PIT, WHAT???? Let me respond to your one comment that was relevant (although absurd), "Would you rather have 5 twenties or a single 100":
If you have a profitable company and you reduce the public float, the value per share will most likely go up, it would be nearly impossible for them to stay the same in a dynamic market. Small floats are great for short term and long term investors alike. I like VirTra's recent earnings as much as anyone but the shorts on this board, so don't read so much into one comment! Do your DD and don't gamble.
I think he was talking to me. His case that the eps is down due to dilution is a lie. It is up from last quarter, and from last year.
The true P/E is not nearly as low as 1.5 (this was due to non sales income), but it is still very low for a stock with this kind of recent growth -- and I am talking about earnings per share growth (eps). It has been growing, 6 record quarters, but wait until next quarter.
Stating that earnings per share are down due to increased sales costs, etc is another lie. For earnings, all that is relevant is:
"Net income from operations increased from $307,716 for 3rd quarter 2008 to $456,303 (not adding back Amortization Expense of $118,263(AE)) for 3rd quarter 2009. This is an increase in operating profit
The earnings in 3Q 2008 included $581,337 in "Forgiveness of debt income on litigation settlements" These are not real earnings, but gave an inflated eps number as of late. The truth is the eps is very good given the share price, and there has been no significant dilution since that which was used to pay down their debt.
Q3 2008: OS = 129,654,154
Q3 2009: OS = 142,031,154
The fact is EPS is up from lsat quarter (Q2) and up from Q3 of last year. Do the artihmetic.
I’m not sure that reply about revenue growth was to me, if you want to call me jack ass fine , like the other guy said just consistent somewhere and make your case. If your talking to me about reading skills I was looking for a verification on dilution and debt, not income growth, I don’t know how to slow it down for you.
You have no credit. Your facts need links.
Do you know how to calculate eps Nomad?
You conveniently left out OS for Q3 2009, and Q3 2008. Why don't you go ahead and include that?
Also, stop starting new discussions, you are difficult to pin down.
Here you go, jack-ass...DO YOU KNOW HOW TO READ??:
For the quarter ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, gross revenue grew 40.7% from $869,818 to a record $1,223,590, due to successful marketing and sales efforts and further market penetration of our brand.
General and administration costs are higher from $120,859 for the Q3 ended 2008 up to $393,466 for Q3 ended 2009. The main differences are $118,263 amortization expense, hiring additional sales staff, increased tradeshow expenses, and increased sales related travel.
Net income from operations increased from $307,716 for 3rd quarter 2008 to $456,303 (not adding back Amortization Expense of $118,263(AE)) for 3rd quarter 2009. This is an increase in operating profit
Net gain per share for the third quarter of 2009 was $.0027 compared to $.0066 per share in 2008.
OS share increase since Dec 31 2008 = 142,031,154 - 136,204,154 = 5.827 million --> NOT 20 million. This represents only 4.1% of OS shares.
earnings 3rd quarter = 364,468
earnings 2nd quarter = 279,602 (OS = 134,605,154)
If do the arithmetic, earnings per share has INCREASED --> NOT DECREASED as you stated. I think you know what you are talking about, so please stop distorting the facts.
Although earnings per share are very good, the last quarter PRs about Lockheed Martin, and many other sales suggest that next quarter will even out perform these last record quartersby a a very large factor.
What we have is a small company paying down it's debt (of which there is little remaining) with very good earnings and extremely good growth. It is very much undervalued now.
Please back up your arguments with facts that are CORRECT.
facts and numbers are stubborn things start showing them. . They issued 5.8 million shares this year. That’s less then the previous year 9.1
is this the convertible debt your talking about