The funniest part is it's being based off a general example of a reason in an Investopedia definition. Yes, every filing for every period in the years I've followed MINE has had an extension filed.
I agree with your assessment of the sparkling category. For one, based on how Coffed Boost and Vitamin Fizz have been played off in the past, the company will always talk about the products as a huge success in any situation, which makes the forward looking statements and analysis difficult to rely on for realistic expectations.
Also, there is a demand for sparkling water products, but you're right on the level of competition. Trying to find a way to stand out is good, but the new branding they are trying to do with caffeine and labelling seems like it is just going to be appealing to the market as diet soda with vitamins. Even if there's a niche for that, it seems like they're trying to appeal to get national chains rather than having a specific agreement in place, like was insinuated in earlier company communications. If that's where things are at, a lot of money would be needed to launch the products successfully in a competative market and there would still need to be an actual path built to earning more revenue, meaning way more dilution to pay for it.
AI
