Replies to post #80299 on Rightsmile, Inc. (RIGH)

[FullDeck]

Multiple $RIGH FACTS:

(Paired with your alleged "false statements")

Fact #1

RIGH's revenues are Mom and Pop grocery store levels. They'd be laughed off of the TV show "Shark Tank"

https://www.otciq.com/otciq/ajax/showFinancialReportById.pdf?id=129668


As for "increased revenue", the numbers are so small as to be irrelevant. And they are not supported by the reported increase in number of tests on the BG website so are therefore suspect as to their origin.

And the losses continue to pile up- an accumulated deficit of $3,643,576 as of December 31 2013. The 2014 totals will only be higher, increasing the likelihood it can not continue as a "going concern":

https://www.otciq.com/otciq/ajax/showFinancialReportById.pdf?id=129668


Fact #2:

LOTS of penny-stock scams do stock re-purchases followed by reverse splits. They only need to increase their reverse multiple to compensate.

See #10 in
"Toxic Financing". Why $RIGH is a "failed business"...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=108275566

10. The CEO decides to start investing in the company by purchasing assets, starting a new service (or website), and releasing PRs via Marketwire! Some of the PRs talk about how $20,000 was spent to lower CHIT’s debt, they are looking at moving to a new exchange (all pink sheet stocks say this), they’ve secured new financing (another loan), the float is only 400,000 because he just retired 50,000 shares and still owns %55 of the company. Whatever they can say to get an investor.

Besides, a reverse-split isn't the only way out. The preferred Moffitt gambit, as demonstrated in JMCP/JMON and GRCO is to issue "restricted shares" in a "new" company (think Genius Biotech).

In RIGH's case, 90% of these shares would go to Angel and puppet Tuzzolino who would have no trouble covering the cost of getting an attorney opinion letter allowing them to trade the shares, while retail investors hold pieces of paper not worth the money it would cost to monetize them. Assuming there is even a market for them.

And moreover.... really. Relying on email assurances that there will be no reverse split? Please.

And has Angel ever provided the promised followup details from this exchange of emails? (See link and screenshot below)

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=107085744


That was 9 months ago!!

So enough with the empty assurances.

FACT #3:

BudGenius could undercut the competition from now to eternity and it wouldn't catch up even if RIGH CEO Aaron "Angel" Stanz REALLY HAD A LAB!

A lemonade stand is never going to catch up with Minute Maid no matter how cheap their price.

An honest observer just has to compare the volumes:

SEE: "So how did SCLabs test 130 times more cannabis... "
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109949948

California may be the eventual "honey-pot" of cannabis testing, but BudGenius is stuck in the La Brea Tar Pits:



Best to all of good intentions.

[stemcell]

False statements about righ are just too funny...

False statement #1:
Quote:
It's a given that "BudGenius" is a failed business.

67 tests in 1st 60 days 2015 is a hair above 2 tests per day, $700/week sounds like failed business to me. With unaudited fins Angel could be making numbers up anyway, things could be much worse than he depicts in the fins. He announced last august that wells was doing the quarterly, wells not signing them could indicate Angel is cooking the books big time.

Response: All one has to do is look at the financials

agreed! (just because sally sold 2 lemonades a day more than last month doesn't mean she's going to Harvard on her earnings, Angel was on track to lose almost $100,000 in 2014 which sure sounds like failure to me.

False statement #2:
Quote:
Maybe a reverse-split

??????? Where is anything written in stone that positively no reverse split? Statement says "maybe" and could not be more true! 30 billion authorized is so large that a reverse split will always be in the conversation. Every CEO in similar situation promises "no reverse split" and then gives excuse for doing it anyway.

False statement #3.
Quote:
BG has no chance of competing against the Big Boys in the Cannabis testing space, e.g. SCLabs, Steep Hill, CannLabs, and tens of others bigger than BudGenius.

Response: BG is undercutting the competition. $50 bucks a strain is less than 1/2 of what these top labs, with high overhead, charge.

Why false? Because Angel only charges $50 for the "most comprehensive reporting package in the industry?" roflmao angel only charges $50 because he has no overhead, competition prices accordingly because they have real labs, real employees with degrees doing the testing. Even with no overhead Angel is still red every quarter and not even close to profitable. At Angel's price you would think dispensaries would be lining up and buying dozens of tests per day, I seriously doubt only Ihubbers are wise to the fact that righ is all smoke and mirrors and the lab doesn't exist. Dispensaries are also wise to Angel, that's why he only gets business from mostly cooperatives and dispensaries that have residential houses as their address and can't be found on the internet.