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.
lol, look at the stock history... this will go to no bid!
Bid at.02usd!What a joke!
OMG.
Is 'jared hochstedler'the former EESO CEO involved?
Run to the Exit if he is!
CEO will tell You why EXTO wasn't at 5 dollar in Jan 2012? lmao
LOl
shareholder in 'Panic mode'
Still happy with your investment?
EXTO Looks ugly!
This board is so funny...
There is NO BID!
BTW: ICBT to the moon (maybe my post will not be deleted this time)
I think it is 1-55 milly and 1-20 milly and 2-20 milly sells!!
Soon no bid... again!
Buyer beware.
ICBT buy the .0001's and sell them to you at .0002! Easy money!
In your dreams! ICBT = scam
Nice day Bleu22.... did you sell already at 100% gain? Lmao
Hmmmm....
What's happen with the attorney who says no PR before the name change?
Run 2 the Exit!!!!
Try to sell them at .ooo2. You can't
Huge vol today.... lmao
NO!
I must be dreaming. We have volume!
ICBT, Strong finish!
Sell and save your money! This will crash soon!
Nice, congrats with your 120$ gain! lol
Nobody can sell ICTBn at .0003usd. Buying ICBT isn't smart. JMHO
Agree, i don't understand why people still buy this rubbish!
buyer beware!
lmao
Be patient Matoutus, be patient.
Are we already at 5$?
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Reply | Private Reply | UnKeep | Last Read Post New Msg Replies (5) | Next 10 | Previous | Next
stervc Share Monday, August 22, 2011 11:14:32 AM
Re: None Post # of 39185
About those comments & a Valuation to add...
Some thoughts were posted justifying what was in the PR and some thoughts were posted that could be considered much more conservative. I spoke to Lou this past Friday not long after reading the disparity in posts stating what Lou had said concerning the recent PR and I also spoke to Lou this morning. Below is what I think should help to clear some things up as to how things should be considered or interpreted considering the thoughts from the PR and the valuation that was mentioned.
I asked Lou about the WOW claims in relation to the Mary Ann Canyon Mine. He told me that because of certain issues that are right now trying to be resolved that he can’t talk about the Mary Ann Canyon Mine until those issues are resolved. I told him that was fine and that I can respect that, but that I am only asking him to compare what he believes about the WOW claims to what he believes about the Mary Ann Canyon claims. He told me that he believes that the WOW claims are much bigger than the Mary Ann Canyon claims. He told me that the Mary Ann Canyon claims had their assay report from their samples to have .19 ounces of gold per ton. He said that the more he thinks about it, he think that it was probably lower as he said that he knows that it was .1 something. The WOW claims had .324 ounces of gold per ton from their samples. Both are well over 100 acres from what he said. He told me that they have something still bigger than the WOW claims, but that he can’t talk to me about that right now until after it is announced. I was told that more updates are coming to the website too to include putting up the assay report for the WOW claims, but Jim (his son) had to go out of town for a few days because of his mother having surgery who is also in her 80’s. He said that Jim will get caught up and take care of these things when he gets back.
I asked Lou about what some are saying concerning his comments that some considered to be negative for the recent PR about the WOW claims. He said… what negative things? Lou told me that all of his conversations are different with each person and that he tries to speak on how the way the conversation is going as far as answering questions from investors from how he feels. If it seems like someone is leaning towards more conservative numbers then he tells them that it is fine to think such and holds the conversation around being conservative. He then told me that if someone is leaning towards numbers that are not conservative, then he tells them that it is fine to think such too and holds the conversation around not being conservative. Lou told me that he has taken this approach because until anything comes out of the ground, nobody knows what the WOW claims are actually worth so he will support what anybody thinks as nobody can knock how anybody feels. I now understand why marc_1958 said one thing and Quinnradio said another. Heck, I guess in a sense, they both are right.
