OK- everybody-
Take a minute to read the "reasons" why SPNG was given the Agressive rating.
Mergers-acquisitions, Expense Reconition, and Intangible Assets account for about 80% of that poor rating.
Lets look deeper:
1) Mergers-acquisitions: Since this was based off the recent Q, this must be referring to the mergers and reverse mergers when SPNG was initially being listed back 3 years ago. What relevance does this have on anything now? None.
2) Expense Recognition / Depreciation: If you read the Q, SPNG's main assets that are being depreciated are the office furniture it owns and the molds used to make the sponges. How much of SPNG's assets does this account for? Less than 1%.
3) Intangible Assets: SPNG's listed intangibles are it's trademarks. Were they valued a little high? Maybe. But at under 300,000$, again representing like 1% of SPNG's value, it's really immaterial.
So basically, this report focuses it's entire ratings on what maybe 2% or less of SPNG's value. Wow, what a good job they did. I'm blown away.
That's the problem with these automated Robo-Studies, they are so mechanical, they're almost always wrong. Just like TheStreet.com has been rating SPNG a sell since .006. If I had listened their Robo-Ratings, and no paid attention to what was really going on, I could have missed out on this thing. +2000% since.
In short, automated rating systems are pretty much useless, as in this case, once you take a minute to see why the rating was the way it was.
~Cheez
I can has?
I can has? 
