Replies to post #11387 on CSMG Technologies, Inc (fka CTGI)

[rocketeer357]

Good points....at the time of the original IPO PR (Aug. 2006?), the CO2 separator was still on the simmer....not as prominent as LTC, but not as seemingly dead as it is now. CTUM wasn't nearly the one-trick pony that it has become since that time. The LTC process has come a long way since that time and has eclipsed any other CTUM patents/products both in financial potential and importance to the company.

I have emailed the company in the past asking about the Landfill Gas end of the business and have never received a reply. My question was simple: "Is the CTUM CO2 separator currently producing commercial amounts of gas anywhere in the world?" I for one, while a big fan of DR, have never understood why, if the technology was so advanced, CTUM didn't get a plant up and running ANYWHERE. Think of the amazing PR and investor attention a successful LFG plant would produce!! The cost of installation would be offset within weeks of the first news of commercial gas production, if only by hungry JV money eager to get a piece of the green action.

That said, at some point, DR will need to raise some cash for promotion/production/expansion of LTC. He's been running this company on fumes, not shares, for lots of years now. At this late date, when approval happens, (and since the hard work will be finished), I'd like to see the company develop and market LTC themselves: there's hardly a need for a JV partner now that the ground work has been laid.

As for the IPO, I guess there's always the possibility of cashing out on your CTUM shares and buying the LTC shares directly if you don't see any value beyond the LTC end of the biz.

[maddogs]

It would seem your asking for reasons or justifications for current expectations based on what has been pr'd about LTC
and it's planned IPO/spinoff.

A combination of factors apply here as I see it.

One, as you obviously see, is the large potential of the LTC.
This will grow on its merits and the ability of the Co. to
market effectively. This will require apprx 25 mill, hence
the original outline on IPO, (5 mill o/s @ $5.) Do the math
and one can see how far share count would have to go up in
Ctum, especially if when a addon of matching shares were to
be awarded to present holders. That is not a "seemingly"
appraisal, just a cold count share vs share.

Two, as most all lower volume IPO's(sharecounts) perform
better than larger, and recent IPO's in this medical tool
area have shown this in particular, this will facilitate the
best opportunity for LTC to capitalize and at a higher
listing than the OTCBB. No offence and due respect but
thinking a bank loan to a non revenue producing(current)situ
that equals already current cap levels is, to say the least,
a grand expectation. Banks simply will not do that.

As far as some fear of "insiders get rich and screw the
shareholders", Managment has recieved , in large part, wages
in the form of CTUM shares, for about NINE YEARS! If
management abandons its shareholders, they abandon their
apprx. 20% share count also. This IPO structure gives
Ctum holders the benifits of owning the LTC a/s, apprx
$65 mill worth or book of apprx $2 for Ctum shares.

So the co. can avoid "Major dilution" only by spinoff IPO,
with low structure. This included apprx. 12 mill LTC shares
a/s held by Ctum AND shared earnings. (I have asked). To
this date, and for 9 years we haven't seen the shares
"pissed away",, why start now?

In my appaisal, managment has done what it needs to do to assure the best opportunity for success for all parties.

[lowman]

Ovidius, perhaps you are not invested in CTUM so much because of management's ability to perform?

Granted, the CO2 technology has not panned out as hoped/expected, this in no part due to directly to management, but rather due to outside forces. It should not be forgotten that an obscure company such as CSMG Technologies not only sat down with, but hammered out a contract with a giant known as Dupont. Just the fact that DR was able to do this, exhibits an ability hardly 1 in 1000 non-revenue producing OTC companies are capable of. This warrants a respect all of it's own and can easily be considered an impressive feat, which could lead one to expect more of these impressives feats to occur, which in truth, already has....the LTC IPO.

As maddogs has pointed out, LTC would require SUBSTANTIAL funds to 'get off the ground', which CTUM could not acquire easily on it's own, without MASSIVE dilution.

That DR has gained the support of Empire is an impressive feat, even if Empire might not be a major player in finance. The committment Empire has made to LTC is integral to the success of LTC, and if a spin-off is required, to please Empire's needs, so's to separate technologies from the 'mother company', than so be it.

Your post would lead one to believe that shareholders should 'get something for nothing'. Something tells me that's not going to happen. Perhaps it's the way the world works?

IMO, the IPO with Empire was either a stroke of good luck, or one of genius. I side with the latter. CTUM gains the support (here and now) without the dilution (here and now) to CTUM shareholders.

Perspective is what it appears you are at a loss for. Consider how much ground CTUM has gained with LTC, while at the same time your own shares have increased in value. Then consider that it has taken considerable funds to get LTC this far, and very few came from the CTUM a/s.

Personally, while I am not ecstatic about a retrace from previous highs, nonetheless, I am more than content with the overall direction that DR is moving forward.

Also, though I am certainly not 'expecting' shares in LTC, I do believe it may still be a bit early to say CTUM shareholders will NOT receive some type of spin-off dividend. Either way though, the overall marketcap of the two companies would remain the same (exactly what the market will bear). The only difference is, more of the marketcap will remain in the company's (CTUM) hands, than shareholders hands.

Since DR has thus far exhibited superior management skills, I am not slighted in receiving no LTC shares. I trust management will leverage the CSMG portion of LTC to it's and our advantage.

And yes, trust can easily be misplaced. This is why we use things as a basis, such as 9 years without a r/s and still only 35M shares o/s, MANY of which are held by insiders (what affects us, affects them also).