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.
BOOM 1/3. Two left.
Congratulations to Nightfood! #WDIA19 #GDC19 #icecream pic.twitter.com/kqx31uoFzG
— FoodBev Awards (@FoodBevAwards) June 26, 2019
https://twitter.com/FoodBevAwards can follow the awards here.
Question for the Board: Do you see NGTF expanding beyond ice cream (and to a lesser extent its snack bars) or is this forever going to be simply an ice cream competitor?
My thoughts are as follows: they have the foundation for an awesome brand. If they could replicate the success they have had with ice cream, with items such as chips, cookies, etc., I think they could make a serious push at becoming the authority on all night time snacks. They will likely never be a Kraft or other similar consumer snack powerhouse, but they could legitimately get themselves to $500mm revenue in year with any sort of expansion.
Not to mention, as marijuana becomes more accepted publicly and legally, they can then expand their success into cannabis snacks with the "Half-Baked" trademark. With their success, IMO they would absolutely kill the small mom and pop cannabis snacks brands that are currently out there.
Any reason for the volume and price jump today? Filings out somewhere?
Also, if you haven't checked out Kelsey Kilmartin's IG, I would do so. While IG can be misleading, he seems to live a semi-lavish lifestyle which might be an indicator as to the capital behind Global CBD.
Global CBD posted again today on IG. The guy that Joel is sitting with is Rhett Jordan who is the Chief Branding Officer of Native Roots. Native Roots is the #1 license holder in the state of CO. They have 17+ locations and over 600 employees.
The link below provides a clear picture of Rhett to compare with the Instagram post for validation. It also provides some background of what Rhett has accomplished outside of growing Native Roots into the marquee player in grow and dispensing in the #1 marijuana market in the US.
https://www.kenehventures.com/
In my opinion, this is actually huge. If Global CBD taps Rhett's talent or is able to get their products into Native Roots, this will take $GEVI to new heights.
Agreed there. I was looking around and see that a hedge fund called Sabby Management took a control position back around January. Not the biggest fund ever, but the principal of the fund just bought a $10mm palace in Miami so they are doing alright.
Obviously it could be part of a short strategy or something else, but anytime I see sophisticated money playing in OTC land, that interests me. Based on what I have read, it seems like Rosetta still owns the IP. They sold all their other assets. Assuming that money went to pay off balance sheet liabilities, it seems like this company could reinvigorate itself by licensing their patents and/or beginning operations again with (to your point) the help of some debt or equity capital from Wall Street. Especially because it seems that their tech has real utility.
I have a starter position already. Going to try to accumulate more shares at a reasonable price.
Mathmos,
Do we know if this invention is "new" or whether they were just summarizing one of their inventions from their past years of operation?
Their website is super sketchy, which doesn't help confident. However, based on my understanding of their asset sale, they still own all the IP which could be monumental if they can straighten everything else out.
Global CBD sources some of its product from $CANB which I find interesting. Seems as if Global CBD is one of $CANB's largest accounts (~10% of $CANB's Revenues). Assuming that Global CBD is selling those products + more, I would hope to see a mkt cap for Global CBD of at least $2.4mm (~10% of $CANB's mkt cap) if not more.
At current share structures, that would yield a share price of about $0.185.
Zoom (not a super accurate source) lists Global CBD's revenue at about $6mm. If that were the case (I would be surprised), I expect to see dollars.
I listed the entire 10K for CANB below. CTRL + F "Global" and you should be able to find the info.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1509957/000149315219005557/form10-ka.htm
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/cbd-for-the-whole-world-sweeps-across-america-called-cbd-for-zayn-1027774121
Interesting article here. I don't know much about the CBD industry, however, this seems like an up and coming player in the space. If share structure remains low, this thing could run quick on news or filings.
I like that they can produce product that has zero traces of THC. Allows them to stay competitive in states that do not allow THC consumption but remain liberal on CBD products.
https://www.nvsos.gov/sosentitysearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=btFnKrCw%252fPZUj0prgSrieQ%253d%253d
This may have been posted before, but if not here is a link that shows that YIC Acquisitions LLC is an established NV entity and that it is in good standing. Linked to ED.
