Replies to post #112375 on Bebida Beverage Company (BBDA)

[OlafKjelldsen]

I would say:

I'd like to thank you for an honest, unemotional, respectful and well-thought out response to those questions.

1. Because they are selling to wholesalers, who in turn sell to C-Stores/Gas stations, etc., and there just isn't enough locations to brag about. So what if they list 40 stores that you can buy the product...they aren't located where most of us can get to them. That is why they have the product online...I just got some. I think they hope that with recent efforts they will be able to "brag" about more locations, at which time they will tell us about them.

Personally, I think they would do well to list any locations the product is available due to the perception that it isn't available anywhere. However, if the locations are very limited, it reinforces the perception that the products are generally unavailable, which is contrary to what the company works to make you think.

I'm sure they do hope the video will spur greater sales, but online sales just aren't going to be that high in volume regardless of the promotion. I'm sure some people will buy a drink online, but buying something to drink over the computer is an incongruous and non-intuitive notion to most people. The whole idea of the product exposure in the video would be to provoke an impulse buy when it's sighted in a store. I doubt much of anyone is going to make a big effort to track down a beverage they saw someone holding in a video, no matter who it is or bother tracking down a store manager to ask them to get it. It's just not that compelling - there's no "gotta have it" factor such as there might be for a designer fashion item or something.

My issue with the "at which time they will tell us" approach is that it's just more non-specific future promise from a company that has consistently disappointed people who made the mistake of expecting them to come through.

The t/a is gagged because

I think your reasoning on why the TA is gagged is plausible, but that's really not the issue. If the TA is gagged, it's because the company, which claims total transparency, is hiding what its doing from its shareholders - the very people who stand to be affected most strongly by what they're doing in secret. It's clandestine and deceptive.

Bottom line though for me is that the J-Lo video has to turn things around for them...it gives them a significant Marketing token, something to sell to wholesalers with what I think is a niche product.

I agree and that's a great term (marketing token), but let's not forget this is exactly the same premise used to justify the expenditure on racing. Among a different group of people, a presence in one of NASCAR's top three series is every bit as big a deal as JLo holding a can in a video.

We were told of all the distributors who signed up and all the great contacts that were made as a result of the NASCAR involvement, but time has passed and there is nothing to show for it. If new distributors were signed up and deals made, then wouldn't their web page about availability have been updated already with the greatly increased number of outlets? Or did all the money spent on NASCAR, even if it's really only the $300K or so in the 2010 annual report, amount to product on the shelves of only a few dozen stores? The risk is there that the JLo video will also result in a similarly insignificant increase in retail outlets for the product. Does that in turn grant permission to leave the "where can I get it" page blank because there's only 80 stores instead of 40? At what point does the realization of the complete lack of cost-effectiveness of this high-profile marketing of a low-profile product come into play?

Along with this, don't forget that at the outset, Koma Unwind (and all Bebevco products) were described as already having a leg up in distribution via the ability to take advantage of Potencia's large, existing network of distributors and stores. That seems to be in conflict with the fact that you can't get it (or Potencia) anywhere. We have been told in no uncertain terms about literally thousands of stores carrying the product - but none are on the page telling where to get it? Why? Here's an example copied directly from a Bebevco PR from 2009:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=58058702

Also, sales numbers, even though they are argueable, appear to be ramping up.

I'm not sure I know what to make of this statement. How do you figure they are 'ramping up' other than the numbers in the 2010 annual statement? If that's the sole source of information on sales, then there is no actual "appearance" involved unless you are choosing to believe (and not question) the numbers in the statement. If you don't believe them, then the "appearance" would be that there are no appreciable sales.

1. Decent Sales figures.
2. Potential thin trading.
3. J-Lo exposure.

All recent developments that if played properly...they could erase some of the pain of the past.

I'm going to have to call you on this.

1. Decent sales figures are not a development, they are an unsubstantiated rumor. Ditto for Q1 sales figures if they aren't audited by a third party.
2. Potential anything is not a development, either, since if it's "potential" it hasn't happened yet. Thin trading could be the result of total lack of interest or justified wariness and suspicion, as much as anything else.
3.JLo exposure is tantamount to NASCAR exposure, just a different (albeit more appropriate) audience. More people have viewed the video than saw the truck circling the track during NASCAR events live and on TV, but there is nothing concrete that indicates the 'exposure' has or will translate to greater sales. In fact, the general lack of easy availability will tend to negate a lot of potential sales.

Anyway, thanks for being willing to have an actual discussion instead of just avoiding questions or laughing at and taunting people who don't agree with you.