Recent

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

Scott's Liquid Gold Inc. Message Board

baaadapple 2933 posts  |  Last Activity: 5 hours ago Member since: Nov 21, 2001
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Lackluster

    by white7knob Apr 29, 2016 4:39 PM
    baaadapple baaadapple 5 hours ago Flag

    The Pakistan sub earnings were similar to that in September. After adding back amortization, parent company cash flow was pretty strong in September and earnings looked better than at the sub. The big new contract starts to really ramp up in the current quarter.

  • Reply to

    How high

    by hejkii Apr 29, 2016 9:07 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Apr 29, 2016 12:01 PM Flag

    This stock traded around $5.00 for quite a while last year before some bad earnings. Earnings are now back to the level when we traded at $5.00. I don't know about year end, but in the next month or two we should get back to $5.00.

  • Reply to

    If the price of gold keeps going up

    by baaadapple Mar 20, 2016 10:36 PM
    baaadapple baaadapple Apr 26, 2016 10:01 PM Flag

    The auction is May 2nd. We'll see if the price of gold has gone up enough to leave something for the shareholders. Not holding my breath, but it's possible.

  • GGP's largest tenants are Sears, JC Penney, Macy's and Bon Ton. Sears and Bon Ton are closing stores and are likely to be bankrupt within two years. JCP is struggling and Macy's is closing stores. Meanwhile most mall tenants are facing increasing competition online. If you back out their online sales, their bricks and mortar based same store sales are declining right now. GGP has one of the highest multiples to FFO of any REIT. This is due in part because renewals are being signed at around 10% higher than the prior lease. That does justify a high FFO multiple. However, as department stores start closing, and bricks and mortar retail shrinks more, this trend will come to an abrupt halt and reverse. The stock price will be cut in half. This is a secular story folks, don't get stuck with yesterday's business model.

  • Reply to

    Shareholder Newsletter

    by onedayracer Apr 21, 2016 11:35 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Apr 22, 2016 11:31 AM Flag

    He really didn't say much other than the guidance given a few months ago is still in effect. After what has happened to SUNE and VSLR, that however is good news.

  • Reply to

    Now I know why SUNW is weak..

    by johnnybohica Apr 12, 2016 11:03 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Apr 15, 2016 9:28 AM Flag

    They didn't wait a year. Get your facts right.

  • Reply to

    Now I know why SUNW is weak..

    by johnnybohica Apr 12, 2016 11:03 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Apr 14, 2016 11:23 PM Flag

    Moon you're way overstating this guys influence. He wrote a whole article about knowing why the stock was down. He attributed it to some stock options that were extended. Something that in fact had no impact because no one knew about it. The extension also turned out to be legit, so his argument was refuted.

  • baaadapple by baaadapple Apr 13, 2016 12:22 PM Flag

    The new solar design center is off to a great start. If they can prove this concept, I can see 5-10 more just in California generating $5-10 million a year each. And this is primarily for residential, the smaller part of their business right now.

  • Reply to

    Now I know why SUNW is weak..

    by johnnybohica Apr 12, 2016 11:03 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Apr 12, 2016 6:55 PM Flag

    Yes the whole 3D thing didn't work out. Saying they never planned to take it to market is conjecture at best. Reality is the 3D product no longer matters. This company is getting explosive growth from its new management team, all of whom except Nelson, arrived in the past two years. You need to look at this company as a solar installation company with 100% revenue growth right now.

  • Reply to

    SA article by Derrick Zierler

    by jimmye123 Mar 8, 2016 1:32 PM
    baaadapple baaadapple Apr 9, 2016 8:21 AM Flag

    So, who are the other horses?

  • baaadapple baaadapple Mar 31, 2016 9:15 AM Flag

    I think $100 million this year is very doable, and possibly $120 million. I don't believe $0.60 EPS is possible, that would be a 12% profit margin on $100 million. Contractors just don't get that kind of margins. I think we are looking at $0.15-$0.25 in 2016. But if the growth continues, the stock may get to $7.50 by year end. What I really like about SUNW is there appears to be nothing to stop their growth. SCTY and VSLR are the only other large players in this space and they mostly do leasing. That leaves the solar sales space to SUNW.

