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.
I figured you'd suggest that you had predicted $0.025! ;)
If I had been on my game, I'd've moved some money into this guy yesterday afternoon or this morning. Up 12% today. Yeehaw!
Anyone know what happened yesterday though? 1M shares for the biggest volume day in ages, which tanks it. Then 2.4M shares traded today brings it back up a bit? Where the technical guys at?
Did a former insider dump some? Who is buying today?
Surna seems to have tough summers. This is particularly bad though, even though they've cut some fat and seem to be back on at least some sort of a track.
I am less down on the reverse plan than y'all. Splits and reverses don't fundamentally change anything about the business. Sure your 300,000 shares are now just 50,000, but you still own the same amount of the company. Empirically, reverse splits correlate with poor returns, but that's not true if it's done in conjunction with an acquisition or other strategic deal, and it's even less true when it's done in conjunction with an uplist (e.g. to meet a listing standard or streamline capital structure). That said, my opinion on their ability to uplist is unchanged, except that I think it's a good sign they put together the investor materials last week. They are fundamentally honest (unlike a lot of their "communications" since that weird shareholder letter from the Keens several years ago--which was also honest, but a bit inexplicable). More importantly, aside from the god-awful color-scheme/branding, they show some level of competence that hasn't been immediately apparent recently. And, like I've said before, just having goals and communicating them is actually a pretty positive sign. I do agree that effecting a split in the absence of an uplist (even if just with a deal, though it may depend on the deal) is likely to have a bad outcome, so I'm choosing to infer that they would only reverse split if they were also uplisting.
At the very least, Keating, Simonton, and McDonald seem like a huge improvement on Bechtel/Doucet. I'd love to see some insider transaction reports, but the current folks don't seem to be screwing the shareholders the way those two (and the Keens with them) did. Hopefully the lack of insider trading info accurately portrays no insider trading--though I suppose Bechtel and Doucet could keep hammering the stock price without any public reporting requirement at this point.
I still wish they would go back to the simple branding of the Bollich days. Get rid of all these god damn shades of green/teal--you don't stand out using green in cannabis, and red/blue is perfect for a company whose strategic focus is water-cooled energy efficiency. Also, why do they use the logo with the "let's grow together" ugly tagline on the first page and then not the subsequent pages? I'm definitely not a branding/marketing person, but I can't help but comment when it's this bad.
Thanks. They do seem to get it. But with a market cap of $10M, how do they expect to [I]acquire[/I] a business with $10-20M in revenue? The math does not add up. I suppose SRNA could be the surviving entity in a reverse with a bigger business, but not exactly an "acquisition" imo.
I always skip press releases and just read the reports, but I didn't see anything about intending to uplist. That sounds good, but it also makes me question whether they have any idea what they're doing or have even a basic handle on reality. Under what standard do they have even a hope of meeting NASDAQ's standards? The only way would be to get acquired or acquire someone much bigger than they are, which I don't think their capital structure currently supports--and making it support such a deal would not likely be awesome for shareholders--but I suppose it's possible--especially if you think a nickel is an accurate reflection of a share's value... (to Avinco's point in the last message*).
From Investopedia (and these strike me as wrong, so maybe I am pulling wrong info or maybe it's changed but):
Yeah. Right. Best case scenario, we're three years away, and that's not going to happen.
Do I even need to consider this one?
Current market cap is something like $10M. Honestly, as I'm looking at this, I'm wondering if they're at risk of getting sent to the pinks--but I'm not going to go look at the QB's standards right now. Someone else can.
So... the idea of them uplisting any time soon under the current business is laughable. That said, I agree that enthusiasm is as good a sign as any (though I'm not sure it's sufficient to make the pr "very positive"), and it could be that they have some deal in the works that would enable them to uplist under a different ticker post-acquisition or something. *Re: dilution--even if they reverse-split in connection with an acquisition, it's going to be incredibly dilutive at a nickel/share, but I agree that they should try to manage dilution by reverse-split if they do find someone willing to get bought.
1) Margins are improving, but their revenue growth is non-existent for years now. Not awesome. They will be raising/borrowing before the end of the year.
2) Doucet's RSU's are still being litigated, though the number is 6.75M now. He also got 1M more shares for canceling some RSU's? Jesus.
3) The directors are taking comp at something like 1M shares a quarter. Presumably they are filing their forms 4 appropriately, but I don't recall seeing them.
4) Margin growth appears to be derived perhaps in large part from reduced comp to its sales team in commissions. Not sure if this is good or bad... they need sales more than they need to increase margins, I think.
5) Re-adopting the company's initial strategy of growth through acquisition. Good luck with no cash and share price at a nickel. Better than nothing though, I guess.
6) Laughable enthusiasm for shiny new graphic that explains their "organic" growth model. How is this different other than that it's got pretty colors now? Admittedly, I only skimmed it, but it seemed to describe their model for the last few years at least.
7) Noticed their press release uses the old logo without that weird green tagline that makes sense but is pretty garish.
At a nickel a share, it darn well should be a takeover target for someone. But who?
I am still very confused by Surna's relative abandonment of its cannabis focus/branding a while back. It seems to be refocusing there now, but it would have been a no-brainer for an established national HVAC company to pick up Surna as its cannabis focused sub on the forefront of federal legalization.
Another potential buyer would be a big ag company. They don't talk about it much anymore, but if their equipment does what it says (and I'm not at all sure that it does... but that's a different story), then the applications for crop cultivation in challenging climates presents potential long-term revenues, and potential assets for a big ag company. At a nickel a share, the patents alone could be worth more than the company.
