Let's see....someone else is already a 10% partner. I didn't hear JR discount
his SOLV valuations for the partners interest. (Even assuming that his valuation
model has any relationship to market reality, which it doesn't).
Now, SOLV is looking for another partner. I wonder how much more interest they
are going to have to give up to get it. I sure didn't hear JR discounting
SOLV's value for this future partners interest. While this could just be an
oversight, it is more likely a fundamental misunderstanding and misconception
of valuations. What else is fundamentally misunderstood or misconceived?
Let's see...according to JR in the conference call, there should be no
discount in value until they start producing, then it is okay to discount.
Surely he was joking: a company that isn't producing is worth more than
one that is?
According to JR, the names of the independant entities are contained in prior
10Q's and 10K's. No I haven't looked yet. Maybe someone will and see if we
can guess at the answer JR would not provide. Query: if these people are
already disclosed in 10Q's and 10K's why not just name them in response to
a very direct question? More interested in playing games with Asensio than
in providing substanative information?
I listened to all of the conference call (on replay). It all seemed like
more of the same rah, rah, with very little real substance. "We are still
planning to do, what we are planning to do." (Not a direct quote).
I will grant all that JR sounded convinced that he is right. But, at the risk
of picking a fight, which is not intended, don't all cons? (I am not suggesting
or stating that SOLV is all con, just drawing an analogy).
This has the makings of a good commercial: "Sounds good" "No, taste's great."
Okay, I'll stop being flippant. Overall, the conference call had nothing of
substance, just more of the same "we are hoping, planning, trying...."
One could reasonably ask: "Where is the beef?"
Just my thoughts.....
Troy McKinney |
