Replies to post #20839 on Tonner One World Holdings Inc (TONR)

[majorpain]

Well. First. Most SCAMS as you call it don't sell product to Wal-Mart, Toys R Us and HEB. These major stores vet these companies out very well before doing business with them. Have you ordered a Dun and Bradstreet report on the company? I have and guess what? Almost perfect credit rating and have been verified by DNB as a legit company? What say you to that or is that just another pesky fact getting in the way of a good sob story?

Second. What accountability are you looking for? Have you called the company, emailed or other wise made inquiries?

Third. The stock price is reflecting what happens when a company has to grow during the period they had no sales. How do they do that? Duh? Investors!!!! And sometimes those investors make it really expensive to get their money but if used properly ... the business will grow and sales will happen. And guess what... Sales are no happening!!! If you doubt that then it may be a case of just not wanting to see the truth for what it is.

Fourth. If this isn't a good idea then maybe someone should tell Wal-Mart, Toys R Us and HEB that because I don't think they got the memo.

Fifth. Being envious of the money the execs make is typical and of people who want to make millions overnight on a small investment.

Sixth. I think anyone has the right to start and idea, finance it and make money from their efforts. What I am finding kinda funny is that while the OWOO people actually did it --- others spend a lot of time crying about them doing it instead of just going and doing it themselves.

It is a shame America is a place where wealth envy and hatred for people who put in the hard work and reap the rewards to is prevalent.

Just my OPIN!

[GOLDBUFFALO]

What is going on? The last round of folks that followed the paid pumpers (IRP's) are now stuck because they were listening to folks that were paid in shares. Dumping while pumping is what I like to refer to it as. The company has another R/S just around the corner for all the unawares, oh, IMO!

[Voices of Reason]

Since beginning sales in the 4th quarter of last year thru the 3rd quarter of this year (year one sales), the Company has sold $55,409 worth of dolls (Cynthia Bailey dolls are probably a small portion of this). After subtracting the cost of sales of $51,340, their gross margin before corporate G&A, overhead, marketing, salaries, etc was $4,069 (or about 7.3% gross margin per doll sold).

You asked "how many dolls have been sold" - the company does not come right out and say the actual numbers, but using some rough math of a sales price ranging from $14.99 (HEB sales price) to $21.95 (OWOO website sales price) for the Lena and Valencia line - you can calculate the quantity of dolls sold. This would equate to range of 2500 to 3700 dolls sold during the 1st year.

Your statement about the doll price being too high brings up an interesting problem for the company. Clearly from the latest 9 month statement where the gross margin, after sales, was a negative $1 - the company is literally giving away the dolls at cost to break into the market - I suspect the HEB $14.99 sales price is break-even for them.

At one point earlier this year, there was comments that a 75,000 doll inventory build for the holidays was forthcoming (presumably to fulfill the initial Walmart order?). At a 7.3% margin on a $21.95 sales price, you are looking at a gross margin of $120k if they are successful in selling all of the dolls out. Not too shabby one might think?

However, keep in mind the company has to pay for that inventory up front (presumably thru convertible debt stock sales), as well as pay for the Operating expenses ($3.7 million for 9 months of 2014), interest expenses, past due** loans (as of September 30, 2014, several of the convertible debentures are delinquent), salaries, advertising, etc, etc, etc....

**On November 4, 2014, we were named as a defendant in a civil lawsuit filed by Darling Capital, LLC, (“Darling”) a creditor of ours, in the New York Supreme Court, County of New York. The plaintiff filed a Motion For Summary Judgment in Lieu of Complaint the same day. The plaintiff alleges, among other things, that we defaulted on our obligations under a Convertible Promissory Note held by Darling. The complaint seeks, among other relief, judgment against us in the amount of $57,627