Don't get me wrong here, as I am in with 2.6 mil shares, but am I reading this wrong?:
It appears that Halifax will take the lead in the Asian market role and IGEX is merely a small part of that and is basically along for the ride on Halifax's coat tails?
Seems like the claim for a 10 year agreement was actually between Kina and Halifax, with IGEX merely a small part of the deal and may not have any deal other than with Halifax, but claiming that IGEX is the one with the deal {?).
Slight disclaimer to respond to earlier posts... I asked the admins to remove the posts after Halifax was brought up by another user. I was not aware of them used in a partnership (still verifying through their site on that) and did not ask the question to the general manager Michael. I'm still on the fence until I hear back that they have an agreement through Halifax for (keywords) changing from E-trade to IGEX (or insert other name) platform. Can't have a post up if reasonable doubt is injected later that shakes the foundation of the original claim so retracted it.
KINA in particular was chosen for a few reasons. 1. 8k filing from 2014 (To prove if it was indeed valid, scam companies do make false filings to give legitimacy so can never take an 8k filing as implicitly honest, always be skeptical within reason for any company. They may file just to pump up the price.) 2. Said deal with Kina was suppose to bring in revenue yet all we've seen so far is 10k give or take. Q2 filings prove to be the same it just casts a bigger shadow on the other 'deals' in generating revenue. I will gladly eat crow if Q2 yields a darn good reason why revenue is lacking (News event of 'oh hey we just started in july...' oh wait) 3. Wording in the PRs, deal between IGEX & Kina Securities. That heavily implies IGEX is involved and not using Halifax as a middleman. Yet can not find anything on Kina regarding a relationship with either IGEX or Halifax, search the sites or news releases from the companies and no mention. Its like a suspicious one sided affair.
Contacting a CEO of a company from which I'm trying to verify their PRs (sent out by him) yields no verification. Always go for the company mentioned in the PR to verify there. Presentation slides, PRs, etc... are all non-verifiable in my view. Skepticism is a good habit here.
Managing Director John O’Shea, said the slower than planned start was due to government changes to laws related to individuals and company’s transferring funds out of PNG. Adjustments have now been made and KINA commission in the last month exceeded estimation and will be booked at over $5000 for the month of June. O’shea added “ On top of the KINA income for the months of February, March and April we posted over $16,000 in trading revenues”.
The Q2 number better reflect the 5K mentioned in the Tradernation article for June otherwise what value are his PRs if numbers given are not accurate? Again, I will formally retract this stance after the second quarter 10q comes out and shows it. The key is the revenue grows more each month if its current amount now is just because some are on the client versus everyone? (Unsure)
Delay in transition from E-Trade to IGEX platform for Kina (H2 2015 alleged now due to laws, etc..)
TA, well not terribly important at this point but probably in my view generate a nasty surprise. /skeptical
Revenue from past deals? (Q2 may shed light on that but still suspect)
Bottom Line: I look at it this way, if I don't see revenue growth in Q2 and Q3 then I know the deals are highly suspect. I hold a bag from 28s and 33s as of today and hold no inclination to 'bash' it down. I try to look at it from a non-hype perspective to see PR issued, correlate info to performance, then judge. :)