Replies to post #47425 on Greenshift Corporation (GERS)

[nobody12378]

Thank you -- a lot to mull over as they say. You certainly have given the posters food for thought and fuel for discussion.

I-Hub contends that they could do nothing to stop the distasteful character assassinations. Price of living in America?

Perhaps we can meet at 717 MADISON PLACE, N.W. WASHINGTON D.C. 20439, sometime next year, or at a shareholder's meeting, or better, at a celebration of the Federal Circuit's validation of the patents and announcement of significant awarded damages in LAS VEGAS!!

Would it be possible to provide a link to this communication on the GreenShift website? Not everyone who may be interested in the company and this information will know to look here.

Thank you again.

NOBODY

[ice_n_ak]

Well written. An obvious display of experience with writing.
Word usage was concise and proper adjectives used to form the message of personal feelings by the writer.

An emphasis on detail of past/current process of Greenshift from the writers perspective.

Sifting out the facts it becomes obvious that there was a balance of 'we' and 'I'. Team player is portrayed.

Some objectivity as stated that show one side of dilution taken by the company in the past and backed up with reasons. (though, for past investors at the time of dilution and r/s, any reason does not matter as their investment was wiped out)

Overall, a good piece of writing with logical intersteps of information/reasoning for current and past decisions.

As a past and current investor, I enjoyed the read. In my opinion the company will persevere and 'we' just might reap some profit and 'I' for one, will be glad to see that.

[Harry Winston]

Kevin, thank you for the statement. It gives many people a basis for making a semi-informed decision. This is much better than the near-silence that the Greenshift shareholders have experienced for a very long time. For what it's worth, I hope that some potential investors in Greenshift common stock will decide to make a purchase next week, especially since Friday's closing price is well within the reach of many small investors.

This is part of the 10th paragraph of Greenshift's statement.

I’m disappointed in those that assert themselves in a public forum before reading our historical filings or asking basic questions to validate their assumptions.

This is part of the 5th paragraph of the same statement.

We preserved our core assets and we rebuilt our business, returning to profitability by 2012.

Q1. Is Greenshift's quarterly income (for any recent quarter) more than the company's expenses for the same quarter? In other words, is the company still profitable now?

Q2. Has Greenshift been consistently profitable since 2012, or has the company had some quarterly losses in the past six years?

Q3. Which is larger, Greenshift's assets or its' liabilities?


This is part of the 15th paragraph.

Attis’ plans are complimentary to everything we’ve ever done. They have been amassing a broad portfolio of biorefining technologies, and they’re working on some extremely exciting things, some of which build on and add to our technologies. Plastics. Adhesives. Drop-in fuels. Breakthroughs. All from biomass. We’re working together to build value through our joint venture, free of the constraints of our legacy debt and litigation, making more progress than we have in a decade.

Q4. In the absence of a ruling by the Appeals Court, who owns the patents that were issued to Greenshift? Who owns the licenses?

Q5. If the licenses were transferred to any other company, what compensation was given to Greenshift in exchange for the licenses? Has that transfer been completed (has Greenshift received the compensation that was offered)?

Q6. What is your estimate of the monetary value of the patents? Can you estimate the value of each patent individually?

Q7. Have there been any new license deals that benefit the Greenshift Corporation?

Q8. Why was the Appeals Court filing made in a way that is invisible to PACER?

[jobynimble]

Good letter and conference call...

[Harry Winston]

This is part of the 10th paragraph of Greenshift's statement.

I’m disappointed in those that assert themselves in a public forum before reading our historical filings or asking basic questions to validate their assumptions.

During the past calendar year, I asked many questions, but the only answers I got came from other posters on this message board, not from the company.

Again, thank you, Kevin, for giving us some information.

[KaiZang]

Thanks Kevin. Really great to see the in-depth and honest response to update shareholders going fwd.

It would be great if u could update the BTZO board as well - since it's been 2 years from last filings or word from the company there as well. Suspension ended on 9/24, but would be great to know what the plan is moving fwd or if BTZO still owns any part of GERS. Last filing stated 80% but if less or none at all would be helpful to know.
Thanks again for the post. Very pleased to see that.

[investorpro1]

Great post on your part. Once the smoke clears I do see progress. Hope to see you on better terms in the future. One question is BTZO still in the mix? Thanks

[Cobra Kai]

Greenshift/Kevin

Kevin, Greenshift is an interesting company- thank you for your recent explanations on the board a few weeks ago. A few quick questions that come to mind if you can provide feedback on any of them.

1.) Can you provide clarification on Bitzio & Greenshift present day relationship or lack thereof.

