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.
Funny how all the unicorn riders ($10 million profitable co. acquisition )
are gone. Maybe they looked down and saw they were riding a donkey. Or maybe they knew it all along. Hmmmmmmmmm
Where's Eco?
rawman,
You said:
qdawg,
Thx for the reply. I didn't look back to see where you were coming from so I thought a quick thumbs up/down question was best. I think that's pretty much my take as well.
Regards
qdawg,
If you read it as written it's clear that it's not past tense as in no longer serving. It only states when he started, not that he is no longer serving.
Speaking of glaring math errors our local ace consultant made here's another one:
Ecomike,
Your post said:
Ecomike,
All of con man Koos' companies are share selling scams.
How do I get my penny?
You asked
DWOL,
Thank you for being that someone to use real world logic to evaluate the Warrant issue. To me they are no different than a LEAP option, except I have never been able to buy a LEAP with such a long expiry at such a small premium ($1.00 for 5yrs.)as SGLBW. And if the underlying (SGLB) ever went to $10.00 the premium on the warrants would go up dramatically as well. I am more than happy with mine.
Regards
It's interesting that I use DP Technology (Esprit) software(booth611)every day. So they are in good company! Wish I could attend.
BETTER RECHECK YOUR MATH. 50000 X 0.0002 =$10.00
Except what you said was injection mold or injection mold use, not diecast.
Could you explain the difference between:
Maybe she's just a bloviating prevaricator!
makes sense to me.
scoop:
The main tree I was barking about was from some of the chatter here about the slowness of sales/revenue that were projected to be happening by now. Just looking at the numbers DECN gives it seemed like a scenario that I described COULD BE a reasonable explanation. I will agree that they probably haven't been as forthcoming as they should about what's really going on behind the scenes. Would I like to know more? absolutely. I didn't just fall off the turnip wagon so it's pretty much the nwhat I have come to expect down here in pennyland/unicornville.
your comment:
loan,
Thx for the great reply.
re: the way the cost of the problem tool is accounted for I would say most often the choice is made to modify the existing tool instead of scrapping it entirely. Generally the actual parts of the tool actually producing the product are individual components of a much larger assy. So the fix is generally to either modify the existing components or make new. That decision isn't always an easy one since by this point the tool mfgr has to interrupt it's normal production (which customer do you give the worst news to?) to get the tool back up and the customer is now left with no other option but failing to get product when they expected to start selling it. If your component is part of a larger assy also in production the cost of not having one component on time can be huge, impacting an entire assy line. The question of fault doesn't really need to be addressed here in detail because sometimes it's arguable (even with the customer) who's fault it really was and who pays for the fix. If it's a large customer (who is always right ;) right) then someone probably eats some crow and tries to make the best of it.
Your assumption about who owns the tool (them) is correct, even though it may remain in our possession producing parts for years sometimes decades. Sometimes the tool can even be retrofitted with new/different inserts to produce completely different parts 2012 parts vs. 2016 parts.
As far as my real life hypothetical info, I can assure you I have no first hand knowledge of DECN's current or past business at all. It was only based on experience with the mfg. industry to see how sometimes the same scenario tends to repeat itself a lot. Rosy forecasts just don't always happen like everyone would like them to.
One last question regarding inventory. My first example re: a medical test strip was real so it seems it would apply here. The rolls of material needed to produce the strips were expensive. Each layer provides some essential function such as a capillary fluid channel or electrical test point sending out results. If the matl. was purchased with the expectation of receiving xx qty of parts and sent to the manufacturer for production would it be considered inventory or just cost of sales?. What if was held up from being used for an extended period?
Loan:
I knew I could count on you for great well informed response.
Thx for that.
Since I am more of a hands on shop floor guy my thinking is more of a "just get this tool done right and start making stuff" view.
I would agree that any CapEx of that size should certainly be amortized/depreciated over many years. What I'm less clear on is if after buying the equipment and running production what happens if it goes south.
I'll run through a quick scenario that happens to us more often than you would think and let you respond from a accounting view.
1.We are given a part by a customer they would like us to design and build a production tool (currently I am in plastic injection molding but stamping wouldn't change anything). The customer can be very demanding on price and timely delivery of product.
2.We build them a tool and send them samples for approval/buyoff before starting full production.
3.We get two enthusiastic thumbs-up from customer. Start up the press/ATM machine!
