Report is due on the 31St but I am guessing they will file a NT and then file at the end of that period.
I know you continue to add. I think you are gone ng to end up with one heck of a lss but maybe you will vet some bumps along the way to take advantage of
Ferrari - does that mean you are aggressively adding to your positon as Bruce is or still sitting on the same 80K with the bloated cost basis?
Have you met either Adamson or Veal?
I wont speak for other accredited investors. I am waiting for 4Q numbers and specifics on retail chain/Japan.
unfortunately he often has had no answers on very basic, fundamental questions such as those. is the PR firm to find new EECP partners? clients? patients? that is what marketing is for. PR for a public company is to advertise to WS/potential investors on the viability of investing ones capital with that company. i have spoken to people at their past IR/PR firms that got it but it was clear that those past firms could NOT get that through Ma/mgmt's head.
public companies are competing for private capital and must prove that their company provides a more attractive return for that capital than another option. PR firms should assist the company in getting that message to informed/active investors and lead those investors to the company to do more specific, targeted research to decide whether to invest.
did Ma just start talking about something else at that point...?
i fully understand dilution and i also understand the risk of the company executing and driving cash flow to eliminate the notes to stem/eliminate further dilution.
they had all inventory locked up with TCA, they had that entire financial situation hanging over their head, the supplier lawsuit, little to no cash, and then a stream of toxic lending that would be coming due. not the best leverage for anyone looking for financing. most lenders at that level become predatory and look for full control due to risk of failure. the company was put in a tight spot (some of their doing and i will still contend much to not their doing). regardless - they have still managed to continue, launch a new product, run production, and fill orders. whether they get the national chain or get Japan past regulatory hurdles remains to be seen.
while production costs for an A&E show of that type are minimal, they still are going to do some DD before spending the money so as to not have to scrap the show if the company goes under. the network had enough confidence to follow through with the filming.
you can continue to harp on the toxic financing but until the company generates SALES to prove the viability of the products - they are NOT going to get traditional lending especially with the shape they were/are in. further, there is no way to generate sales with no product so they have to get money to produce product to sell to generate revenues and prove sell through and viability. it is a chicken and egg and definitely a slippery slope. whether they take the short term toxic loan or an "angel investor" that wants 60-70% of the company - either one provides significant risks to the owners/founders and existing shareholders. either way - they still need to execute. we can debate execution but unless you had an attractive alternative for them to secure cash in that situation - it is beating a dead horse.
that is a cop out and you know it. either make an argument or dont but dont give me that my eyes are closed BS. my eyes are absolutely wide open and i have personally given Ma every opportunity to keep them open.
PSK agreement may bear fruit in the future but i do not like the terms and do not trust the partnership. that is a separate issue and has to do more with my dealings with chinese firms vs the actual contents of the JV agreement. while it is certainly too early to pass judgement on this agreement, it is NOT too early for BIOX and MobiCare.
what are you focusing on that will push the PPS higher in the future? the company keeps returning record revenues and the share price declines.
the company has increased their product line and service offerings and the share price declines.
the company has dramatically increased it exposure/participation worldwide in supposedly key medical trade shows and the share price declines (not to mention that Ma can not answer a simple question about the efficacy/impact of these events on the pipeline).
the company has restructured its sales force several times and the share price declines.
so what are you focusing on that you believe will increase the share price? more importantly - why isnt the company aggressively communicating with shareholders and potential new investors about those items that will increase the top AND bottom lines which would make the matter moot?
liguy - do you know what that makes your current shares worth...? do you realize the multiple this stock will have to hit for you to ever reach break even? unfortunately your chance for returns slip slided away a long time ago. trading after the R/s will more than likely be very swift and go down even faster than the decline to $0.0001.
bruce - that remains a very open ended question and will be entirely dependent on each investors' individual circumstance. that being said - i would counter with - if buying today - what is the realistic time frame for a return on investment and what is the risk/reward scenario for doing so?
the company will continue to see massive dilution based on the last several 8Ks (increase in AS, convertible debt offerings, convertible salaries, and tenets of the lottery deal). the company has had 4 quarters of severely declining revenue and has alluded to that all but disappearing in their last PR due to focusing all resources on lottery business. it doesnt take a cynic to consider that all of the Jifu revenues were front loaded to hit the $4MM mark to receive the 50MM shares (before the OS/AS ballooned). it also doesnt take a cynic to argue that EVERY product/deal that the company has touched has been an abysmal failure (Mach5, smart watch, Jifu acquisition). Jifu was the only one that produced revenues of any magnitude and those have all but disappeared 12 months after the deal was finalized. so - why should there be any faith put in mgmt to execute on the lottery business?
