% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.


you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • Eggplant101 Eggplant101 Jul 2, 2008 1:43 PM Flag

    empire H2O

    Suedannam, what do you suppose EWCR paid BWTR for this contract? Do you think they paid in cash, or in some kind of funny money/paper? Bear in mind, most of the revenue that BWTR books in any given period isn't even billed to its 'customers', let alone collected as cash. EWCR is a scam -- it's CEO is the former CEO of BWTR. ALL of its assets were obtained from BWTR last December in exchange for stock. BWTR is the largest shareholder of EWCR. It's a scam. Along with the canal they 'purchased' from BWTR, they assumed a whole bunch of obligations. EWCR's total revenues in 1Q08 were $11,000. It's a joke. Even the mention of the water crisis in California in their press release is clearly just part of a pump and dump scheme. They barely have a whiff of a business. Go read their SEC filings. BWTR is a scam too, IMO.

    Have a nice day.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • ca water has always been about rights, and that seems to be where ewcr has planted its flag...acquiring rights. i'm not a fan of the transactions for stock either, but let's not assume this is a fraud just because there is an exchange of shares between companies. clean drinking water is an inelastic resource.

      • 1 Reply to maggiebarr9696
      • Suedannam and Maggiebarr9696, I think you guys misunderstand my point. I have not argued that CA doesn't have a water problem. My argument is simply that BWTR and EWCR are not a way to play it. My argument rests on these facts:
        1) BWTR burns cash and was hyped as a water play, but in reality has a business built on money losing deals.
        2) EWCR has no business, per se. 1Q08 revenue was only $11,000. It's new CEO is the same guy responsible for BWTR being hyped as something it is not, and for putting in place the deals that cost BWTR so much money (and is still costing it cash)
        3) deals between BWTR and EWCR are not arms-length transactions, and should not be viewed as such.

        Because CA has a water supply crisis, both EWCR and BWTR can eaily be hyped as 'water plays', but the reality is that the businesses they operate are awful, both companies are rife with insider dealings and illusory transactions, and are unworthy of the valuations implied by their stock prices. That's not the same thing as saying CA does not have a water supply crisis.

    • I've never been a fan of the ewcr deal. I've always said that. But, if they get potable water running down that canal - it is going to be very significant. The city owns 3 of the 4 canals.

      I think you are deluding yourself if you think the ca water crisis is pump and dump.
      So far, you don't even have any proof of a pump and dump. Other than your short position. No one is buying ewcr. Bwtr can't even sell shares for a year.

      If I were you, I'd go to google and get some rss feeds on the water issue in Ca.