  • Reply to

    TERP 10k delay

    by tipperjade Mar 24, 2016 10:51 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Mar 24, 2016 12:14 PM Flag

    That may or may not be true, but TERP is in a much different situation than SUNE. SUNE has a negative net worth, massive debt, and is hemhoraging money. TERP has strong earnings and cash flow, and lots of net worth. Banks are likely to be forgiving to TERP, much less so SUNE.

  • Reply to

    Question for TERP holders

    by poundofweeds11 Mar 21, 2016 7:59 PM
    baaadapple baaadapple Mar 23, 2016 7:39 PM Flag

    Chances are, at the end of 20 years technology will be a lot more advanced and the solar panels will have a lot of wear. They still may have some value, though that value will be significantly diminished. That is because they will generate less electricity and the price per watt being paid will be much less. The question then is it worth signing a new contract? Will the new contract be for more than the cost of maintenance? In some cases yes, some no. I think there is a little value left after 20 years but not worth assuming when you buy TERP,

  • baaadapple baaadapple Mar 23, 2016 9:59 AM Flag

    With Tepper involved and the big management and board change last year, TERP is asserting its independence. However, the CEO needs to decide between SUNE and TERP.

  • Yes it will be messy, but unhooking from SUNE is the best thing for TERP right now. TERP needs to hire its own staff. The CEO needs to choose between SUNE and TERP. A SUNE BK will not affect TERP's revenues at all. They are mostly under long term contracts. It will impact expenses, but they might actually go down, once TERP hires its own staff. TERP will still have many opportunity to buy assets from other solar and wind manufacturers and finance companies. In fact being agnostic to where their new properties come from is probably a good thing. The connection with SUNE is the only thing holding TERP down right now. FREEDOM!

  • who knows there might be some shareholder value. Management has slowed down the bidding process in the hopes of getting something higher than total liabilities. At a price of $0.0016 its worth holding anyway.

  • Reply to

    New seeking alpha article out

    by ssandridge18 Mar 16, 2016 5:59 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Mar 16, 2016 9:17 PM Flag

    Oh pleeeease. Now your grasping at straws.

  • Reply to

    New seeking alpha article out

    by ssandridge18 Mar 16, 2016 5:59 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Mar 16, 2016 3:04 PM Flag

    Here is a copy of the second SA article's response to ssandridge's claim of unnecessary dilution.

    "I TALKED TO MANAGEMENT AND THE NEWS IS GOOD! What happened is the notes were, like I thought, to the sellers of Sunworks United who are now officers and insiders of SUNW. In the fall of 2014, SUNW announced another acquisition, this time of MD Energy, a company similar to Sunworks United. When that happened, all insiders were prohibited from buying, selling or exercising shares. The deal closed in March, 2015, but too late to meet the 3/31/15 deadline, due to an end of quarter blackout on insiders. No new shares were created. Existing shares convertible at $0.52 were extended to be fair to the insiders who didn't have the opportunity to convert at the $0.52 price."

    This fully explains the apparent dilution.

  • Reply to

    New seeking alpha article out

    by ssandridge18 Mar 16, 2016 5:59 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Mar 16, 2016 1:18 PM Flag

    There is not 1.4 million new shares. Those were the shares originally in the note. There was $750,000 on the note left and they were converted to 1.4 million shares as always intended. The only thing that changed was the conversion price, it went down from $1.50 (50% of the $3.00 recent price) to $0.52. Not good, but not much dilution.

  • Reply to

    New seeking alpha article out

    by ssandridge18 Mar 16, 2016 5:59 AM
    baaadapple baaadapple Mar 16, 2016 12:36 PM Flag

    Instead of childish taunts, perhaps you can explain why a 1% dilution of he shares supports the short position you have.

SLGD
1.20-0.06(-4.76%)Apr 29 3:57 PMEDT