along those lines - considering continued dilution, no revenues, history of failures, and no revenues - what is the real potential for the lottery business to impact XCLL's top and bottom line in the near and long term? 80MM shares were offered in the deal with 40MM being contingent on getting a license and 10MM contingent on reaching the USD equivalent of $6-7K in revenues. do you really believe the company will hit the next three revenue milestones to give the sellers their 10MM shares at each tier? if the company really believed that - why was this deal not BACKLOADED to have the majority of the shares hit AFTER major milestones instead of perfunctory ones?
i think the 4Q14/10K is going to be a stinker and there will be further price erosion.
there have been others who have been much more critical and boisterous than i - both on here and during shareholder meetings. my discontent has been clear, specific, and transparent. the lack of transparency by the current mgmt/BOD has directly and specifically created this discontent. i am not alone. they have lost the support of many long term shareholders - some large ones that have moved on. they continue to lose support based on the sellers still out numbering buyers.
i will accept your position with respect to the company.
now - will you lay out the position to keep current mgmt/BOD in place considering the share price performance, lack of transparency (specifically around numbers coming from BIOX acquisitions, numbers on MobiCare, and lack of specifics concerning recent EECP JV), not being able to monetize GEHC agreement (by keeping SG&A in line and/or increasing margins inside the GEHC deal, all while exponentially increasing their compensation? i have asked the board several times to provide a coherent, detailed counter argument to the above and have yet to receive any. where is the correlation between shareholder performance and fiduciary responsibility? where is the correlation between insider compensation and shareholder performance?
if you or others can clearly articulate that - i will gladly accept my argument missing something important. more importantly, if the company themselves would specifically and ardently address these issues - this would become a moot point. telling shareholders to "trust us", "your money is in good hands," "things take time" or similar platitudes no longer cut it after 6 years. i do not know how long you have been around but i was a firm supporter of Ma and the strategy early on. it produced results and specifically - a solid 2011. however, since then, it has become bloated, unfocused, and M&A strategy has been a failure.
i also am not adding to my position or adjusting my cost basis right now as i previously stated due to the volatility and share redistribution. i dont see mgmt releasing anything in this firestorm or the next couple of weeks and at the current rate, this easily could go down to $0.0001-$0.0003. if it does - especially in the $0.0001 - i will buy heavily and readjust my cost basis. at that price point, i can recoup my original percentage basis and have a significant tax adjustment on the prior shares (that will be substantially devalued/marginalized by the assumed R/s). if the company failed to deliver on the deals or the 4Q14 is a bust - i will have a much smaller loss on the new shares than the existing. however, the old shares have to be regarded as a sunk cost when evaluating the potential going forward with the new share structure. this will all be dependent on the extend the OS ultimately increases and the terms of the eventual R/s.
however, if the fundamentals of the company havent changed and they are on the verge of moving forward and/or hitting that $5MM revenue target - one shouldnt consider the sunk cost when applying capital going forward (except where the tax implications are involved). however, if the fundamentals change, mgmt fails to deliver on the announced deals in the works, then it makes no sense to invest further.
this is lost on the majority who are looking for a quick flip or to make a killing with no understanding of the risks. i have always answered questions on how i evaluate my decisions or questions on my numbers to those who were interested. for those that attacked with no basis, i ignored when it was clear they had no interest in constructive debate. as far as pumping - that is absurd. i have sold very few shares since i started investing in the company (less than 2%)and these sells were simply to free money to buy another stock prior to moving cash. i very rarely "trade" stocks.
thank you. it remains high risk/high reward but the share structure change has definitely swayed the risk. i have been the naysayer to more stocks than being positive but this one for me has been somewhat unique. i have bought several cases and have passed them out to family, friends, and colleagues and asked for genuine opinions. ironically, the recovery shot has gotten much stronger reviews and passionate responses. i have a lot of professionals in my circle that apparently like to go on a bender but still have to get up and perform the next day. however, this IS the target market for the recovery shot.
the energy shot has been different. however, that is mostly because few people i have handed them out to ever used energy drinks/shots (myself included). i never had tried a 5Hr until after HJOE released the energy shot. i ended up trying all of the top 10 (in terms of reported revenues) just to compare/contrast (mostly taste and jitters as i have nothing to compare to in terms of "performance" of other brands as i had no direct experience). the little feedback i got on the performance side was positive usually around the "no crash" or "no jitters" that the others created.
this combined with the compensation structure and the specific items i have stated made this attractive to me from a risk/reward despite the ominous share structure issue that future dilution could cause. i have always clearly stated the risk was mgmt execution on key deals, becoming cash flow positive/sustaining, and eliminating CD prior to these terms coming due. if they did - investors would drive demand, raise the price, and drastically prevent further dilution.
this is still the case to a certain degree but substantial dilution has already taken and will accelerate due to lack of demand from current investors and potential investors waiting to see when the dust clears and/or firm PRs from the company.
