Mary - here is exactly what you said in the post after you implied that ASTN would not be around by September:
"$6M figure as per COH in annual as of March 31, 2001. Burn rate is $1.3M/mo as per Fred on last FWF. Ask mst. He will quote the same I believe."
As usual, distorted. Your COH figure is low (securities available for sale -- all highly liquid bonds like US Treasuries per the 10K -- effectively add $1.5 Million to the $6 MM COH figure in "current assets"), and the burn rate (assuming ZERO revenue) was stated by Fred at between $1 - 1.1 Million per month, not $1.3 Million, per the last FWF. With 200-300K per month in revenue (which is a backward looking guess based on the eVWAP volume figures in the past 2-3 months), ASTN will go a lot longer than September even without additional funding or increased eVWAP volumes. I think there will be both.
All investments in speculative start-up companies are predicated on the word "if". It may come as a shock to you, but most of us who are long on this stock know that it is a speculative investment, that ATG is a start-up, and we also know the meaning of the word "if" (and its implications to this particular investment). Start-ups present different challenges (and different risk/reward scenarios) than more mature public companies. Believe it or not, virtually every person I know who follows this company (and there about 100 or more that I have met, or discussed this with, either on the web or face to face) is aware of the difference between this investment and investing in a mature company. And while we all share certain disappointments in the past year or two, we are not ignorant of the risks involved (including the risk that volumes will never increase from current levels). But we also recognize the unlimited possibilities that exist for this company -- now more than ever (and something that you have been and remain completely blind to) -- the possibility that the things management has been saying are true, that they have been and are very close to achieving the volumes that we know will turn this 180 degrees, and to landing the whales that are necessary to make this an unqualified success over the long term -- and we also recognize the misleading negative picture you paint of the people who run this company (and/or who are associated with it). The reality is that many of the things Fred has said would happen have happened, and continue to happen. Timing projections have been woeful, but relationships that he said would happen have happened, and the infrastructure that will support 10-50 Million share volumes exists today. That is what they have been doing, and that is why the longs are still invested.
Today, the system traded over 3.2 Million shares. That's not a "what if", that's a fact. The calculation that you use to imply that ASTN will run out of $$ in September (i) underestimates current assets by 20%, (ii) overestimates monthly expenses by 20-30%, (iii) does not account for ANY revenue, which is, in fact, increasing monthly, and (iv) does not account for the equity line or any other future funding sources. That's not a matter of some high flying "what if", that's simple math, and you are either bad at it or you are deliberately ignoring the financial data that is publicly available. And, of course, you always take it one step beyond fair -- for example, when you take my posts out of context by saying that I have projected future income or stock price, which is a distortion of what I have really said, or when you accuse me of intentional fraud for personal financial gain (and the post I am responding does that explicitly) -- I know with absolute certainty that you are wrong in these personal attacks (and I still cannot fathom why you persist in pursuing a path of ugliness and personal attack over a fair debate of the facts, which could be had if you were so inclined).
Mary -- If you think I represent a more positive view of the company than is correct (and I am unapologetic in my positive view of the future of this company), well, let's just say that I think you represent a totally negative view of the company and its management that goes well over the line of fairness and accuracy a good percentage of the time. You have taken my posts out of context more times than I care to think about, but guess what: It don't mean sh**. The only thing that will determine if this was a good investment or a bad investment is how the company performs over the long haul, not what you say about me or the company, or how shrill or ugly you are in the way you say it.
MST |