4. After weeks of production and millions of parts are sent to the customer we get a panic call that some aspect of the design was overlooked and the tool needs to be modified to an updated design before making any more useless parts.
5.We get the design changes from the customer approved and done in record time (picture Scotty saying Capn' we just canna do it that fast and Kirk saying you have to our life depends on it).
6. Production resumes but with a totally different cost basis than originally planned.
So my question is how fuzzy could the accounting of that fairly expensive scenario get. If the customer had already received and inventoried a significant amount of product (believed to be good but wasn't) what kind of shifting costs can be used?
P.S. My comment about the $750k wasn't directed to you. I included it because some of the chatter (Scoop or johhny maybe?) was questioning how DECN could have sent all that money to Korea and have nothing to show for it.If they bought a cheap tool and are having trouble getting good parts well (see item 4/5 above)...
loan you asked:
Thanks,
To you as well
Zillow shows it at 1.02 Million.Not exactly the slums.
AL,
Deagle,
common financial reporting is to show losses in this format such as (.01).
So, yes a change from (.10) loss per share to (.09) loss per share is an improvement by.01 per share. Still a loss but a smaller one never the less.
Hope this helps.
Maybe because they aren't real e-mails from her?
I could type one up right now if I wanted to.
Just saying
This post isn't directed to anyone in particular so anyone can hammer away at me if it is honest and factual. It probably sound like a conspiracy nonsense but I don't get how most of the recent posting has been driven by a few posters (completely anonymous) some wild ideas as if they were facts, such as:
1: we are told that KB is on the verge of resigning from DECN, mostly as a response to some angry shareholders on a couple of MB's.
My take:Really? Just because some goof makes a wild claim like that without one shred of real proof it now becomes the latest hot button issue.
I completely ignore ANY claims like:
I know him (KB) personally and he told me that.
I talked to him on the phone and he told me that.
I got an e-mail from him and he told me that.
"I know a guy" and he told me that.
KB's feelings got crushed when he reads these mean things on a MB so he's decided to throw in the towel. etc etc.
My guess is that more than likely KB doesn't know or care what goes on on these boards (I wouldn't if I were in his shoes) and certainly wouldn't consider resigning even if he did know.
2: Some unknown guy that supposedly holds a vast qty of shares has started some legal proceedings against DECN.
My take:One single link to a legal/court case would help settle this one quickly.
3: Some unknown guy that supposedly holds a vast qty of shares has started some legal proceedings against some other MB posters for posting false info, even supposedly subpoenaing users real identities and post history.
My take:Too funny to take seriously. I love this kind of stuff in the movies but it's just too corny to be believed. One single link to a legal/court case would help settle this one quickly.
There's several others I could bring up but should be a good start for now. I suppose somebody may have posted some legit facts about this stuff and I overlooked it. My apologies if that's the case and I am willing to be enlightened.
loanranger,
That was my general understanding about materiality also (non-expert me).
I am fine with waiting for the Q to look for info. I certainly won't be getting all worked up in a lather about something that no one here can prove (good or bad).
I also don't really believe KB would so far remove DECN from the settlement proceeds that he couldn't access it if it was really needed to move forward with the sales/distribution of product.My guess is there is already a viable plan for that whether he chooses to make it public or not.
I work for a large multi-national and every employee (more 200k of us) is required to read and sign a nondisclosure regarding ANY aspect of our companies business that would hurt our chances of success or give our competition an edge. Suffice it to say that after the next couple of Q reports we should all have more than enough info to properly assess our investment here.
thx for the response
loanranger,
of course you are right about the significance of that one little "or" and the following sentence. With the tiny current revenue/market cap of DECN wouldn't even a small (less than 10 million) settlement qualify as a forced declaration of such a material event?
With no declaration being offered it seems the details of the settlement were significantly different than was expected by most (me included).
Bottom line for me is that the next Q report should show some exchange of value passing through the books if they are to be believed, even if the exact amount is withheld per the settlement and regardless of where they decide to use it. They can't just shrug their shoulders and say "nobody knows".
agree?
loanranger,I really like your well informed/written posts (a rarity on IHUB),but if you are saying this section:
Wrong Sid,
He said "DOLLARS" so that means at least 2 bucks for this turd, then if you
throw in RGTURD & RGTURD PREFERRED you could be all the way up to ten spot for the three of them (combined of course). I was going to sell but not now.
Ha, I would have voted YES 3-4 years ago!!
ABSOLUTELY!!!!