From one of the 10-Q Filings
The Company's parent, Bitzio, Inc. ("Bitzio"), paid $2.5 million to the Company which was drawn from a loan of $2.9 million made to Bitzio by TCA Global Credit Master Fund, LP ("TCA"). The loan was made on December 31, 2015

I've seen a few casual claims that Bitzio has been removed from the deal- one of the claims being done on a blog *not run by the company. There is also no mention of Bitzio in any transactions related to ATTIS-JV- However I haven't seen anything from Greenshift directly unless I may have missed it. Seems like significant information loosely discussed- If you look on this Board-Greenshift- most would likely post BTZO is not involved on BTZO board it looks like many think they still have an 80% interest

2.) Greenshift & ATIS have a JV and plan to work together- they fund Greenshift-but Greenshift also has plans to fund ATTIS/JV via a debenture (10 million) - Given ATTIS cash position last seen in filings June 30,
2018- $278,993 and a variety of technologies/services/industries they look to be pursuing- cash may be at a premium-Laboratory-5g Wireless- etc. is there concern over the short term funding needed to launch this JV as well as the long-term repayment of the JV? The ethanol industry is a crowded one with lots of big players- Attis looks newer to the ethanol industry- Given Greenshift struggles over time of fighting a war of attrition against companies much larger with superior resources-If I were to play devils advocate for a moment I wonder why none of the larger players targeted greenshift's patents to add to there Intellectual Property portfolio or why Greenshift didn't team up with a larger industry player to help provide those missing resources that it has been lacking financially. Attis may be the best opportunity but looking at this from an amateur standpoint it may appear as if the industry titans didn't have interest in the technology in 2018.

Thank you in advance!

[madeindet]

Can the SEC delist our company due to lack of filing and what does that mean for shareholders?

[madeindet]

“Our shareholders may consider the result to have been worth the wait when the filings do come out. But, yes, I understand and agree. They need to be filed.”

[Harry Winston]

We’re working on our filings while we finalize restructuring agreements with our lenders. While we’re targeting year-end to get everything done, our reports will be delayed if execution of the restructuring agreements is delayed. If that occurs, it will be to mitigate the risk of dilution.

We regret any confusion that may cause. Transparency is obviously a legitimate concern. It has been almost two years since our last filing, and I empathize with the impact. There would be no void to fill with speculation if there was no void to fill. That said, bringing our filings current carries an immediate risk of dilution from lenders that can be expected to convert their debt into stock as soon as they can deposit, clear, and sell our shares - before the Federal Circuit’s decision, before we make progress building value again, and before buyers come to the table.

Again, I'm going to reprint part of the above statement, with boldfacing added to emphasize it.

"... bringing our filings current carries an immediate risk of dilution from lenders that can be expected to convert their debt into stock as soon as they can deposit, clear, and sell our shares ...."

This statement from the Greenshift Corporation was made on September 28, 2018. I looked up the historical data for this stock on that date, using NASDAQ's website. During the trading week that began on Monday the 24th and ended on Friday the 28th, the only trades happened on Monday. The total trading volume that day was 7,500 shares. The opening price, high price, low price, and closing price on Monday the 24th was $0.052 or 5.2¢/share, and it was maintained throughout the rest of the week because there were no trades for the rest of that week. If those 7,500 shares were traded by only one buyer and seller on Monday the 24th, then $390 changed hands, give or take a brokerage commission. That was a realistic amount to spend on this stock at that time, and a realistic amount to expect to receive from a buyer if you were a seller at that time. In fact, from October 8th until November 26th, about seven weeks, only eight trading days had some trades.

That trading price on September 24th, 5.2¢/share, is just under half of today's closing price, just under a dime per share. I'm going to make four conclusions based on the above facts.

1. Any debt holder who did what Kevin was afraid he would do (convert, deposit, clear, and sell his shares) made a foolish decision. He sold his new stock for a nickel (or less, given a very illiquid market) and lost out on the opportunity to hold stock that almost doubled in value since late September with the potential for more gains.

2. Any debt holder who converted and held his new shares made a wise decision, for the same rational reason. The price has doubled since late September.

3. Kevin has less need to worry about the debt holders. As the price goes up, they will receive fewer and fewer shares if they do convert their debt into stock.

4. Because there is less need for Kevin to worry about the actions that could be taken by the debt holders, he now has a bigger obligation to bring the SEC filings up-to-date. The increased stock price is giving him a less valid excuse to delay writing those reports and sending them in to the SEC.

[jobynimble]

Good luck tomorrow...

[oldrogue]

Skunk has posted on his site...maybe important to say the least!

Oldrogue.