resellerguy - what is your position relative to being a shareholder and affiliation with the company?
have you ever been employed by, retained by, contracted by Vasomedical or any of its affiliates or have had any personal or professional relationships with any of the current or past Vasomedical employees, management, or directors? i clearly stated that i have had none of the above.
if you want to continue this conversation - unequivocally state your position and any bias/interests.
as i stated previously, while the party that sent me the unsolicited email has no legal claim to restrict dissemination, it also isnt worth the hassle for me to be challenged on that claim in court which i have no doubt they will. i will certainly agree they are trying to sway opinion but the unsolicited claim suggests they are struggling to do so instead of being ahead of the curve. that suggests the company is in the right and/or winning the battle. this isnt a jury they are trying to sway. it suggests more of a shareholder play against mgmt. however, i have no interest in joining any group that doesnt provide specific evidence of wrongdoing or malfeasance and instead fights a battle of he said she said. clearly mgmt lacked oversight in some key negotiations. the fact they have resigned GE shows confidence in the company going forward. that doesnt mean the fight isnt over and it doesnt mean GE wont decide to wash their hands of the issue should they get dragged in the middle.
either way, there has been and remains a significant lack of transparency that is holding the company back along with excessive compensation/bonuses relative to shareholder performance. further, they appear to be squandering the much needed cash infusion the GEHC agreements have brought them and continue to bring them by failed M&A actions and refusing to focus on EECP internally (because it is too hard).
you can continue to use innuendo to discredit me but it wont work.
i really cant tell if you are completely confused or obfuscating the obvious for the sake of the board. either way - i will end the thread with this post.
i am not party to either nor will i be goaded one way or the other in the dispute. i am interested in a solid return on this long term investment that has been absolutely squandered the last three years and continues to slide.
i have never been employed by, worked for in any capacity, or have any personal or professional relationships with anyone at VASO either now or in the past. my contact with any of the personnel have been strictly as an investor/shareholder. i started investing in this company right after the stock tanked when PEECH results were released and were less than expected. i have continued to increase my position substantially since and have sold very few shares in the process including over the last 12-18 months as the stock tanked. i own more shares than all but 4 or 5 of the listed insiders and prior to the share giveaways the last 2 years - only Ma and the Syrbniks owned more. my interest in this board/company are to align mgmt compensation with stock performance that the common shareholders have to use as their ONLY metric for ROI. there has been NO correlation between those two in the last three years and common shareholders continue to be suffering in one of the greatest bull markets for small caps. throughout - mgmt/BOD has had a complete lack of transparency, refuses to seriously address share price, has bungled basic business/mgmt questions, and snidely dismisses shareholder complaints/concerns as daytraders whining.
what is your position...?
Yes. Brillinat analysis on your part. Thank you for sharing the effects of toxic financing to the board. No one understood dilution or the effects on share structure prior. Many companies succeed dispite toxic financing but it certainly doesnt make it easier and it always makes trading more volatile. It also makes taking a long term position more difficult due to the uncertain share count (maybe you should educate the board on the factors that actually lead to the spiral).
However - there are a number of factors any company caught in this type of destructive financing that can turn around or stop the spiral. The primary factor is traditional funding which is a function of sales and viability. The viability of the recovery shot was evidenced by sales approaching $2MM in 2012 prior to the production issue. They restarted selling the shot when they took back inventory with the TCA agreement. They had $80K in sales of recovery with their soft launch. The market doesnt know about the 4Q nunbers yet. We do know they nust ran production on both shots and LTCG continues to promote the shot.
If/when numbers materialize - the company can be reassessed what the prrsent value of the company is and whether current price/share sturcture make it attractive. There was no question dilution would drive the price down. The issue is how fast or when the company would have the ability to stem the dilution and remove the existing CD debt. This removes significant uncertainty and then creates demand for the stoeach investor judges their own risk tolerance for getting in or out. On paper - I have a largenloss. I am not concerned with it as I see this as anlong term investment and not a flip. If they get no traction in these quarters or they still cant consummate the larger deals I will reassess and move on. If I was in this looking to make $1000 - I would be day trading.
Act like one...? If you mean sit passively in the dark while mgmt does nothing to stem or avert the precipitous decline we have seen over the last 12-18months or refusal to address basic questions at shareholder meetings or conference calls - no thank you.
How do you know which party singled me out...? Let alone what they disseminated to me? You either dont or you are complicit. If you are complicit that is a whole different issue. It certainly wouldnt surprise me.
plenty of posters were saying that in summer of 2013, end of 2013, middle of 2014 - and yet the company has continued to exist, launch new products, secure contracts, and managed to do so with very little cash, very little media presence (beyond social media), and fighting major cash issues/legal battles. the share structure has changed and will change again. but the company remains.