InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 57
Posts 3280
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/10/2013

Re: 2obee1 post# 256576

Tuesday, 09/01/2015 12:13:39 AM

Tuesday, September 01, 2015 12:13:39 AM

Post# of 347742
Good post Obee

Also, I have been saying for a long time that VitaminFizz just isn't profitable yet. If you took the time to understand the last Quarterly report you would have understood what I was trying to say. Scott's PR today states that it cost so much money to produce, that we aren't making money on it, and so they have to now partner it up with another brand. 


While being a staple, VitaminFIZZ is very capital intensive when launching into new markets, and we feel it requires a complimentary brand that can support the corporate monthly burn rate. I have internally nicknamed this new brand a "house" brand but believe the moniker "work horse" brand is more fitting. This new brand will be many things including 1.) already developed, 2.) cash flow positive and 3.) easily integrated into our existing infrastructure network 



I guess though this brings up again a criticism that some of us have had for some time on why it made no sense to suddenly expand to the UK. People kept insisting that it was just an easy production for a distributor and then a check at a profit comes back in upon delivery of the shipment, but this was not the case based on the statement that it is costly to enter a new market, plus the UK required reformulation of the product from the US version. Focusing on getting SoCal towards being on stable financial footing first, especially if they used 1 billion extra shares for Avanzar at shareholders' expense would have been a better idea IMO. The company may ultimately be successful, but shareholders are financing the cash burn and being diluted.