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 don't pretend to know all the regulations around an uplist, so I was simply curious if them "get[ting] $20 million in stock at a discount" could be a potential strategy we are seeing. My gut tells me that could be classified as intentional market manipulation, my curiosity wondered if it could be a legal strategy of taking advantage of a repressed pps to obtain the needed shares. Just a question for those that are more familiar with the regulations than I.
Is there any chance AGP could be a buyer presently in prep for the uplist, or is that illegal?
CUIN2, Thanks for the thoughtful response, much appreciated. I'm not one to assume everything I think is the conclusive truth, because 99.9% of the time, there is additional detail to be factored in, that I either have not considered, or am unaware of for a variety of potential reasons. I try to take in everything and sort through it, including the negative and distasteful. The pumpers, IMO, are too often blinded by hope, and vice versa with the bashers. I'm way in the RED with FUSZ, but I own my part of insufficient DD to have bought some of my shares at $2.72 and have been trying to average down since, so that it will take less upward movement to recover, or gain. At this point, I've done enough DD, to be moderately comfortable staying strong, despite the serious errors in judgement both I and nFUSZ leadership have made.
Answers to Questions #1 & #2 help me understand your perspective.
Answer to Question #3, In no way did I forget the relevance that Rory is the largest shareholder, or that him trying to cash out would demolish the current pps, so yes I do see that he "took one for the team", sort of, but at a MUCH, MUCH lower risk level than the rest of us, while recognizing that it could be argued that when the options were established, his risk was higher, albeit, he was in the driver's seat. However, I don't agree with your statement, "Honestly, everything he is doing benefits us shareholders more than himself currently" accurately represents his level of risk, nor motivation, he is in it for himself, like every other human being, but he knows that requires the resources of others that he needs to help him, so he must share the wealth if he expects others to share the cost. Thanks again.
Good points, thanks for sharing your thoughts
May I ask a couple questions?
1. What is the purpose of comparing the shares outstanding and Market Cap of nFusz with HubSpot, SAP, Salesforce, Oracle, and Microsoft? I fail to see the relevance, yes all are tech companies but VERY different. Certainly nFusz agreements with them are likely to have more correlation with revenue than say the landscape company(s) that have agreements with these companies, but it's not like these agreements suggest they will be anywhere near as successful simply due to these agreements. Different businesses with a segment of overlapping interest. For example, How much of Oracle's DB business, their flagship, is nFusz going to earn revenue from? How much of MS Office needs CRM via interactive video? MS Word, Excel? I think there is bigg opportunity in ways, not often discussed for sure, but simply having an agreement with them doesn't guarantee any particular revenue other than at least one (1) Notifi subscription.
2. When talking about Rory's wild success with Telx, why does he mention and everyone keep parroting that AFTER he sold the company for $200M, YEARS LATER it was resold for $1.9 Billion. Was that additional value add of $1.7 Billion due directly or indirectly to Rory, or was it due to the new management? I'm a long, but this seems like a massive pump due to something someone else did. Am I missing some data on this?
3. When Rory got to convert $788,538 into shares WAY below market value ($0.07 I think), didn't that instantly generate a massive positive value for him? By my calculations the 2 transactions of $582,333 into 407,226 Restricted Shares @ $1.43 & $788,538 into 11,264,828 Restricted Shares @ $0.07 means he Netted $3,619,606.65 at today's share price of $0.36. I don't see how this is something to brag about. He averaged down below market value. This cuts both ways, yes he took $788,538 off the books, and converted it into value in his own pocket. Honestly, I don't see how that was good for OTHER shareholders, outside of reducing an hindrance to uplisting.
I love all the information you and everyone posts, but I'm not quite with you in giving as much credence to some of the highlights as other optimistic investors, feel free to set me straight on what I might not be seeing.
Ted I've been wondering this too. My take is that he has brought on a lot of talent recently and they are working out the best approach in real time as market conditions continue to develop and change. Remember whatever approach they finally select will be the culmination of very diverse opinions of especially talented individuals. Businesses try to manage everything in their control, but when external factors exert competing influence, you have to remain fluid and agile to respond effectively. I might well be wrong, but I've sat at the table many times contributing to large scale business maneuvers and am comfortable with what I can discern so far. Only a few months ago, I was less red and more concerned. This is just my opinion.
