At a quick glance, Terra Tech also looks interesting. Like Growlife, it is another infrastructure play, but it seems to have a second division that sell consumer end products (flowers, joints, oils, extracts, etc.). Those consumables however are regulated on a state-by-state basis.
They have 350M shares outstanding (which it pretty high and 3x+ more than Growlife)
Other thnt the argument about which company leaders are lying and which are not, what is it about Terra Tech's business model that you found compelling enough to invest your money into them?
Based on their focus on oils, waxes, and shatter (a new term for me), it seems that they are positioning themselves for the vape consumer. Is that a reasonable generalization?
Their 10Q shows that they are about as financially unstable and unprofitable as Growlife, so why do you see growth potential in Terra Tech and not in Growlife? Not being argumentative, I am just being lazy as you seem to have already done your Due Diligence research into Terra Tech.
From Terra Tech 10Q (5/16/2016)
"We intend to raise additional capital through equity and debt financing as needed, although there cannot be any assurance that such funds will be available to us on acceptable terms, on an acceptable schedule, or at all.
We will be required to raise additional funds through public or private financing, additional collaborative relationships or other arrangements until we are able to raise revenues to a point of positive cash flow. We believe our existing and available capital resources will be sufficient to satisfy our funding requirements through the second quarter of 2016. We are evaluating various options to further reduce our cash requirements to operate at a reduced rate, as well as options to raise additional funds, including obtaining loans and selling common stock. There is no guarantee that we will be able to generate enough revenue and/or raise capital to support its operations."
@Semperfi, I think that kidcar is trying to say that a1:100 reverse split would reduce the 1.12 billion outstanding share count to 11.2 million shares and raise the share price up to 1.00/sh +. Both are levels where an institutional investor could consider buying the stock (and some index funds would be forced to buy based on their covenants). Both of those are good things for Growlife. However, to your point, a reverse split is not viewed favorably by the market and typically the share price takes a short term hit after a reverse split, but it is not always a death knell, especially when the outstanding share count is being reduced from such astronomical levels.
So far, only GWPH (a UK based company), CBDS, and CANN have emerged as significant players in the pot sector from a stock market perspective. They only have 21.8, 17.48, and 15.5 million shares outstanding respectively. Growlife will need to get their outstanding shares down near those levels to get investor's attention. Maybe a 1:100 reverse split is too aggressive but the share count will have to be reduced significantly if this stock is going to do anything except be pumped n dumped as news cycles generate excitement and associated speculation in the sector. Will Growlife benefit from those 20 elections? will those new markets have any real impact on Growlife's share price? It is hard to say. California's election results could be THE game-changer.
One advantage that Growlife has is that infrastructure supplies are not regulated at a state level like the consumer product (pot) is and so they have a potential for a national presence if they can leverage the opportunity. However unlike the consumer pot plays, which are consumables, Growlife's products are basically one-time purchases. That said, the farm equipment infrastructure industry (also one-time purchases) has had some good investment opportunities emerge. Maybe indoor pot farming equipment will follow a similar path?