Replies to post #236535 on Winning Brands Corporation (WNBD)

[stallion70]

Great post!

—$WNBD

[satter]

Its possible I have been around longer than you and just decided to join here. I think if you would re-read my post you would discover I was not addressing traders, but rather future potential investors being lenders Eric needs. And if Eric does not attract them there is trouble never mind what you wrote. And if he does attract them but at what a dilution cost.

I find it remarkable that you now say the thing slowing this down was the delay of the VO when in fact after Eric revealed the name of the company it was you and others who said the shares would hit the moon on the following Monday. Yet here you are jumping on anyone who may suggest some people could be cautious for some of the reasons we mention.

Several things can stop the company from hitting multi pennies and beyond. How long have you been saying that. My crystal is not working and think yours is not also. Only time will tell.

I do not see those revenue streams like you do. Eric has some affiliate arrangement which means he makes some percentage likely small, when he makes a sale, Not HADV. He says there was a $60k covid test kit sale yet HADV reported none. He claims he will sale out on first run of wine yet has not announced receiving the license yet, courtship website still under construction, and most important is he selling that first run of wine. or is HADV and if he is, again what does mean as far as revenue considering he is an affiliate.

I will agree stocks might not move when you think they will and can move when not expected.

As far the CEO can be a scumbag that is fine, but the problem here is for some potential investor lenders, ( not Canouse Brs,) if they see the Court file where he deceived, defrauded, lied to that lender, to get that lender to make more loans, it's disqualifying. But yes for some lenders because they themselves are questionable they might not care. In the end it may or may not be a problem and your looking at it from traders and I was looking at it from potential investors. ( lenders ) Some will ask about past litigation and insist on seeing the complaints/docs. Some will just ask and accept whatever the answer is. Some won't care as long as they can enforce, seize the assets upon default, that is good enough for them.


Eric can look to get away from toxic notes, whatever, but if he has to he will engage in toxic notes and RS something we don't know yet and either does he. He will do what he has too to keep the company. He is not going to guarantee it will never happen, just say he right now its not on the table.


As I pointed out a few times, it seems he has written off debt by exercising some right he says he has, but also states that action could cause litigation if not amicable. I just get this message that sounds like its saying I am doing it, but if the other side does not agree it can lead to legal challenges.

Footnote 1: In 2013, a number of lenders and creditors entered into debt purchase agreements with ASC Recap LLC for the purpose of qualifying for conversion of debt into equity under Section 3(a)(10). In the debt purchase agreements between those 3rd. parties and ASC Recap, the onus was upon those parties to notify Winning Brands within 6 months if the arrangements between those 3rd. parties and ASC Recap lapsed. Winning Brands reserves the right to reclassify and write-off a portion of this debt under the applicable statutes of limitation or as a result of renegotiation by which financial obligations are replaced with non-financial consideration. The indicated residual balance has been reduced by $900K from the previous report and may be reduced further between ensuing quarterly or annual reports, and may be reclassified as additional paid-in capital to reflect relief from these obligations.

No new legal proceedings were notified within the reporting period to Sept 30, 2021. However, the process of debt reduction involves negotiating compromises which may result in litigation at any time if not resolved amicably

I find it odd that there was no new litigation but he felt compelled to state the above


I will repeat the old stuff is directed to the potential future investors as per lenders Eric will need, not traders. I do that as I see it as a most critical aspect to make the acquisition work or not. Believe it or not many acquisitions do not work. They are not inheritably good or bad.


Trade away as you see fit.

[teddibear]

Very well said wash3

[teddibear]

stickied

[Sat Naam]

nothing w/stop this...hitting multi-pennies&beyond except whatever's stopping it

[doogdilinger]

And yet almost a year later and Eric's yet to find his supposed better way to fund WNBD, but it certainly hasn't stopped him from tweeting out a chitstorm about how wonderful the next 4 years will be because by golly he's finally got it all figured out after being at it for a full decades and counting tick tick tick tick tick...