ScripsAmerica Inc. (SCRCQ)

[coolerheadsprevail]

in my opinion when stock unlocks in January you will see very little selling because those who have shares unlocking believe in company and will hold until stock moves much higher.

Considering that the ~2,600,000 restricted shares that are scheduled to unlock on 1/7/14 and 1/11/14 belong to various members of the Core and other paid promoters as disclosed in SCRC's 2nd and 3rd Qtr Q's, on what basis do you formulate your "opinion" that in the history of the market, this is suddenly the one instance where paid promoters DON'T dump and actually become benevolent investors? I have never seen this happen in the market before and have no reason to believe that it will happen w/SCRC.

Specifically, as it pertains to the current situation w/SCRC, many of the paid promoters who are scheduled to have their restricted shares unlock on 1/7/14 and 1/11/14 are members of the Core who have already dumped the restricted shares that unlocked for them on 11/1/13 and 12/6/13, which cratered the sp from .30 down to .13 and then again from .20 down to .10. It is not easy to crater a sp down 50% TWICE within a span of only 6 weeks, but these Core members were exceptionally motivated enough to bid-whack virtually this entire period and unload stock as if SCRC was poison ivy.

So I am curious as to what basis you would form your opinion that these same Core members and other paid promoters would NOT behave the same way only a month later when their next tranche of free shares unlock?

As an example if I complain at the pharmacy about my paying $50 for a prescription refill my pharmacist tells me that same drug cost $1 to refill in india, so if one does not think the potential overseas is very lucrative then that person is missing the picture.

OMG, I sure hope that you are wrong! Because if this little parable of yours is true, then that would be a disaster for SCRC.

Think about it. The manufacturing cost per treatment of RapiMeds is the same regardless of whether the pallet of end-product ends up on the shelves of a WalMart here in the US or on the shelves of some drug store in China/India. Let's say this cost per treatment is 25 cents.

As with any product/service, the more expensive the end product costs to the consumer, the higher the markup (i.e. revenues, and ultimately margins) the manufacturer can charge thru the distributor of the product as it winds its way to the end-point retail outlet.

If a pharmacy in the US sells one dose of this treatment for $50, then this means that there is a big pie that can be divvied-up between the pharmacy, the distributor, and the manufacturer, and it is likely that the manufacturer (in this case SCRC) may be able to fetch $20/dose (I know that RapiMeds will not cost this much, but I am using the $50 for illustrative purposes only to maintain consistency with the example you used in your OP). So, for US sales, SCRC generates $20 in revenue per treatment/dose sold and recognizes a kick-ass margin on these sales.

Now, under your scenario, if a pharmacy in China or India sells one dose of the same product to a consumer for only $1 (USD), then the pie is virtually non-existent that the pharmacy, the distributor, and the manufacturer have to divvie-up. In this case, the manufacturer (i.e. SCRC) may only be able to fetch 0.50 per dose. So what this means is that for sales in China/India, SCRC generates only 50 cents in revenue per treatment/dose -- which is a far cry from the $20/dose generated from a US-based sale.

In fact, one could argue that the distributor for China/India will claim a much larger slice of the pie than a distributor in the US simply due to the staggeringly higher logistical costs involved in transporting product overseas, so 50 cents may even be a stretch.

Sure, SCRC could source a new manufacturing partner in China to service the far east region and possibly lower their unit cost from .25 down to say .10, but that is nothing considering that the end price to the consumer is still only $1.00 (USD). It is this low end-cost to the consumer that will forever stifle SCRC's revenues.

Again, this is all assuming that you know what you are talking about and that this scenario of yours is an accurate reflection of reality -- and your pharmacist would know more than me so I am willing to take his word on it.