I then said to Lou… hmmmmm? I told him that I fully understand his approach to how he is responding to investors on that matter, but to eliminate confusion, I think if you believe that the numbers in the PR are correct for having that potential to exist, then I think you should stick to that. I asked him if he believed that the numbers in the PR ”could” be correct. He told me YES. He told me that he must believe that it could be correct since he signed off on it, but he said also that it’s ok to think conservative too. He told me that until they start pulling the gold out of the ground, the numbers could be worse than what was PR-ed, the same, or better than what was PR-ed. I think now he understands how he could have been confusing some investors. He said that those numbers were primarily based off of the data from their assay report for the WOW Claims. He said that the news was released to show investors just how good the WOW claims ”could” be. Again, for those who have not done so yet, to verify the claims existence within the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), one could do so by going through the series of links within the link below:
investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66312878
It’s no secret that this is not being run like a major mining company, but I think some are being a little too critical on Lou and the company. It is very obvious that EXTO/Bayport Corporation is still in its infant stages. To me, that’s the beauty of what we have here with this company. Lou is 83 years old and I think he might explain things in a way that could be taken at least a couple different ways. Think about what some considered negative when he mentioned a conservative amount to be produced for the year and compare it to what he stated in that same conversation of how he believed that the stock would be eventually trading at $5.00 per share by Jan 2012. That’s some night and day stuff, but I’ll take it because I and some very good mining friends of mine have confirmed that everything is above board and is real. I recommend everyone to do their own due diligence (DD) to determine your own comfort level. I think we just need to give these guys some time to continue getting things in order.
Lou told me that he did mentioned to someone a more conservative amount that could happen if things don't happened as planned. He told me that he didn't mean for it to sound like he didn't believe in the PR since after all, he did review the PR and the numbers before it was released. Lou never told me what was the amount of that conservative number he talked about with someone and I didn’t think to really ask, but I would presume that it is the $200,000 per day worth of gold to be generated that was posted here within the forum as I presume that the topic was in net amount terms since it was compared to what was recently PR-ed. The Transfer Agent for EXTO/Bayport Corporation is ungagged and has been for years since I can remember. The share structure has been unchanged for many months. The Outstanding shares (OS) is currently 540,921,049Shares. Conservatively speaking, still, take that net amount of $200,000 per day and divide it by this OS to derive an annual Earnings Per Share (EPS) as indicated below…
$200,000 x 365 = $73,000,000 Net Income
Net Income ÷ OS = EPS
$73,000,000 ÷ 540,921,049 OS = .134 EPS
Now to get where EXTO/Bayport Corporation could conservatively be trading, multiply that .134 by either a 12 conservative Price to Earnings (P/E) Ratio. Or better yet, you can multiply it by the actual P/E Ratio for gold stocks as indicated below:
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/134conameu.html
EPS x P/E Ratio = Fundamental Share Price
You will see that regardless to what you come up with, it equals = UNDERVALUED
Now let me help those who want to go a little bit beyond the conservatism and go with what the PR stated. The PR stated that the WOW claims are expected to generate a total of 1620 ounces of gold per day. That’s only 591,300 ounces per year. I say only because there are plenty of mining companies that are producing more than 591,300 ounces of gold per year so for this untapped area, I personally believe that it is very possible. With net costs expected to be no more than $600, and considering that the price of gold is $1800+, that’s a net total of…
($1800 -$600) x 591,300 = $709,560,000 total Net Income from the gold
Some seem to question why the CEO believes that his company can be $5.00 per share by Jan 2012. Personally, if I was him, I probably wouldn’t mention a price. I would be more generic about it and just say that I believe that we currently are significantly undervalued. Ok, but since he did, let’s talk about it. Since he said $5.00 per share, let me try figure out why I think he could have seen that based on what we know from the data that helped us to generate the $709,560,000 total Net Income number above.
The $200,000 per day conservative concept has helped us to derive an EPS of .134 and from doing the math with considering the P/E Ratio for gold, that’s a share price of over $2.50+ per share. So that’s not why the $5.00 per share amount was mentioned in my opinion. The only logic I can come up with is that if you take an amount of Net Income from the above conservatively derived $73,000,000 for Net Income and the $709,560,000 derived from what was derived from the data within their recent PR, you can come up with some numbers that would be far greater than $5.00+ per share. Go ahead and use the substitution process with the formulas I used above to derive the conservative amount above and see what you come up with for yourself. I think too if anyone calls Lou and asks him to explain this above, I’m sure that he could, but I think understands this from Jim or somebody explaining this to him.
Bottom line, no matter how you slice the pie, we are significantly undervalued at these levels.