Positive sign in my opinion. Why waste the money filing for a subsidiary if you aren't serious about finalizing the transaction. ED has shown in his previous endeavors that he is willing to do the bare minimum with regards to disclosure and seeing things through (based on my research and understanding). Entity filed/organized on 4/11.
Also another thing in the S1 that I thought was interesting. Proceeds of the offering are going to go to "Production/Inventory". Unless this transaction is at the finish line or officially closed, ARSN would have no reason to allocate money to production since they have no assets otherwise. As this is an SEC filing, it gives more credit to the fact that a Yuengling's IC acquisition is done or likely done. Additionally, no reason for an S1 unless you actually need the capital. ED has already shown hes willing to dilute with no prior notice. Nobody will buy the S1 offering unless legit news is to come.
I've been 50/50 on this so far. Have been buying and selling the dips. May hold strong from here on out. Between some close associates and I, we are holding about 4mm shares, collectively.
To that effect, this situation is similar to Yahoo's stake in Alibaba. I think we can all agree that Yahoo (outside of Yahoo finance) has not been a very good company for a while. However, Yahoo owned 15% of Alibaba which supported its stock price for a very long time. Yahoo was never going to buy all of Alibaba, but it profited simply by making a smart investment. The same applies here in my mind. ED is unproven. That makes ARSN Yahoo. Yuenglings ice cream, is a potentially valuable asset that could be worth a lot if they continue to grow and generate attention. That makes it Alibaba in this situation. From that standpoint, ARSN's 33% stake functions exactly like Yahoo's stake in Alibaba, which is to provide it with passive income. So long as ED doesn't screw the share structure up and tries to grow Yuengling Ice Creams sales via YIC Dist., we win. from that standpoint as long as the 33% stake in Yuengling's Ice Cream is worth more than the current mkt cap of ARSN its a solid investment. Right now ARSN Mkt cap is about $580k. That means that the market says that Yuengling Ice Cream is only worth $1.5mmish.
Again, I've stated my thoughts and opinions on this, but I think that Yuengling's name and infrastructure is worth much more than $1.5mm to the right buyer. And from that standpoint, ARSN seems to be undervalued.
I agree about the language of "all previous LOIs are void." But that wouldn't affect the YIC Distribution portion of the transaction, based on the news article which stated that transaction was closed (sometime in late february I believe). Thus, the LOI in that transaction is not valid anyway, the only agreement that matters is the fully executed purchase agreement. From that standpoint, there is no unwinding the YIC transaction unless the agreement provides some way to do that (not likely without major costs or litigation). So unless they released news of closing prematurely (which they would need to clarify to investors that such transaction actually did not close), I think it can be confidently said that YIC Distributors is owned by ARSN. Even check the "About ARSN" section in all of their news articles. After the closing news, the about us went from being extremely generic to highlighting its focus on ice cream and rights to acquire additional Yuengling assets on top of the ones they already own.
Now, with respect to the 33% of Yuengling Ice Cream that YIC owns, unless that 33% was somehow carved out, then ARSN would also own that via its 100% ownership in YIC. Thus, ARSN, via YIC's stake in Yuengling Ice Cream, would still be entitled to a portion of whatever Yuengling's revenue is each year. This is in addition to any revenue generated as the online distributor of the Ice Cream.
Any voided LOI's seems to me to only affect negotiations to acquire the remaining 67% of Yuengling. And in all honesty.... why is owning 100% of Yuengling in our best interest. I trust David Yuengling and the CFO to run Yuengling more than I trust ED. Although they haven't taken the ice cream global, they have built a solid foundation. By keeping ownership of the main valuable asset (i.e. Yuengling Ice Cream Mfg.), it prevents ED from fucking up the name and value, while still incentivizing him to grow the value via online sales and distribution. Sure it'd be cool to have the full asset, but that doesn't solve all our problems and even creates some. So long as there is no dilution, and Yuenling's or YIC continues to grow the reach of the ice cream, ARSN will profit. Also, without acquiring the additional 67% we also won't see such extreme dilution I don't think. So long as Yuengling Ice Cream remains selling, ARSN makes money without having to occur any substantial costs. To the extent Yuengling is making money on sales that YIC Dist. creates, ARSN gets paid twice...
https://www.folioinvesting.com/servlets/ProcessAction/nuxeo/proxy?path=%2FTRIPOINTBANQREP%2Fsections%2FPrivate+Placements%2FYuengling+Ice+Cream+Corporation+Units%2FPrivate+Placement+Memorandum
Offering memorandum which is slightly more updated lists a PA and NC (not SC as I thought in my last post) as production locations. Again, slightly dated but I'm assuming production isn't something that would change drastically from when the PPM was relevant.
