Replies to post #81077 on Bots Inc (BTZI)

[Perfectson]

I'll try to summarize these because I know you'll debate this until the cow s come home without admitting you're wrong.


1.

Contracts are sales! When any company announces a contract they are announcing a sale of their product or services. The problem you have is that you don't want to hear it.

no they aren't, and we've seen historically where these "contracts" are actually just bids or leads and never become sales. Show me sales and show me the subsequent revs on the 10K


2.

So what?

exactly, no rebuttal . after preaching turnkey solutions for a year , we get a "so what" when Paul and yourself were wrong.


3.

Here's where you're totally off base. What "you consider" is an opinion, not a fact. Rob Kressa has been in the business since 2006. Anyone working in this sector that long would be considered a de facto expert. There are no barriers to a contractor building a room. There are plenty of barriers to a contractor convincing a commercial grow operator that they have the expertise to navigate the permitting and legal complexity involved in building for this sector or that they can help with finding the right seed crops or environmental controls or staffing the facility or can get them the best deal on the paneling or greenhouse supplies or help with finding financing. All of which mCig is now capable of doing. Go ahead and try to convince us that these are not barriers to a vanilla contractor. LMAO

there's no barriers to entries, period. that's fact. There's no "de factor expert" when everyone is basically starting a new. there were little to no grow stations because they were mostly illegal , now that it's legalized, you will see actual innovation in the space, which makes Rob Kressa no longer a "de facto" expert. IT's like MMA back in the 90's when anyone could get in the ring, now you have actual experts because of the "legalization" of MMA, now the barriers to get into the sport is lot higher. This is the same thing that's happening to MJ, but right now the barriers are still low until the industry become proliferated and monetized.


4.

The CannaPod bids turned into the contracts mCig has today.

No company will tell you much or anything about contracts that they are bidding on since that would give their competitors an advantage. You're asking for something you know they won't provide and them condemning them for it.

no they didn't. I know for a fact that the majority of those qualified leads did not follow MCIG, why don't you reach out to cannapods and ask them before you make erraneous statements that you don't know anything about.



5.

There is no contradiction or lie here. mCig decided to focus on large commercial projects and that made CannaPods unhappy because they weren't getting any immediate results. Yes CannaPods broke the agreement because of Paul's decision.

there is a huge contradiction, Cannapods "Felt" mcig was not delivering or executing and severed ties with MCIG. To act like Paul did something to sever the ties is a lie. To even hint that MCIG was focusing on other large commerical projects and that caused the rift is flat out wrong. YOu yourself in the previous post said that these were two different sets of busienss (large commercial projects and cannapods), which they could have co-existing because cannapods needed a sales team to work the pipeline. So you're totally making stuff up right now. Why don't you ask Paul or Cannapods what happened...I'm sure both stories line up and Paul will admit that their was a failure on his end to up hold the agreement with Cannapods (of working and executing the sales pipeline).

6.

There are very good reasons to believe options # 1) and 3) were the explanation but virtually nothing pointing to option 2) which is what you seem to be convinced is the cause. Paul was deep in negotiations with Malecon/Omni during that quarter. If he saw the merger coming and realized that Omni did not want to have anything to do with the VitaCig product line, he would have wanted to sell off as much inventory and purchase contracts as possible, even if it meant deep discounts. In fact, I recall reading in one of the financials that Paul personally bought some of VTCQ's obsolete stock, probably at cost or less. There were also steep online order discounts available to customers during that period. Also, have you considered that $12,924 was held in reserve in their merchant account for doubtful debt? Isn't this reflected in revenues?

#2 is the same thing MCIG is doing. It's hilarious you're discounting #2, when that's the only one that MCIG has done in the past. They have never done #1 or #3, I posted those because those are other accounting tricks companies use but #2 is the one that MCIG has used.

Your explanations make no sense since VCIG is with MCIG now, why would he want to get rid of inventory of product he was going to sell through MCIG. YOu're reaching

No the $12k would not be posted in revenue. Doubtful accounts/bad debt expense is booked in expenses not against revenue and the double sided entry is a contra to accounts receiveable. So you're reaching yet again without knowing what you're talking about. Instead of guessing, why don't you put two and two together. MCIG has shown a propensity of using both stock and their product for exchange for services rendered, it's not far fetched for them to have utilized this again in Q4 and propped up the Q4 revenues in doing so or they gave away their product, either way it's a scam move.


7.

mCig shareholders have ended up owning 9% of Omni, a company that has much more potential for immediate ROI. I'd say it worked out quite well for us.

we lost the valuation of VCIG when they spun it off and they have yet to show us value on that investment.

tell me what potential OMni has, when you haven't even seen a 10Q or 10K from them...in fact they have not fully PR'd anything , you're guessing and speculating again.


8.

Works for me and most shareholders. OMHE is up 300% since the deal went through

but down overall


9.

Because they get mCig to do most of the work and don't have to share ownership with underwriters and brokerages which could be much more demanding on their growth plans and management structure. They also inherit a ready made market for their shares.

of course that's not how an IPO works, again if this was worht $15m they would have IPO'd and gotten as much value out of raising money for the comapny. The way they did, they raised 0 money and saved a minimum amount for doing so. YOu do a reverse merger when you are worth anything and have no market to create value. So hard for me to believe OMHE is a $15m company jsut from the route they took to get to market.


10.

What universe were you living in? mCig didn't get to $.92 based on sales of their $10 vaporizers. Of course there was a bubble. We all got carried away on expectations. Once it reverted to a more rational valuation I encouraged people to stay the course because it was a legitimate company with real products and business plans which would eventually pay off, while you and others were perpetually using baseless assumptions and flawed logic to argue that it was a scam. We're still having that argument.

there was no bubble, they scammed people into thinking they were going to be able to sell huge amount of retail vaporizers...you can call it a bubblea all you want. The other MJ stocks were in a bubble, they had no product, no sales, and basically were put in a bubble. MCIG just had lofty expectations and talked about their sales plan and going to NYSE etc etc. That's not a bubble, they rose because of the serious plans Paul laid out...once it was realized they weren't hitting their targets and the 10Qs came out it dropped.

and i think we were right, this was a scam - and they have since gotten out of the MCIG vaporizer market. It was a scam and worthless product and I called that early.




11.

Now were getting closer to agreeing. We've both had missed calls. My main issue is with your accusation that mCig is lying. You argue that everything is a lie if it doesn't happen exactly as planned. A lie involves intent to deceive and you have no way of knowing the intent of mCig management. Business plans change and evolve. The test is whether they result in additional revenue, which in mCig's case has happened consistently for three years with zero debt.

I've reported my conversations with Paul. He's been quite transparent with me and is the first to admit that he's made some wrong calls. In fact, much of his problems stem from a desire to be too transparent and to let shareholders know his thinking before the plans are solidified. You call these lies. To me they indicate a CEO who's willing to change directions and take the heat whenever one of his initiatives doesn't work out as planned. Yes, it's frustrating. But it's not dishonest.

B.S.

when they decide to change plans, at what point are they letting shareholders know? LOL@being to transparent. Listen, when CAnnapods deal fell - he put out a PR ( a bit late IMO) and was transparent about CAnnapods severing ties and that was true. I don't expect him to call himself out for not executing. But that was 1 deal - all the others have been surrounded with some shroud of mystery even the ones like the "securties company" which was PR'd but not clear. Pulling out of MCIG vaporizers hasn't been clear, all the failures have not been transparent. If this was a big boy company, they woulnd't be able to get away with half of this stuff. But taht's why we are on the OTC boards.