The company has a decent amount of more news coming from what I have gathered, but I don’t know when. They have a lot of good things on their plate and it will be interesting to see just how much they can get done. Personally, I don’t mind waiting. As I stated earlier, Lou is 83 years old and I think he might explain things in a way that could be taken at least a couple different ways. I think he is doing the best that he can and that he knows how. Heck, first I hope to live until I am 83 years old and if I do, I hope to have as much sense as he has shown to have. I actually commend him. From what I have researched, they are very real. I think if we relax, be patient, and simply give these guys some time… I think they will come through to prove just how serious they are. For me, it doesn’t matter to me… I’ll take the conservative or the not so conservative numbers. Either way… I think we are in good hands.
v/r
Sterling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Says who?
Lol, Good one Hunter!
This stock is a joke! Do we have the cie's email adress?
I hope! :)
quote: 'due not later than January 19, 2012'. Hmmmmmm
Here is 'THE FALSE' information Matouboy!
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Reply | Private Reply | UnKeep | Last Read Post New Msg Replies (5) | Next 10 | Previous | Next
stervc Share Monday, August 22, 2011 11:14:32 AM
Re: None Post # of 39185
About those comments & a Valuation to add...
Some thoughts were posted justifying what was in the PR and some thoughts were posted that could be considered much more conservative. I spoke to Lou this past Friday not long after reading the disparity in posts stating what Lou had said concerning the recent PR and I also spoke to Lou this morning. Below is what I think should help to clear some things up as to how things should be considered or interpreted considering the thoughts from the PR and the valuation that was mentioned.
I asked Lou about the WOW claims in relation to the Mary Ann Canyon Mine. He told me that because of certain issues that are right now trying to be resolved that he can’t talk about the Mary Ann Canyon Mine until those issues are resolved. I told him that was fine and that I can respect that, but that I am only asking him to compare what he believes about the WOW claims to what he believes about the Mary Ann Canyon claims. He told me that he believes that the WOW claims are much bigger than the Mary Ann Canyon claims. He told me that the Mary Ann Canyon claims had their assay report from their samples to have .19 ounces of gold per ton. He said that the more he thinks about it, he think that it was probably lower as he said that he knows that it was .1 something. The WOW claims had .324 ounces of gold per ton from their samples. Both are well over 100 acres from what he said. He told me that they have something still bigger than the WOW claims, but that he can’t talk to me about that right now until after it is announced. I was told that more updates are coming to the website too to include putting up the assay report for the WOW claims, but Jim (his son) had to go out of town for a few days because of his mother having surgery who is also in her 80’s. He said that Jim will get caught up and take care of these things when he gets back.
I asked Lou about what some are saying concerning his comments that some considered to be negative for the recent PR about the WOW claims. He said… what negative things? Lou told me that all of his conversations are different with each person and that he tries to speak on how the way the conversation is going as far as answering questions from investors from how he feels. If it seems like someone is leaning towards more conservative numbers then he tells them that it is fine to think such and holds the conversation around being conservative. He then told me that if someone is leaning towards numbers that are not conservative, then he tells them that it is fine to think such too and holds the conversation around not being conservative. Lou told me that he has taken this approach because until anything comes out of the ground, nobody knows what the WOW claims are actually worth so he will support what anybody thinks as nobody can knock how anybody feels. I now understand why marc_1958 said one thing and Quinnradio said another. Heck, I guess in a sense, they both are right.
I then said to Lou… hmmmmm? I told him that I fully understand his approach to how he is responding to investors on that matter, but to eliminate confusion, I think if you believe that the numbers in the PR are correct for having that potential to exist, then I think you should stick to that. I asked him if he believed that the numbers in the PR ”could” be correct. He told me YES. He told me that he must believe that it could be correct since he signed off on it, but he said also that it’s ok to think conservative too. He told me that until they start pulling the gold out of the ground, the numbers could be worse than what was PR-ed, the same, or better than what was PR-ed. I think now he understands how he could have been confusing some investors. He said that those numbers were primarily based off of the data from their assay report for the WOW Claims. He said that the news was released to show investors just how good the WOW claims ”could” be. Again, for those who have not done so yet, to verify the claims existence within the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), one could do so by going through the series of links within the link below:
investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66312878
It’s no secret that this is not being run like a major mining company, but I think some are being a little too critical on Lou and the company. It is very obvious that EXTO/Bayport Corporation is still in its infant stages. To me, that’s the beauty of what we have here with this company. Lou is 83 years old and I think he might explain things in a way that could be taken at least a couple different ways. Think about what some considered negative when he mentioned a conservative amount to be produced for the year and compare it to what he stated in that same conversation of how he believed that the stock would be eventually trading at $5.00 per share by Jan 2012. That’s some night and day stuff, but I’ll take it because I and some very good mining friends of mine have confirmed that everything is above board and is real. I recommend everyone to do their own due diligence (DD) to determine your own comfort level. I think we just need to give these guys some time to continue getting things in order.