Of course, it's not clear that the Company would accept an offer even at a premium to the current share price. The insider reports show that they have been buying shares at $0.10 and under. That's definitely a good sign, but not if your hoping for an exit by acquisition.
Anyone see other potential acquirers?
Even if the company would sell, I'm not sure Surna is that attractive to either types of buyer right now anyway. It had the premier name in cannabis for a couple of years (the Bollich days), but by about a year after he left, they seemed to struggle to stay on brand and acquire customers. Then, as Doucet came on, they seemed to abandon Cannabis entirely and focus on--who knows what exactly? Also took a couple of clients to court over failed systems/installation, which turned off a lot of potential customers. No wonder they got rid of Doucet, but Bechtel seemed to double down on Doucet's errors--even signing off on a sweet exit deal for Doucet, continuing to pursue an aggressive stance towards customers, and failing to market to the cannabis industry. McDonald seems to be moving away from custom installs and towards retail sales of equipment. That might make it a bit more attractive to larger competitors since it's a business they know, but it's also a low-margin, presumably low-growth strategy. I've given up on this thing ever taking off, so I think it's probably wise to take the more conservative approach at this point and cut some of the fat, show some assets with positive ROI, even if it's not much. But they also need to get their brand back in good standing and deliver value.
I noticed in the 10-K/A that they mentioned being in a lawsuit against Doucet. Anyone know details? Was it for not paying taxes on the sweet exit deal he got? How is the company able to sue for that? Sounds like an incomplete explanation to me. If they are able to recover the balance of the shares they gave him to leave, that would be great, but if all he has to do is pay the withholding taxes, that seems like a waste of money.
Eye contact and a handshake are intangibles that I think are underrated, but certainly not the kind of thing that the SEC would consider a violation. Really, it's not just non-public, it's material non-public info that can't be divulged. They probably just stay clear on the right side of that line, as they should.
If I were willing to pay, I'd make this a private reply.
I don't think he's saying anymore. His response to my similar q was basically "loose lips sink ships" and then said you should never be long-term in any OTC stock, which walked his previous comment back quite a bit. I suspect he met Bechtel somehow (maybe the CEO reviews this board? Or their PR person does and got Shortnlongs in touch?), but that he doesn't want to divulge what was said is a bit weird, right?
I met her a while back. Either that videographer is not adept at capturing flattering video, or the last couple of years have been stressful for them also.
Only a handful of projects in Canada, tho. Shouldn't they be killing it up north? Does Trump's screwing with NAFTA impact them? And what makes something a "large-scale project"? Is that like two chillers instead of one?
What kind of numbers would be disappointing? Or, more to the point, what kind of numbers would be not disappointing?
Now I remember why I kind of stopped watching this stock daily. Just depressing to watch it sink every day.
So you've actually chatted with this Bechtel character? I've no more or less reason to trust him than the Keens (who still have massive ownership, right? Are they just not involved in day-to-day anymore at all?).
I've always respected your previous analysis, so if you, even as a basically anonymous message board poster, are vouching for a reassuring convo with him, that would mean something.
Did you reach out to the Company at some point after he took over? If so, why? I see he has some business experience (where the Keens were sorely lacking). I'm still a massive holder because I wasn't paying attention when it hit $0.40 (unlike mr. Doucet). I just don't know whether to take my (minimal) gains or keep holding out for some more Canada action.
And re: Veritas, shiite. Who does that? I thought that name sounded familiar, so I figured it was a huge get; now I realize it was only familiar because I read the same release a year ago. And no follow up. Did it ever materialize? Or did it get canceled like all the others seem to?
Shortnlongs, what makes you say this? I've seen you down on this stock when it could be had for a dime. I've always thought you made some fair points, though perhaps a bit overly negative. Are you looking at technicals or fundamentals?
Speaking of fundamentals, I've been only paying some attention to these guys since 2016's 10-K. It was obvious for the last 2-3 years they needed to focus on revenue to justify playing here, and they've been basically flat since 2015, even though they were hockey-sticking to glory initially. I did notice Trent's sale of 750,000 shares (!) in January, and couldn't find anything about that in the Edgar filings, other than the announcement of some kind of stock options for employees this summer. Evidently, 9,000,000 RSU's (i.e. shares) went to Trent under this stock plan at that point? Why did Trent get 9,000,000 shares for stepping down as CEO? Is his position in California for real? Or was that a "too much turnover; let's save face, here's your severance. As far as I can tell, he's entitled to them, employed or not and performing or not, so long as he doesn't speak ill of the Company (in violation of some non-disparagement and confidentiality agreement). His replacement then gets awards for performance at least. Looks like he must have hit his Q4 performance benchmark, since that Form 4 got filed in Feb for 1mllion shares awarded? If so, I guess we're looking at a high-revenue Q4, though I wonder what the costs to hit that revenue number will have been. Does it include deferred revenue like the Sante Veritas deal they announced recently?
And Trent's Form 4 says he holds no shares at this point. Didn't he have some holdings at some point? I recall reading something about a performance-based transfer of shares from other insiders after he raised some money last year? When did he get rid of those? Did I miss the form 4 or did that never happen and the 9M shares was the board's way of making it up? And, more to the point, regardless of his holdings, how did he manage to sell in late January (at the peak share price since IPO, no less) without running afoul of insider trading laws (or the Company's Ethics Policy---which has evidently since been replaced).