This article (below) is old so things may have changed since then, but the article implies that they weren't high on buying/building their own manufacturing facility. I haven't been able to find it tonight, but I know I read another article at some point that mentioned two manufacturing partners. One was located in PA and the other one was located somewhere else on the east coast (I want to say South Carolina if I recall correctly). I'm assuming the PA one is the one mentioned in the attached article.
http://lehighvalleymarketplace.com/we-all-scream-for-yuenglings-ice-cream/
Don't get me wrong, Everett is sketchy and somebody to exercise caution around. With respect to YIC Acquisitions Corp. however, it is common in asset transactions to buy through a subsidiary to limit any sort of liability to the parent. With the switch from a stock transaction to asset, as well as the incorporation of an acquisition subsidiary, that tells me that there was a third-party on Yuengling's side that had CoC rights and was holding the entire deal up. By switching to an asset transaction and acquiring with a subsidiary, the parties can omit the asset or liability that was holding the deal up and eliminate any unknown liabilities attached with the acquired assets. By doing so, it actually protects us.
I agree. I stated that in my original post that Manta numbers are not always accurate. With that being said, there are also many times when they have been in a close range. I'm not claiming that Manta is correct or an amazing source, simply looking for the info and an edge. If you don't believe Yuenglings Ice Cream does $7mm a year, then your sell price will be less than if you did believe it was $7mm.
The $7mm number isn't crazy though, IMO. Yuengling claims to be in 500 stores and sold online (again, that's for you to decide if you believe their numbers or not. I'm generally skeptical of management's numbers but for simplicity, i'm using the information provided). From the 500 stores, if they sold an average of 6 cartons of ice cream from each store for 365 days and charged an average price of $5.99, that is $6.6mm in revenue.
Dick T, to answer your question, yes closing can take a long time. M&A is my daily profession and educational background. I've worked on deals take that took 6 months to satisfy all the closing requirements. During that time, the structure was changed twice and the deal continued to get pushed back for no fault of either of the parties to the transaction but because of third-parties who have ROFR rights or other abilities to hold the transaction up.
Seems like everything is positive on the part of the two main parties to the transaction. Change in transaction structure to an asset sale tells me that it's a debtor, minority shareholder, or third-party vendor holding the parties up.
Besides $NGTF, another semi-interesting comparison to $ARSN is $KGKG. Both companies operate in competitive, brand-oriented industries. Although the the energy drink space may be slightly less competitive, KGKG's success, much like ARSN's, depends on a quality product, good branding, and good distribution.
In terms of product I cannot compare the quality of Yuengling's ice cream to Kona Gold Solution Energy drink, as I have had neither. I have heard that Kona Gold is pretty good, which makes sense as it couldn't grow the way it has if it wasn't. With respect to brand, I think we can all agree that Yuengling's is a much more recognizable brand comparatively, simply due to its connection to the brewery.
The key for ARSN is distribution. As evidenced by KGKG, even without proper branding, if you have good distribution and a quality product, you will experience growth. The crux for KGKG is their brand. If KGKG had a more recognizable name behind them, I believe they would be growing faster than they already are. Luckily for ARSN, branding is not the crux. It is far easier to establish distributorships when you have a very well known name behind you than vise versa. It is for this reason that I think, given time, ARSN can be what both KGKG and NGTF are, plus more.
KGKG currently has a market cap of $95mm (grossly over-valued since it is likely to do under $10mm of revenue). To reach the same PPS, ARSN's mkt cap would only need to be about $12mm, which is more than feasible.