Lou told me that he did mentioned to someone a more conservative amount that could happen if things don't happened as planned. He told me that he didn't mean for it to sound like he didn't believe in the PR since after all, he did review the PR and the numbers before it was released. Lou never told me what was the amount of that conservative number he talked about with someone and I didn’t think to really ask, but I would presume that it is the $200,000 per day worth of gold to be generated that was posted here within the forum as I presume that the topic was in net amount terms since it was compared to what was recently PR-ed. The Transfer Agent for EXTO/Bayport Corporation is ungagged and has been for years since I can remember. The share structure has been unchanged for many months. The Outstanding shares (OS) is currently 540,921,049Shares. Conservatively speaking, still, take that net amount of $200,000 per day and divide it by this OS to derive an annual Earnings Per Share (EPS) as indicated below…
$200,000 x 365 = $73,000,000 Net Income
Net Income ÷ OS = EPS
$73,000,000 ÷ 540,921,049 OS = .134 EPS
Now to get where EXTO/Bayport Corporation could conservatively be trading, multiply that .134 by either a 12 conservative Price to Earnings (P/E) Ratio. Or better yet, you can multiply it by the actual P/E Ratio for gold stocks as indicated below:
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/134conameu.html
EPS x P/E Ratio = Fundamental Share Price
You will see that regardless to what you come up with, it equals = UNDERVALUED
Now let me help those who want to go a little bit beyond the conservatism and go with what the PR stated. The PR stated that the WOW claims are expected to generate a total of 1620 ounces of gold per day. That’s only 591,300 ounces per year. I say only because there are plenty of mining companies that are producing more than 591,300 ounces of gold per year so for this untapped area, I personally believe that it is very possible. With net costs expected to be no more than $600, and considering that the price of gold is $1800+, that’s a net total of…
($1800 -$600) x 591,300 = $709,560,000 total Net Income from the gold
Some seem to question why the CEO believes that his company can be $5.00 per share by Jan 2012. Personally, if I was him, I probably wouldn’t mention a price. I would be more generic about it and just say that I believe that we currently are significantly undervalued. Ok, but since he did, let’s talk about it. Since he said $5.00 per share, let me try figure out why I think he could have seen that based on what we know from the data that helped us to generate the $709,560,000 total Net Income number above.
The $200,000 per day conservative concept has helped us to derive an EPS of .134 and from doing the math with considering the P/E Ratio for gold, that’s a share price of over $2.50+ per share. So that’s not why the $5.00 per share amount was mentioned in my opinion. The only logic I can come up with is that if you take an amount of Net Income from the above conservatively derived $73,000,000 for Net Income and the $709,560,000 derived from what was derived from the data within their recent PR, you can come up with some numbers that would be far greater than $5.00+ per share. Go ahead and use the substitution process with the formulas I used above to derive the conservative amount above and see what you come up with for yourself. I think too if anyone calls Lou and asks him to explain this above, I’m sure that he could, but I think understands this from Jim or somebody explaining this to him.
Bottom line, no matter how you slice the pie, we are significantly undervalued at these levels.
The company has a decent amount of more news coming from what I have gathered, but I don’t know when. They have a lot of good things on their plate and it will be interesting to see just how much they can get done. Personally, I don’t mind waiting. As I stated earlier, Lou is 83 years old and I think he might explain things in a way that could be taken at least a couple different ways. I think he is doing the best that he can and that he knows how. Heck, first I hope to live until I am 83 years old and if I do, I hope to have as much sense as he has shown to have. I actually commend him. From what I have researched, they are very real. I think if we relax, be patient, and simply give these guys some time… I think they will come through to prove just how serious they are. For me, it doesn’t matter to me… I’ll take the conservative or the not so conservative numbers. Either way… I think we are in good hands.
v/r
Sterling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats not false, i am not the only one who remember this post!
Ask Stervc, it was in one of his posts!
Lou was right. EXTO is at 5$ oeps 0.005$ after newjear!
This POS is DEAD!
And don't forget EXTO at 5$ after newyear!
What a joke!
U R Funny!
Lol, nice day 200k at .0002
Lol, and soon there will be No Bid. Fkng POS
R U Dreaming? lol