Actually that information is incorrect. Walmart actually issued a purchase order to owoo to buy the dolls to inventory. Tru did not. That is a drop ship deal.
And it makes for walmart and tru to offer the dolls online first and its vest for owoo because their marketing efforts dont have to be spread this trying to support stores in different locations.
Let the dolls prove themselves online and then move them into stores.
I actually agree with you. It makes no sense for walmart or tru to start out with pg dolls on shelves at first. It takes up space from other current sellers. Testing online means walmart and tru had enough interest to start with owoo.
That interest will build just like it did wirh heb and after that BAM! PG dolls on walmart and tru shelves.
Physical shelf space is really what the company needs. Having done so at HEB (and now Fiesta) is a good start, although it would appear that they have done so as a loss leader (reference gross margin of negative $1 for the 1st nine months of 2014). Having the dolls on Toys R Us or Walmart's website does no one any good, if one is not familiar with the OWOO brand of dolls and have no idea of their name recognition (like Barbie) to search for them. Pulling up a multicultural doll of color on a search of their websites will pull up Barbie and other brand names that consumers are familiar with. It does not mean they will not get some spill over, but from a price standpoint, their dolls are not a value proposition compared to other brand name dolls. The dolls are already not profitable as evidence from the latest quarterly reports.
At the end of the day as you and others have pointed out, it was never about the doll sales, but rather the selling of the stock. Clearly from the multi-million dollar hole the company has dug for itself, that gravy train is over - there is no conceivable way the company can ever sell enough dolls, while simultaneously funding ongoing operations and the bloated overhead that they have become addicted to. The numbers simply do not support it, no matter how much PR and sub-penny temporary price swings that they induce.
Regarding feeding the ongoing need for cash, it is perplexing to me that the company would have defaulted on the two relatively small loans while simultaneously receiving the big infusion of cash from a new lender in October: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/one-world-doll-project-announces-130311461.html ??? Reading thru the complaints filed in the lawsuits, Ms. Melton was willing to settle the debt at a pretty good discount to what was owed and in fact signed a settlement agreement, only to default on that a few days later. Why would the company do that when their publically stated goal was to pay off toxic loans before they were converted? By defaulting, they basically scare off any new funding, which will inevitably be needed to fund the ongoing operations and aspirations to grow sales. A real head scratcher to me....meanwhile, break out the popcorn as we are headed back to last week's numbers ($0.0012)...
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