Right. Sorry if what I said was confusing. I agree that they are separate entities from a legal and financial perspective. What I meant was from a branding perspective, the brewery has some common interest in seeing this acquisition and strategy work. The ice cream company is clearly using the family history to promote itself. The ice cream company also uses substantially similar logos and branding with the brewery. From that perspective, the brewery can't have a company that is so closely associated generating bad press (not that it is currently generating anything negative, but humor me, this is the wild west OTC land). While not substantial, it would have carry over effects to the brewery purely via association. So from that perspective alone, although not direct, there is still a vested interest from Yuengling's brewery to see this succeed and help out to the extent it can. And while they may have no equity, the association alone will be enough for them to open opportunities if things begin to go south.
One other thing I forgot to mention that I thought was interesting was the debt structure of ARSN. I don't have it in front of me currently, but I want to say one of the filings showed SBA debt on the books to help fund this acquisition. If I'm not mistaken, I take this as a very positive sign as SBA debt wouldn't be issued if there weren't real, revenue generating assets to back the debt. Much more conducive for shareholder returns compared with horrible convertibles.
Per Manta.com (not the greatest source, but it's better than nothing) Yuengling's Ice Cream does north of $7mm of revenue annually. Considering the name behind the brand, the awards the ice cream has won (see some of their press releases and news articles), and the growth in sales, assuming a revenue multiple of 2x-3x is rather conservative. Assuming such multiples puts the company's value at $14mm-$21mm based on current sales levels. At the current S/O levels, that translates to a price of somewhere between $.17 and $.25 if the companies were to merge with no dilution.
However, even if dilution were to occur (articles state a possibility of around 300mm S/O with a public float of about 50mm) that still translates to a price north of $.05, and that's worst case scenario.
As the prestigious Yuengling brand will be tied to this company, there is a vested interest from Yuengling brewery in having the Ice Cream division succeed. So although there is some risk from an OTC perspective, there are shared interests between the ice cream brand and the brewer. Additionally, in the event of dilution, such shares will be going to the owner of Yuengling Ice Cream -- David YUENGLING. I'm going to go out on a limb and say he is probably quite connected and quite motivated to keep the Yuengling name in good standing.
Once this transaction goes through and the new website is launched, I expect to see revenues that grow exponentially, driven by a quality product and a name that is recognizable. I was an early investor in NGTF before it took off. Not knowing about NGTF before investing, if I saw NGTF and Yuenglings side by side at the store, I would pick Yuenglings as the name is more familiar. Generally speaking, the public would follow this same trend.
Just my own personal thoughts. But seems like it is an undervalued investment from a pure fundamental standpoint.
They are different. It is slightly confusing because Image Protect removed the IPShare tab from their website and replaced it with Fotofy, but the two are complimentary to each other.
IPShare is the underlying technology.It encompasses many different features. The blockchain portion of the technology allows the image to be shared, tracked, and controlled by the photographer. This allows them to control who uses their photo and any unauthorized use can be removed. The technology also prevents people from screen-shotting and illicitly stealing the photo for use. In cases where the photo is somehow screenshotted/copied/or thefted, IMTL also has technology that can crawl the web and identify any unauthorized uses of the photo. The unauthorized use is then replaced with the IPShare version which then makes it secure if later shared, etc. Finally, IPShare is also what allows images to be embedded with ads which will generate substantial future revenue.
Fotofy is the marketplace. Images will be uploaded here and embedded with IPShare so that consumers can go and use them (similar to Gettys/Shutterstock but without the licensing fees). Because the photos can now be tracked from Fotofy and embedded with ads, they can offer the photos for free or at least much cheaper than their competitors but still generate equal types of revenue. Thus, IPShare is the real value behind the company. Fotofy just provides a consolidated place for consumers to begin sharing IPShare photos. Once that happens, "share" events should grow exponentially.
Most people might read the article and think that an "Automobile Site" is an odd place to begin testing Image Protects technology. However, those of us following think otherwise. One of Madhive's main partners is Tegna. For those of you who don't know Tegna was the sole owner of Cars.com before they spun it off in 2017. With this being said, I am assuming they still have substantial connections with Cars.com and would be able to say, test image sharing technology if the opportunity arose. If $IMTL is being tested on Cars.com, I can only imagine that their technology is legit and that additional big partnerships are on the way.
