InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

z4lover

08/19/09 7:13 PM

#168927 RE: RainingPennies #168925

no worries. the OS is the important number the number you should be looking for in terms of the shares....

However there is going to be a wealth of information other than the OS on there.. I highly recommend taking a look through the Reuters report from the link in the ibox. It goes over all of this data from past 10q's and shows it in a pretty easy way to understand.

The reuters report after the 10k will be a very good tool for understanding the 10k if you aren't an expert in reading financial reports.
icon url

Spinosaurus

08/19/09 7:29 PM

#168936 RE: RainingPennies #168925

RP: If I may add my own comments to your question to Z. I do believe that mgmt. will in Subsequent Events section of 10k indicate the share current structure; and I believe that it will reflect that given in the 7/27 PR, to wit: 900/500.

Elsewhere in postings it has been indicated that the increase in A/S to 2.5 and 2.75 were so-called "pipeline" increases -- for whatever reason we will not know, after which the 900 A/S was in the "pipeline" and will be the figure in the SE in 10k. Of course, as Z said A/S is irrelevent for our purposes. It is the 500mil. O/S shares which we own and comprise the float (?),etc. It will be what the NSS are scared of if over 1 bil. exist the there is the MOASS. It has also been indicated elsewhere that events will occur in the Aug./Sept. time frame and not Oct. when the 10 Q comes out. I think mgmt. is anxious to get to the NASDAQ sooner than later. That said, I do think we will get some indication at time of 10Q in some PR possibly of sales for Aug. and estimated revenues for 2010 Q1 -- which will blow away all of 2009 fical yr. totals.

I hoping it will all come together sooner than later. Good luck.
icon url

Spinosaurus

08/19/09 7:52 PM

#168946 RE: RainingPennies #168925

RP: Ooops -- In my added comments to Z's answer I said at time of "10Q" there might be a PR to discuss the 2010 Q1 sales. I meant to say at the time of the "10k", not 10Q. Sorry to confuse. Didn't proofread.