange)
3) It is documenting the activity (NOBO list)
4) It will be acting upon receipt of illegal shorting documentation
There will be a resolution, and the resolution will trigger a short squeeze. Get ready.
rjc
If you are blocked from buying, this can indicate that your broker doesn’t want you buying while he is. He could be accumulating for his own account, or for a buyer that has instructed the broker to accumulate shares for him through the day.
I suppose that it could also just be a technical problem of some sort. You should ask your broker, and let us know.
rjc
A few thoughts on AAGH
We’ve had a week of volatile trading, and the share price has been going both ways. I’d say that there has been a substantial day trader participation in the stock. Sometimes stock prices are only loosely connected to the real value of a company; especially when the traders are playing.
Back to basics. What are we looking for here? Well, it’s a significant increase in share price, and it is supposed to happen because of a great 3rd quarter. On Friday, we got a PR with some information about the 3rd quarter results, but we didn’t get the 10Q itself (expected by the middle of this week). It’s the 10Q that will drive the share price up … not the PR.
By the way; what does AAGH management want to see in terms of share price? Well I notice that both management and employees are being paid a substantial amount of their income in shares (or share options), so I would expect that all of them will do whatever it takes to get the share price up.
What can they do? They can make the company more profitable. Let’s see how they’re doing. Here’s the net income figures for the last 11 quarters (including the approximation for Q3 from Friday’s PR). It’s the graph that tells the story though.…
Net Income
2004 Q1 57,303
Q2 44,829
Q3 ( 37,926)
Q4 409,743
2005 Q1 999
Q2 71,199
Q3 ( 22,262)
Q4 (335,223)
2006 Q1 (107,685)
Q2 335,001
Q3 900,000
For most recent O/S reported here, see:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=14422008
“Unchangeable” orders can be cancelled.
rjc
I'm trying to buy at the ask ($0.00) but they won't fill it.
Ba$tards!
"In addition the Company issued new shares with a new CUSIP number which became effective for all previous, current and future common stock issued by the Company transfer agent"
Was your common stock issued by the Company transfer agent? If so, you're covered. If not, you will have to have the support of your broker to honor your shares, and to see that you are paid when you do sell them as if they were issued by the Company transfer agent, even if they weren't.
rjc
When Asia Global issued their PR on Oct 13, they did not say that they had ordered the list, but rather said that AAGH “is ordering a current NOBO list from ADP Investor Communications”. A subtle point perhaps, but we don’t actually know when ADP received the order.
Assuming they received it on the 13th … then based on earlier timelines that I have seen, AAGH could be getting the results back any time now. Their next step will be to evaluate the results, and to decide what action to take. They may not be advising us of this until they have decided on their subsequent action.
rjc
Add AAGH to the list. Price at time of PR (Fri Oct 13, midday) was 0.139
Current price as I write is 0.206
rjc
The Jul 31, 2006 share count (outstanding) of 29,862,000 posted on this board in my post 5289 is incorrect.
It said “The O/S share count has been unchanged at 29,862,000 since the end of July.”
It SHOULD have said he O/S share count has been unchanged at 29,862,000 since the end of August.
Thanks Wade for catching this.
It can also be noted that no further shares have been authorized to this point beyond the current 29,862,000 outstanding shares.
Correct info is as follows:
Outstanding shares as of 4/12/2005 … 19,862,000 ….. Source (1)
Outstanding shares as of 12/31/2005 … 19,862,000 ….. Source (1)
up to 10,000,000 additional shares authorized on Jan 9, 2006 ….. Source (2)
Outstanding shares as of 3/31/2006 … 21,812,000 ….. Source (3)
Outstanding shares as of 6/30/2006 … 21,812,000 ….. Source (4)
Outstanding shares as of 8/10/2006 … 22,112,000 ….. Source (4)
Outstanding shares as of 8/31/2006 … 29,862,000 ….. Source (5)
Outstanding shares as of 10/13/2006 … 29,862,000 ….. Source (6)
Source (1) Company filed 10K (year end) to Dec 31, 2005
Source (2) Company filed F8 on Jan 9, 2006
Source (3) Company filed 10Q for Q1 to Mar 31, 2006
Source (4) Company filed 10Q for Q2 to Jun 30, 2006
Source (5) Transfer agent on 8/31/2006 per IHub post 2268.
Source (6) Company PR of Oct 13, 2006
rjc
AAGH sends messages. Listen closely.
10 weeks before their Q2 2006 filing, they said that the company “… has already doubled its sales revenue against the first quarter. With one month still remaining in Q2 the company anticipates a very strong Q2 report.” This was a message. The subsequent Q2 filing followed through on their “very strong” prediction with a Q2 showing results that were more than 4 times higher than the best previous Q since the beginning of 2005 for net income (and almost double the best previous Q’s in revenue), and the first positive net income Q in the previous 12 months. These guys are not hype.
On Sep 1 they surprised everybody by issuing a 1 month financial (July). The PR said that they “…posted profits of $609,708 on $1,012,564 revenue in the month of July 2006. This represents increases of 745% and 590% respectively over July 2005 profits and revenues of $81,738 and $171,410.” This was another message.
The Q3 results will be filed on or before Nov 15 … a month from now. At that point we will see the Q3 results validate the July financial results “message” just like the Q2 filing validated the June 1 PR’s “very strong Q2” message.
Now we’ve seen AAGH order that a NOBO list be prepared (see post 5388 for the role of the NOBO list) … yet another message.
So what’s the message? It’s that this company is taking measures to support and promote the share price, and that they have the company performance to support it. By the way, insider sales from the beginning of 2004 to date is still zero. The NOBO tactic only works well for “real” companies that can demonstrate that they are in a turnaround or growth mode. This is one of them.
rjc