Don't take my word for it people. Look around and think.
No May should also be a big month. Although Fotofy isn't being released until August 1, per the last Shareholder Letter (sometime around March 3-7) IPShare will be fully launched for commercial use in it's most updated form. Larry Adams claimed that it would be ready "within 60 days" of the letter meaning an announcement could hit anytime starting next week or the week after.
Not sure what it will do to price, but will definitely generate even more interest for August 1. A lot of eyes on this thing right now.
Very precarious mention of Kodak in the latest article.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-internet-visualchina/furor-over-black-hole-photo-forces-chinas-largest-image-provider-to-shut-idUSKCN1RO06H
You know who solves this exact problem.... Image Protect. Talk about a perfect opportunity. Image Protect already has connections in East Asia with Shanghai Media Group. This is the perfect opportunity to pitch Getty's and Visual China Group on $IMTL's technology and benefits.
And to follow up my previous post, Pixsy is being offered for free via Flickr which either means Flickr is paying some sort of license fee and/or Pixsy is simply offering their tech to the company in hopes that it will generate additional lawsuit revenue (both models are limited with respect to how much revenue they can really generate).
Let's not forget how closely connected Matt Goldman is with some of the behemoths in this space (Getty's Images, Corbis, etc.). Getty's has already stated they want to pivot to a free, ad-revenue based model. Additionally, Getty's currently does not offer the ability to monitor photos the way Image Protect does. In my mind that makes IMTL a perfect acquisition target and/or partner. Now, I think IMTL could fare better by launching on their own, but in terms of a fallback position, it doesn't hurt knowing that the company you are invested in is worth more to a strategic partner than what it is currently trading at now.
https://betanews.com/2019/04/10/flickr-pixsy-image-protection/
One of Image Protect's competitors just landed this deal today. I am encouraged by this because Image Protect (based on my research) has exhibited more success than Pixsy to date. Image Protect monitors more photos, has a higher potential case rate, more success litigating, has more members (175k versus 35k), and offers more services than just monitoring photos (i.e. IPShare, simple copyright, etc.) Pixsy uses a model that is litigation-heavy which does not bode well for consistent, recurring revenues. It is for this reason that IMTL has shifted their focus away from solely litigation to now litigating AND shared revenue on photos.
With Image Protect being connected with celebrities, Fortune 500 companies (via MadHive), and having a superior service offering, I have the utmost confidence that Image Protect will land deals similar to the one listed above (as IMTL has already with the likes of Age Photostock and Snapwire). 20% and 30% days will pale in comparison to the types of days this company will have when IPShare and Fotofy launch.
I absolutely agree with that.
Something else that surprised me is that this company hasn't garnered more attention now that crypto is gaining traction again. Although they didn't release their IMAGE coin, that's not to say they couldn't in the future still. And even if they don't release their own specific coin, if kodak or somebody partners with them that still gives investors some exposure to the crypto sector.
Yeah, I'm semi-surprised as well. Although I will say, personally I prefer no news to fluff news. My thoughts are that mgt. is going to release financials, IPShare, form 4s, and new partnerships etc. all at once to generate some attention that will really stick.
I wish mgt. would update us with what ever happened to uplisting. I know the stock price has to be above a penny, but seems like an attainable goal and one that would really help solidify the companies actual value. Still trading below comps.
This post seeks to analyze some of the more notable parties that IMTL is associated with. While the association with these parties alone does not necessarily mean success, the fact that IMTL was able to even obtain some sort of agreement/partnership with the following entities signifies that IMTL’s technology has serious potential.
MadHive – a blockchain technology company that is working to revolutionize advertising by helping to reduce the opaqueness of digital advertising. Madhive’s technology allows advertisers to track the effectiveness of ad expenditures, eliminate ad fraud generated by bots and malware, and generate more targeted ad revenue. Their website lists CBS, NBCUniversal, Fox, Hallmark, and Pluto TV as current customers. Although detailed information is lacking regarding their relationship with these customers, the list alone warrants some serious recognition as these companies would not spend money if they did not see a ROI.
