They talk about their so called vision of the future. They call the shorts names. But they never like to discuss the added profit of gmcr by buying from its own licensees. Its legit, isn't it, so why can't it be discuss.
Some pumper even went for the dirty trick of assigning one star to the thread so it doesn't show up in a lot of people's screen!
May be the pumpers tries to mask the topic until they have unloaded all their holdings?
boy , i want to short this thing so bad i cant stand it , have you seen the naked float? wow, i am trying to figure when the current shorts might get sqeezed and then buy a whole s-load of short puts, this thing is fire but it reminds me of crispy creme these fools got a couple million for operating expenses, one hiccup and this thing drops like a rock, whats your setup mate?
Absolutely. It's beginning its topping out phase now, where the the high short interest enables large holders to bleed out of positions and the stock treads water. I estimate within 2-3 quarters the real growth rate will become clear. Of course it will be far less than what the pumpers are saying, and the stock will collapse. It happens with every single one of these consumer growth stocks, and this one will be no different. Just a matter of time...
the shorts in this thread are brain dead. Make sure your comments can be understood. Royalties, K-Cups, Mcdonalds' newmans own brand in NE all make GMCR a good long term bet for another few months
I think you are mistaken about the longs not wanting to discuss this. It was "discussed" to death in the Barron's thread here, it ended with me and a couple others posting facts and our resident basher Jesse/Warren/?? (he uses multiple IDs) running away.
So let's discuss this, again...
GMCR makes 60% of all K-Cups sold, and earns a 6.4 cent royalty on the remaining 40% made by authorized suppliers. So, just to be clear, you think they should ONLY sell items they manufacturer themselves and ignore offering a broader selection for consumers?
The reason the royalty issue has not been discussed on and on, is it seems to have been satisfactorily answered and put to bed—except for you guys who keep holding on to it. You accuse GMCR/Keurig of buying product from the licensees in order to generate more royalty revenue to Keurig. However, this theory is defeated by three things:
1. If Keurig was artificially inflating its buys from licensees, then the costs of buying the goods would more than offset the 6 cents per kcup royalty. It would not result in artificial profits, it would actually make the numbers worse from an accounting standpoint.
2. If this was happening, inventory at GMCR/Keurig would balloon. However, based on last SEC quarterly filing, compared to prior year quarter, inventory WENT DOWN. The March 2009 qtr total inventory was 71.5 million (18.1 raw materials and 71.5m finished goods) and in March 2008 it was 85.3m (19.4 in raw materials and 65.8 in finished goods). In other words, with all this growth and added production by GMCR, inventory has not increased at all!
3. When kcups are sold into retail stores such as BedBathBeyond, etc, the sales are all handled by the Keurig fulfillment partner. That means that whether it is Caribou, Emeril, Diedrich brands, whatever, the sales go through Keurig (via the fulfillment partner) into these big retail channels. That is part of the licensing deal apparently. So, Keurig already has the contacts with the big stores, and the licensee is assured its’ product is in the lineup being presented to the store. What good would it do to be able to produce K-cups if you did not have the contacts and sales force to get them into BB&B, etc. The stores deal with Keurig regardless of what brand of kcup they want to order. Plus, this lets Keurig track the amount of product shipped by each licensee, so Keurig gets to ensure the royalty is calculated correctly.