Uhh, what 'news' was that -- or was it just PR?
In the timeless words of the Bard: "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Worth looking at the specific news which has come out:
- 2011. Up to ten stores (as I recall) in the San Antonio, TX area; two were opened, both closed now.
- 2012. Early year (or perhaps late 2011) PR speaking to 5 stores in PHX area by end of Q1 12. Eventually two were opened (one in Q3; in PHX area, with average temps of 100+??? business acumen questioned from my perspective, both closed now).
- 2012. Early year (or late 2011) sponsored Equity Research report projecting 100 stores at the end of 2012, per company plans (as stated in the report). Instead, stores have gone from eight early in 2012, to ten at the moment. And the audited financials showed revenue less than initially reported, and revenue DECLINED about 15% from the downward adjusted Q1 2013 to Q1 2014. 'Fast growing' claim??
- 2013 (or was it2012, time flies when having fun). Baristas branded ice cream announced, $500K worth of stock provided to the NY area distributor. 200+ stores distribution announced in NY area. Recent financials say nothing about ice cream as part of the business model (search on the word 'cream').
- Multiple dates. 'Uplisting' to senior NASDAQ exchange -- including a trading symbol acquired. But company comes no where close to meeting the financial requirements for uplisting (counter arguments encouraged, only truth should be published).
- May, 2014. Baristas-branded Tennessee sports bar to open by end of July, 2014. This hasn't happened yet.
But hopefully will happen soon, perhaps a short delay. But, recent history on 'openings' not helpful: A Jan 2014 announced the opening of a SW Florida coffee kiosk in 'early Q2,' hasn't happened yet.
And of course, there was the NJ kiosk opening announced in 2011 which never happened, but arguably that is water under a long lost (Hurricane Sandy) bridge.
Having said the above, the company did promise audited financials (OK, more than a year ago) but did deliver. What they showed, however, was a lot of 'dealing' between the company and its officers. For example:
- The unaudited financials never showed a receivable from key shareholders, but the audited ones do -- six figures!
- Yet in Q4, the key shareholders received 5M+ shares of preferred stock in exchange for 'debt' of $80K -- why wasn't said debt used to offset the receivable, as opposed to further diluting public shareholders?? (caveat: although preferred is convertible to common at 1:1, the financials point out that this is impossible since to do so would put common shares over the authorized level of 300K).
It is that kind of transaction which causes some to suggest that this is a scam. Again, counter arguments encouraged, I am just reading public documents perhaps I missed something.