Furthermore, Madhive, along with IBM and Tegna (a publicly traded company with a mkt. cap of $3.205bb), started Adledger which is a nonprofit that helps develop and spread knowledge about digital advertising. In addition to the founders listed above, The Hershey Company and Publicis Media (French media conglomerate) have both signed on as members and seek to adopt the technology generated by Madhive and AdLedger to create more effective ads.
While MadHive is not a well-known company to the general public, it is a powerhouse in the blockchain tech space. Through its partnership with MadHive, IMTL now has direct access to some of the largest media and consumer products companies around. It is rumored that MadHive and IMTL are creating something unique which I can only imagine will be offered to MadHive’s A-list customers and partners.
Age Fotostock – a photo marketplace/collective that manages 50mm+ digital images and videos. The company has several different marketplace offerings that cater to the “rights managed” sector, the “royalty free” sector, and the “low budget” sector. Although the details of their relationship have not been disclosed, the fact that IMTL is associated alone yields serious potential. If IMTL can onboard Age Fotostock’s portfolio and photographers onto the Fotofy/IPShare platforms, which will instantly add an additional 50mm assets to IMTLs existing 20mm+. As the company offers its assets to over 40 countries and has partnered with over 400 professional photographers, IMTL has the potential to gain serious exposure here. With numbers like that, IMTL would be able to grow their “share” events exponentially.
Snapwire – A company that allows users to sell photos they take to commercial users. Buyers can request a certain photo and all a photographer has to do is take that certain photo and upload it in order to get paid. As of July 2017, the company managed over 3mm photo assets. While this pales in comparison to Age Fotostock, the company has been growing extremely fast.
Between these three partners, as well as many notable individual photographers, IMTL is connected with both sides of the equation. On the one hand, they are building a photo platform that is large enough to generate significant revenue from “shares” as well as are forging partnerships with companies that can help them monetize these activities via ad revenue.
Out of all these companies the MadHive relationship interests me the most. By getting their foot in the door with MadHive, they are now positioning themselves to be the “go-to” image company when Fortune 500 companies are looking to place image ads. I expect additional news to come from this partnership shortly after the official launch of IPShare.
In order to understand the references and details of this post, please refer to post #4808 for my general overview of IMTLs value. This post will try to provide real numbers behind IMTLs potential using the data that’s out there.
IMTL has 175,000 confirmed members. Based on the type of people who would seek this type of service out my thoughts are that a majority of these members are avid-photo takers or professional photographers, as the average person would have not seek this type of service out (until now maybe). Management claims that each individual uploads approximately 120 photos for use which would mean that IMTL is protecting about 21mm photos (seems correct based on management’s statements in prior press releases).
Now referring back to the 175,000 members, lets assume that 90% are unpaying users (conservative in my mind, but I digress). Of the 10% paying customers, I will assum 8% use the $20/mth option 1.5% use the $45/mth option and another 1% are corporate clients who are charged much more. Based on this, and assuming no growth in members, IMTL’s subscription revenue should be as follows:
Total Members: 175,000
Subscriptions: $0, $25, $45
% Breakdown: 90% 8% 1.5% *.5 goes to corporate accts.
Total Members: 157,000 14,000 2,625
Revenue: $0 $3.36mm $1.42mm
Total Rev. $4.78mm
My research tells me that there are about 60,000 pro photographers in the U.S. To assume that 16,625 of them could use this platform and pay for it is reasonable in my mind. Thus, on a recurring revenue basis alone this company can get to $4.7mm of revenue pretty easily. As membership grows, and more people sign up for the paying membership this will obviously grow. The paid membership is further incentivized by the fact that the full benefits of IPShare cannot be accessed without paying.
Now, circling back to photo assets, these photographers have uploaded about 21mm photos that the company can generate share revenue off of. Based on the company’s press releases and other relevant information I found, let’s assume the following:
Total Photos: 21mm
% Shared: 50% ** Management test-run claimed 78%.
x's Shared (mth): 35x ** Management claimed 75x over 60 days
Annual Shares: 4.41bb
Revenue per share: $.0035 *Youtubers receive on avg. $.0076 per view
Total: $15.44mm
As you can see, and as I earlier claimed in post #4808, getting to $20mm in revenue based on current members, etc., should not be hard for IMTL once they begin to scale. I tried to be as conservative with these numbers while still being realistic as I don’t necessarily trust management’s numbers altogether. However, if you believe management’s numbers and believe that this company has room to grow with regard to its photo and member base, then by all means $20mm would be the baseline for you.
