Replies to post #6283 on Shearson Financial Network (fka SHSNQ)

[wickw50]

CM,
a good quote from your post:

Trading for a living is about eating and survival.

[Riverboat1]

cotton: You are unfortunately missing one very big point, WE DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, SAY OR DO. It looks as though you have a hard time grasping this fact, so I thought I'd put in writing.

R

[littlejohn]

cm,,,I will leave the trading to those much better at it than myself...Just looks like anything below around 3 cents is below the median of the share price over the last 3 months...Many who buy any dillution at a higher price will stay until it moves above that...It looks like one cd funder could put an average of 235,000 shares a day into play or about 4.7 million per month if I have read the agreements correctly...If the share price is above .025 during the month then it looks like the company saves on the interest cost...So I figure somebody has a reason to see the price below that level...But not the company or shareholders...Some of these company prices move mysteriously at times...Yahoo stats for the company are still over 14 cents/share low for the book value if you use the recent I-box share count figure...The best time of the year is coming very soon for the home mortgage business...RPT looks like they have done better early in the year based on their past results...So, all-in-all, the business plan looks to be shaping up for a balance in the revenue and hopefully earnings also on the near term horizon...Still could be a little further out before the price recovers much...But maybe a plan of buying low as it moves along will pay off...Best of luck...LJ

[wheels10bager]

I am long again with SFNN....JOKE...Why would you be long if you know so much about DILUTION of shares...so why are you here!!!!!!and by the way smart-man "shares" aren't diluted if it has increas in revenue to off-set increase of shares...how do you think YHOO got where there at

[rheddle]

You repeat yourself, so I am also going to repeat a point.

Companies come to the stockmarket principally to raise money for growth. There are other benefits as well, but raising money to grow is the principal reason, because it allows companies to raise cash for acquisitions that would be difficult to raise from existing revenues alone. It also means companies can raise cash without taking on debt.

It would be hard, therefore, to name many companies - if any at all - that have come to market and never sold any shares to raise cash. The important point for (long term) shareholders is what is done with the cash.

If it is used for sensible acquisition of companies that, once absorbed into the existing business, create a group of businesses that are able to work effectively together towards a position of strength in the market to grow faster than / at the expense of competitors, then that is money well spent.

Additionally, if you have X number of shares out there and acquire two companies that triple the revenues of the company in exchange for increasing the number of shares by a factor of 2 (i.e. you have three times as many shares as you started with and the revenues are also three times what they were when you started) then no backward step has been taken in terms of dilution.

It is easy to scare people by mentioning dilution, but bad dilution is a company that comes out with fluff PR after fluff PR, has 100 billion AS and are constantly adding to the OS and / or float with no real shareholder gain.

What we have seen with SFNN is the company acquire businesses and give the previous owners a shareholding in the new company. Not what I would call toxic financing.

Now for the positive:

Revenues for the SFNN businesses are growing nicely year on year (including taking the debt forgiveness into account) and that is expected to continue when the next set of numbers come out. What will happen to costs when the next numbers come out? The real bonus will be if costs stay pretty much the same or even fall while SFNN increases overall revenues.

[ada]

why would share holders consent to increasing number of shares?
isn't this NOT in their best interest? ie: dilution