Rubber Technology International (fka RTEK)

[KauaiPI]

razr~sorry you are so down on GolfD....and ME apparently ~grin

As for GolfD, you are now saying things to the effect that he and you are the only people on these boards that know how to read 10Q's.

...certainly not but we may be two of the few that actually READ the filings... note his post to CSA;

http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=RTEK&read=23751
---
CSA and YOafter9 Quick Accounting lesson:

What part of Net Operating Loss don't you understand.

There is no way you can funnel profits back into additional equipment purchases when you are operating at a loss. What they are doing is using money which they do not have into equipment. This money either has to be borrowed (thus increasing the loss) or by issuing equity (thus diluting the existing share value). I totally agree with your last statement:

What I don't agree with is the notes about trying to convert a lot of their loans into equity. That sounds like more dilution and more hands in the pie.

That is exactly what this company is doing.

This company is operating at a loss and paying the management very handsomely to do it. Depending on your investment strategy:

As an investment RUN RUN RUN RUN Away until the management can prove it can operate consistently in the black.

As a purely speculative play If your brokerage fees are low enough the stock price can not go much lower. IF you do not get greedy 3.5 cents to 5 cents is a 42.86% profit. HMMM
-----
OR;

http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=RTEK&read=23764
-----
I am interested in the recycling industry. I originally invested in the stock as an investment but then changed my investing strategy to speculation and won.

However with the IMO massive stock dilution over the past 18 months and the low margins in the tire crumbing business I will wait on the sidelines to see when the SB-2 is approved because then IMO we will see dumping by the debenture holders to get their money back. At that time I believe that the stock will be an interesting speculation as it should be around two cents.

CSA I do own a business. What I have done when business is bad is to stop paying myself to save capital. What I can not stand is to let false statements go unchallenged. This company can not invest profits when it has none.
-----
OR;
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=RTEK&read=23756
----
Let me see if I understand how to build a business RTEK style.

1. Pay myself, my wife (Anne G.) and other officers a decent monthly salary while losing money.
2. Hey there is no money to pay my salary(s) because of operating losses so I accrue the salary(s).
3. When I do need money I convert the accrued salary to shares at a sweet heart deal (at the time of the last conversion they were issued for 8 cents when the market value was 12 cents) thereby diluting the value of the other shareholders holdings.
4. Sell some of the newly acquired shares on the open market to cover my personal living expenses.
5. More time passes and I still need more money to pay my salary while the company continues losing money, but the share price is so low that step 3 and 4 is now longer a viable option so I issue convertible debentures to have money to pay my salary.
6. The conversion rate on the debentures are so good that a conversion could increase the number of outstanding shares by up to 20% Remember the conversion rate is 20% below the average market price for the previous five days.PS this is the second time this step has been done in less than two years.

When I first bought this stock there were less than 15,000,000 shares outstanding. Now there are 72,000,000 and counting.

CSA, with your accounting degree you should understand the concept of market capitalization

20 cents times 15,000,000 = $ 3,000,000
4 cents times 72,000,000 = $ 2,880,000

So CSA I leave you with this question, do I understand how to build a business RTEK style?
--------
.... note the last referenced post should help you answer the original point (NOT choice D IMO) and of these points by GolfD the only point that glares at me is the comment about Trevor paying his wife... I don't know that to be the case. The filings DO show commissions and such so maybe he IS for all we know, no?