Rory has been getting an education in what customers want and he is responding,and that takes time, it's that simple. He was eager, and so are many of the investors here. Many of them bashed me for saying the share price was going to continue to drop (months ago) until a major announcement occured. I said it because that's how the world turns. hope and enthusiasm can be blinding, but I also appreciate their optimism and persistence in finding DD. There's no guarantees, but if you consider the activities, BAD and good, holding your personal bias in check, you might determine that the path has changed, been delayed due to unnecessary but profoundly important enhancements, and the intrinsic lead times involved. However, the longer path taken, is a far more productive road than what Rory could see when he started. If you were evaluating a company with a 100 years of established business and market share, your concerns about missed marks would hold more merit, but with a budding innovation tech, your evaluation is grossly immature, and wildly emotional.
Yeah, thanks to the delays and the shorts, I've been able to average down some of my Redness. Fortunate indeed. When I bought at $2.72 in March I never expected to get another crack at buying below $1, let alone buy at $0.20. Carpe Diem.
I think it's pretty easy to see where a significant amount of volume is coming from. Shorts, while Longs scoop them up with every push down.
https://otcshortreport.com/company/FUSZ?index=Ambs&action=view
Don't you mean January 2019? NM I see you fixed while I had another old window open GLTY
Very much agree. IV w/ CTA might well turn out to be one of the most widely used applications for their product.
It's really impressive how much volume this stock routinely has.
In your example the R/S had nothing to do with the $2K loss, that fully occurred prior to the R/S.
The smart part of what you are saying, is that you are both, looking to divine the state of affairs based on available facts, and that you are being realistic about expectations for whatever the complete facts might be. We are all trying to fill in the missing pieces, with varying levels of bias, and risk acceptance.
I hit the ask today, demonstrating my own bias, but with much less investment than previously, demonstrating my realistic reservation.
We also don't know how much was not collected due to the free trials, of which some, unknown number, will convert to regular revenues.
I'm good with that while I await funds to clear to buy more. I never thought I'd get a second chance to buy in so low.
Thanks for the DD
Short Volume has dropped off significantly
https://otcshortreport.com/company/FUSZ?index=Ambs&action=view
Yeah the math at today's price obviously doesn't work. But I don't see why you would take any option off the table, in the event it's a better fit when you are ready. The most simple interpretation is as you've said, but another reason COULD be to allure sort money (I suppose, although I'm not sure how that would help). Let's say they plan to wait until Q1 2019 to uplist, and expect to have Q4 2018 earnings to report and demonstrate massive sales improvement, and only needed a 1:2 or 1:3 R/S, why lock yourself out of that option? Thoughts?
Wondering why 1:2 - 1:4 R/S wasn't also on the table? Puzzling.
I've worked for tier A companies, their legal departments very seldom give up the rights to use their name to promote vendors. I've personally had to decline that request from vendors. Don't get your hopes up on that, unless they are really smitten and expect massive revenue related to the joint effort. But yeah it would be great if it happened, a shot in the arm nFusz could really use.
I have to say I think you are on course here, there's no reason the price can't be $4 on the OTC, no amount of shorting will over power revenue and general business success.
Me too, there are way too many other contributing factors to suspect this is going belly up, in fact I'm mulling over a couple speculations on the non-disclosable strategies potentially at play. It seems extraordinarily unlikely, this is being handled haphazardly with the players involved. I do think Rory has tripped up a few times, let's face it building big data centers(Telex), is simply positioning as a service provider in an existing service industry, different skill set than trying to create a brand new niche service offering. His feet got out in front of him in big ways out of his enthusiasm. Reality is a good teacher, and there's no better hammer than experience.
Personally I think it's harder simply due to emotional assessment of stock value, there's no arithmetic reason.
The sting of an R/S, if it happens, isn't that nFUSZ may still do perfectly fine, and evolve into a profitable company. Rather it's that the expectation that buying stock at $0.33 that goes to $4 on NASDAQ will yield roughly a 12x gain. Now that 12x may be reduced to 2.4x gain down to 0.3x (loss).
