Replies to post #17521 on Vystar Corp (VYST)

[MMMQA]

Doesn't that translate into 30 million in tax NOLs when they acquire Rotman's?

[TonyJoe1957]

That clause is required under US GAAP. Keeps the CPA auditor from getting sued. Chrysler had a comparable clause before Lee Iacocca took over as CEO and got Govt loans from Reagan and paid them off early. This is not to say that you should not be careful. I have flipped enough and continue to hold some free shares. Best to all! AJ

[spudge]

I read the same thing in every 10Q of an unprofitable company. EXAS for example. You really need to go back to school and learn. But thanks for pointing out the 31 million in accumulated operating losses, which will be used to offset future profits. KEK

[War Shark]

"Deficit of $31M" is an NOL! The NOL ("net operating loss" = tax writeoff) here is making the whole deal possible. Rotman gives up 25% of his store and saves $31M in taxes, gains access to Nasdaq, the most powerful capital engine in the history of the world! See you at $5. I know the Rotman family will be billionaires this time next year.

[stervc]

About the VYST “Going Concern” Statement…

The ”Going Concern” statement within their filings is of no major concern in my opinion. Most companies that are ”fully reporting” and file with the SEC on a regular basis have some kind of a ”going concern” statement or warning within their filings. This is nothing more than a formality that’s delivered as a safety precaution that companies use as a way to cover them for a “worst case scenario” situation if for some reason their company does not execute their business objectives and to be legally protected.

The ”going concern” statements that you see in numerous filings is also a way for a company to remain very conservative to make sure they don’t get into any trouble if for any reason anything within their filings or PRs are considered too forward thinking where shareholders could have felt that they might have been misled by the company.

I can tell you numerous stocks that have had major moves, all while having a Going concern Statement listed within their filings. It’s nothing more than a company being conservative in nature. This is why I think it is important to understand the intent behind such conservatism when these statements are within a company’s filings.

I’m not saying to ignore any “going concern” warnings within any company’s filings, but I am saying that they do not pose a negative threat that some might perceive.

Doing your own research and knowing what you hold is the solution to have a better understanding of just how important a “going concern” really is. After doing my own research… I have zero concerns here with VYST.

I think we will be better than fine here in VYST.

v/r
Sterling

[TonyJoe1957]

I will do this another way.
A negative working capital position REQUIRES a going concern disclosure statement. The most profitable trades on the planet are done when buying these stocks and they clear this issue. That is not to say you should not be cautious. Lee Iacocca took a salary of $1 per year and made about $15M, as I recall, from options, when Chrysler had a going concern disclosure. That was in the early 1980s, so $15M was worth quite a bit back then. Keep posting and stay well! AJ

[wolfden2018]

You get an "A" for effort, slick Willy.

[cjstocksup]

ALL big board companies give the same going concern warnings on all of their earnings reports also! Remember you are referring to the old VYST. VYST under new management and a new CEO Mr. Rotman is a new company ad you can add in the HUGE Rotmans Frunitur business that does over $35.00 to $40 million dollars in annual sales.