This analysis does not include any additional revenue that comes from partnerships, copyright infringement recovery cases, or other business lines that IMTL decides to enter in the short/near-future.
IMTL Although I am new to the whole world of “Investorshub,” I am not new to the world of corporate strategy and investing. As such, I thought I might get in on some of this action and provide my own two cents on why IMTL is undervalued. I have a busy day job as an M&A and securities attorney so I won’t be posting extremely frequently, but I hope to make some additional follow up posts when I get the time.
First and foremost, IMTL has revenue. Without getting too far into the weeds, both Gettys Images and ShutterStock’s equity is valued at 3x revenue or more (this can be verified as Shutterstock is a public company and Gettys revenue numbers are floating around on the internet). On that basis alone, assuming IMTL’s 2018 revenue will be at least equal to 2017’s, it would be worth a minimum of $2.1mm. I for one believe that IMTL will see some revenue growth this year and therefore, its equity value should increase substantially.
Second, and building off of the name Gettys Images, let’s take a look at Matt Goldman’s past work experience. His time at JupiterMedia ended with a sale of the company to Gettys. Although the full value of the transaction was not realized due to the 2008 recession (originally Gettys offered JupiterMedia $350mm), the transaction was still for ~$100mm. From there, Goldman went to Corbis (a privately owned company founded by none other than Bill Gates), where he again worked until the company partnered with and sold out to Gettys Images. Although he did not start either of these companies, he held large enough roles that if nothing else happened with the company, I am positive that Goldman would find some way to salvage SH value by a sale to Gettys or some other major player. IMTL has the tech and the assets to do it this very moment if that was their end goal.
Third, let’s look at some other companies that have recently taken off:
- SHMP had a recent run to ~$1. Although the tech was patent protected, the company’s management has less youth, experience, and track record IMO. Furthermore, their share structure (~293mm) is approximately 50mm more than what IMTL last listed (~253mm). Most importantly, SHMP has no revenue and a growth plan that requires substantial CAPEX and time to scale. IMTLs model grows exponentially with little CAPEX as it’s all about getting members and shares. On that basis alone, IMTL should be worth about what SHMP is.
- SSFT also recently experienced a nice spike. SSFT is much more applicable here as the two are both AI/tech companies. Both SSFT and IMTL are in up and coming industries that undercut the legal market. As a lawyer, I see the risk that these companies pose more than anybody, yet I am still backing them because they make jobs easier and create new forms of revenue in simple ways. Based on my research, SSFT has less revenue (per marketwatch), is more dependent on project-related revenue (which is riskier than IMTL’s subscription and per share revenue models), and has twice the debt (the level is more like 3x when considering a lot of IMTLs debt is with related parties). Yet somehow, SSFTs share price is almost 40x times greater. Again, on this basis either we should be shorting the hell out of these other companies and/or should see a significant rise in IMTL value.
The last item I will leave with is based on execution. I don’t disagree that IMTL has dropped the ball on certain occasions with releasing financials on-time and releasing its blockchain coin on time (personally, I’m happy there’s no IMAGE coin as I’d rather see a partnership with Kodak since the two offer something that the other would benefit from). However, what I will point out is that IMTL does have 175,000+ members confirmed (I know this as I created two profiles back to back and am member #175,314 and #175,317). They have individuals such as Mia Khalifa and Idris Erba, whose entire livelihood depends on protecting their image and video assets, who have endorsed this system and use it. Clearly IMTL is doing something right. Now that they have announced Fotofy I believe that their model will become viable quick. Along with a few strategic additions that I will try to explain in a future post, this company could see $20mm in revenue with little to no real effort. On that basis alone (assuming a 3x revenue multiple) the share price would be about $0.24.