I have a family member that bought in at $0.04 share on up to $0.50, they accumulated ~200K shares, expecting to have their million bucks at $5/share. At just 1:5 R/S that same 200K shares goes to 40K and at the same $5/share is now only worth $200K. The R/S strips the multiplier away from investors, unless we all get really lucky and the price goes up inversely proportionate to the R/S ratio. So in the case of my above example, the the price goes up to $25/share after the R/S. It could happen, but much harder, and if it could have made it to $25/share regardless, then the emotional strain of knowing it should have been worth 5M, is distressing to investors. Suddenly the lottery ticket stock turns out to be just another stock, one that tied up investment funds, that might have been more profitable elsewhere, during the 'long' holding period.
Last SHAC was August, however there was a non-SHAC "CEO Insight with Rory Cutaia" 10/11/18
https://nfusz.com/2018/10/11/ceo-insight-with-rory-cutaia/
And no one knows how much SC revs have changes since using nFusz CRM, also to be considered in the new offering. Both as a case study in closure rate and revs created.
Best SEC permissible message a long could ask for! Clever.
Why are FB and Google so massively successful?
Their core business is mining marketable data on broad groups of users, even while they are NOT shopping.
That is exactly what nFusz is doing too, different collection point, but same business, coupled with offing additional ways to perpetuate the user's engagement, thereby exacerbating immediate revenue generation.
I've stated before that I think their interfaced is clunky and unrefined, even amateurish. BUT.... I do believe they are in the right arena. Time and money will address the refinement concerns, assuming they get enough of each.
Considering all they have accomplished in just one year, regardless of the frivolous missteps and miscalculations. As a result I lean more towards the probability of a long term success, in spite of my emotional misgivings. There's no guarantees either way, and the available information lands reasons to believe they might succeed, OR that they might fail. If it were a sure thing either way, it wouldn't be a risk. No matter Rory's best intentions and resolve, things could happen that circumvent success, that's life. To me, the path forward looks good in spite of being down a LOT of money presently. I never expect to be lucky enough to buy in perfectly at the bottom or sell perfectly at the top, so going red on an investment is not a sensible concern, IF reasonable DD brings me to the persuasion that green is a more likely future than more red. Good luck to all you longs.
The email you mention was from 11/04, stating Next week, so the timing suggested in both emails refer to the week of 11/12-11/16
I'm guessing we will see those numbers next week either 14th or 15th.
I think the point is that the financials might be released for 2 reasons
1. Compliance with NASDAQ historical financial data requirements
2. Support the value for stock price valuation for uplist offering
None known so far, relax for now
Your math is wrong
Ted,
I don't have pm.
Almost assuredly they are using javascript (likely AJAX). The client side is IP but probably not terribly complex, the data mining on the server-side is where I would expect the most code to reside, that and the application code for creating/publishing content.
I agree the likely value comes from being a 'first mover', assuming they hurry up. I also think the user interactivity is still clunky, but could be something great with the proper refinement by the right visionaries. For example, clicking 4 call to action links creates 4 new pop-ups partially on top of the video you are watching, which, to me, is horribly annoying and amateurish. You have to decide which of 4 windows to focus on, while the video plays in the background, and/or interrupt the video that you are supposed to be focused on. However, if the call to action causes the playing video to change course, BUT CONTINUE PLAYING, leaving the user engaged, that would seem to me to have far more engagement value. In fact, people might avoid interactive videos with all the pop-ups. Not a new idea, but few are doing it yet. Rory even stated in one of his presentation videos, that what they are doing is NOT proprietary, and others are doing it, but they were 10 million lines of code ahead.
I agree time is key, but I'd also encourage you to consider one thing Rory is doing most other tech focused startups don't do well, and that is establishing many strong connections with Tier A & B companies, to create 'first mover' sales channels. Obviously we have to wait to see how that is going, but it's smart to make it such a significant focus before even making money.
Interpretation:
Key phrases:
1.) expect to get back to a more regular update schedule next week
2.) provide more visibility
I.e. Next week they will be free to speak openly without fear of SEC violations.
To me this lends to the projection that Earnings and Uplist will be coordinated, between 11/04 and the end of next week. It still seems reasonable to use the previous earnings release calendar to suggest 11/14/2018 is a likely target for BOTH earnings release and S-1/A Filing, coupled with some Partnership PRs.