ScripsAmerica Inc. (SCRCQ)

[coolerheadsprevail]

Looks to be heading back down to 10th AVE.

@cjmeyer,

I think you misunderstood JOSEPH ZAMPETTI and his "inner circle" (LOL!) of fellow Section 17(b)-violators when they were pumping to high heaven for the past couple of months that the sp was imminently going to 25th Street.

You see, most amateurs naively assumed that they were talking in terms of USD when in fact they were talking in terms of the local currency in Aruba, the Aruban Florin (currency code AWG).

At today's FX rate, .14 in USD is equivalent to .25 in AWG.

So they were dead-on, as the sp did indeed stop at 25th Street in Aruba today!!!



*********************

Why the 15% decline today? Heavy volume, lots of selling...this is very discouraging as I thought it had finally turned the corner. Are the notes still flushing through or is it something more such as the CVS news? Any thoughts on where it goes from here...

@Chaser79,

There are no more notes other than the fixed rate convert notes that convert at a price of .17 (which have not yet matured, although the terms of the notes entitle the noteholders to convert at anytime prior to maturity). And all other discounted financier shares priced up thru .14 have materially flushed thru.

IMO, the selling today was comprised of a combination of the following:

(1)
JOEY Z and his merry band of .05 PIPE-holders.

(2)
Technical traders who are religiously following the indicators, which are increasingly telling them to sell.

(3)
Amateur retail flippers who were fatigued to begin with and, once the selling began, saw it as the last straw that broke the camel's back and decided to go play in a different sandbox.

Part of this group are the retail shareholders who bought in at .13x-14x, when the first big base was formed (remember, 4M shares were churned over at this level), so those who didn't already flip for profits likely sold out as the sp spiraled down today as they did not want their green to turn to red.

(4)
Retail investors (both longs and traders), who see the uncertainty that the 8K presented, and elected to de-risk. Remember, at these sp levels, even 1M shares is not a lot of $$$, so 4-6 traders/investors de-risking by unloading partial tranches (but still maintaining a core position) could have driven today's action.

The rest of this week will be telling, though, and should give us a clearer picture of the Street's true opinion of SCRC...



*********************

Cvs has scared the weak people out. Short term blip.

People are forgetting the two new pharmacies which will be coming aboard. They will more than make up the loss of Cvs to main avenue.

@martin,

How in the world can a statement like this even be made???

Does any non-insider know what the two target phamacies are?

Does any non-insider know how much each of these target pharmacies do in revenues each year?

Does any non-insider know what the net income of these target pharmacies are each year?

Does any non-insider know what the COGS is for these target pharmacies? What about Selling expenses? G&A expenses? Interest Exp and other debt service costs?

Do you know what the debt load is of these target pharmacies?

And, most importantly, does any non-insider know what percentage of an equity stake SCRC is planning to acquire, assuming that it actually goes thru with the deals and that the announcement of the "intention" to acquire equity stakes was not simply a fluff attempt to stem the impact of the bad news re: CVS/Caremark?

The answer to all of these questions is a clear, unequivocal, and resounding "NO".

Claiming at this time that they will more than make up for the loss of CVS is akin to claiming that the sp will be at .25 by Valentine's Day -- oh, snap!!!


*********************

Do we know what the % of Main Ave is CVS? Also, the 8K wasn't specific as to the terms of the break. Is it immediate or over a period of time? Does the contract stipulate that CVS needs to give a specific notice? Will CVS be bound to the contract until arbitration is completed? Until these are answered, calling sellers "weak" is a bit premature.

@Newtoscrc,

(1)
No outsiders know exactly what % of Main Ave revenues were routed thru CVS/Caremark. However, as I stated in a prior post, the fact that it was 8-K'd tells the Street that it was material. And, apparently, that's all the Street needed to know.

(2)
As I also mentioned in a prior post, it was noteworthy that the 8-K used different language than the PR (it is noteworthy because 90% of the time, companies use the same language for both and simply copy/paste from one to the other). Although absent from the 8-K, the PR disclosed that the effective termination date that CVS/Caremark notified Main Ave of was March 13, 2015.

As such, MAR-2015 approved orders as well as APR-2015 approved orders will tell the Street exactly how much CVS/Caremark impacted Main Ave -- MAR because we will see half a month of impact, and APR because it will give us a full month's worth of numbers to confirm any assumptions that may have been made due to MAR being only a partially-impacted month.

So get ready to hear a bunch of excuses about extended closures due to St. Patrick's Day, Palm Sunday, April Fool's Day, Easter, Tax Day, Daylight Savings, Earth Day, etc...

(3)
No one knows what specific terms/provisions/conditions are in the Agreement. As I mentioned in a prior post, if the contract stipulates that CVS/Caremark has the right to terminate the agreement at the time they did so and under the manner in which they did so (i.e. proper method and timing of notice given? satisfaction of any triggers/conditions? etc), then this will be an open/shut case for the arbitrator.

(4)
CVS/Caremark will not be bound. As stated in the PR, CVS/Caremark has already stated that they will cease reimbursements effective 3/13/15. Should SCRC win this arbitration hearing, it is possible that the arbitrator may award some form of quasi-damages, BUT it all depends on the terms of the contract and the extent of indemnification (if any) a losing party in arbitration may be liable for. Some contracts specify full indemnification while others specify that no indemnification is required but simply that the contract resume again under the original terms. There is no set black & white rule/law on this -- it is completely contingent upon the language of each contract.

(5)
I concur with your statement re: the continuous name-calling of shareholders who choose to recognize unquantifiable risk.



*********************

If it is just CVS related then why didn't the sell-off happen Friday when the news was announced?

@Chaser79,

(1)
Although the PR came out in the middle of the trading day, the 8-K came out at the end of it (possibly AH), and SEC filings typically have a much larger audience.

(2)
My thoughts are that although this specific PR involved CVS/Caremark, the two big concerns in the market were/are: (A) How much CVS/Caremark will impact Main Ave, which is SCRC's cash cow; and (2) Whether CVS/Caremark is simply the first, and that other insurance companies and pharmacy benefits managers will be the next dominos to fall.