As such, I think it is clear that the market is valuing this as a copyright recovery company instead of a revolutionary tech company. The growth and scalability of the model is truly unparalleled at this time. For anybody interested, feel free to message me and I will provide greater detail with sources, thoughts, etc.
Although I am new to the whole world of “Investorshub,” I am not new to the world of corporate strategy and investing. As such, I thought I might get in on some of this action and provide my own two cents on why IMTL is undervalued. I have a busy day job as an M&A and securities attorney so I won’t be posting extremely frequently, but I hope to make some additional follow up posts when I get the time.
First and foremost, IMTL has revenue. Without getting too far into the weeds, both Gettys Images and ShutterStock’s equity is valued at 3x revenue or more (this can be verified as Shutterstock is a public company and Gettys revenue numbers are floating around on the internet). On that basis alone, assuming IMTL’s 2018 revenue will be at least equal to 2017’s, it would be worth a minimum of $2.1mm. I for one believe that IMTL will see some revenue growth this year and therefore, its equity value should increase substantially.
Second, and building off of the name Gettys Images, let’s take a look at Matt Goldman’s past work experience. His time at JupiterMedia ended with a sale of the company to Gettys. Although the full value of the transaction was not realized due to the 2008 recession (originally Gettys offered JupiterMedia $350mm), the transaction was still for ~$100mm. From there, Goldman went to Corbis (a privately owned company founded by none other than Bill Gates), where he again worked until the company partnered with and sold out to Gettys Images. Although he did not start either of these companies, he held large enough roles that if nothing else happened with the company, I am positive that Goldman would find some way to salvage SH value by a sale to Gettys or some other major player. IMTL has the tech and the assets to do it this very moment if that was their end goal.
Third, let’s look at some other companies that have recently taken off:
- SHMP had a recent run to ~$1. Although the tech was patent protected, the company’s management has less youth, experience, and track record IMO. Furthermore, their share structure (~293mm) is approximately 50mm more than what IMTL last listed (~253mm). Most importantly, SHMP has no revenue and a growth plan that requires substantial CAPEX and time to scale. IMTLs model grows exponentially with little CAPEX as it’s all about getting members and shares. On that basis alone, IMTL should be worth about what SHMP is.
- SSFT also recently experienced a nice spike. SSFT is much more applicable here as the two are both AI/tech companies. Both SSFT and IMTL are in up and coming industries that undercut the legal market. As a lawyer, I see the risk that these companies pose more than anybody, yet I am still backing them because they make jobs easier and create new forms of revenue in simple ways. Based on my research, SSFT has less revenue (per marketwatch), is more dependent on project-related revenue (which is riskier than IMTL’s subscription and per share revenue models), and has twice the debt (the level is more like 3x when considering a lot of IMTLs debt is with related parties). Yet somehow, SSFTs share price is almost 40x times greater. Again, on this basis either we should be shorting the hell out of these other companies and/or should see a significant rise in IMTL value.
The last item I will leave with is based on execution. I don’t disagree that IMTL has dropped the ball on certain occasions with releasing financials on-time and releasing its blockchain coin on time (personally, I’m happy there’s no IMAGE coin as I’d rather see a partnership with Kodak since the two offer something that the other would benefit from). However, what I will point out is that IMTL does have 175,000+ members confirmed (I know this as I created two profiles back to back and am member #175,314 and #175,317). They have individuals such as Mia Khalifa and Idris Erba, whose entire livelihood depends on protecting their image and video assets, who have endorsed this system and use it. Clearly IMTL is doing something right. Now that they have announced Fotofy I believe that their model will become viable quick. Along with a few strategic additions that I will try to explain in a future post, this company could see $20mm in revenue with little to no real effort. On that basis alone (assuming a 3x revenue multiple) the share price would be about $0.24.
As such, I think it is clear that the market is valuing this as a copyright recovery company instead of a revolutionary tech company. The growth and scalability of the model is truly unparalleled at this time. I invite you to critique my analysis but please do so and bring real sources to back it. For anybody interested, feel free to message me and I will provide greater detail with sources, thoughts, etc. Happy to be along for this ride for those of you who are long with me! For those of you short, would love to understand your reasoning as you clearly see something I don’t.