rrufff - so you are not going to provide the details of how you concluded that the Sulja lumberyard plus SAM would be valued at 4 times revenues of $12 million or $48 million, especially when a comparable transaction results in a multiple to revenues of only 0.10 for a total valuation of only $1.2 million. Very well then.
I have further comments to your remarks in bold below because several of your other posted messages were somehow deleted.
To: Thompkins24 who wrote (1190) 12/25/2006 1:15:26 AM
From: rrufff 1 Recommendation of 1191
Please Mr. Thompkins, or Ms. Thompkins, don't put words in my mouth. I suggested that if the company gets away from scam valuation, which is where you value it, then a very fair valuation, and one which investors at this end of the market would use, would be a price to revenue ratio of 3-4 depending on growth. That's purely an opinion based on the company proving somehow that it's not a scam, perhaps with the promised production of AF's.
After all the information that has been revealed in the last few weeks regarding the operations of SLJB and its historical financials, I find it hard to believe that you are still concluding that the release of the promised audited financials are not going to show that SLJB is a scam. There is no way that a company can issue unaudited historical financials with $65 million in revenues and $26 million in pre-tax income, then release audited financials FOR THE SAME ACTUAL HISTORICAL PERIOD showing less than $10 million in revenues and minimal income and not get labeled a "scam".
Investors here should understand the risk that the company is a scam and should evaluate the risk/reward ratio. They know how much they can lose if it's a scam, .015 a share. If it's not a scam, then the world of pinkies rewards non-scams with multi baggers. It's hard to otherwise explain the 100 baggers many have enjoyed, against virulent bashing in stocks such as LFWK, HISC, and smaller multi baggers such as PAIV, PAIM, AURC, NDOL, etc. Investors are so hungry for information in this area, that whenever management shows a streak of honesty, stocks fly. I wish this weren't the case, but it is.
I don't know much about these other stocks, but how can you possibly still be bragging about the LFWK 100 baggers and saying that it is a non-scam, when all the evidence that is now coming out shows that the 100 bagger was achieved by the artificial increase in the stock price due to the issuance of false and misleading press releases and financial statements, together with several email/fax spam blasts paid by the company and its affiliates and related parties?
You don't seem to understand these very speculative markets. You claim you keep giving real world comparisons but your comparisons are in the private, non-public company sector. Perhaps as you get more experience valuing companies in the pink sheet sector, you will understand.
You have been given a clean, full explanation of the valuation premiums in private versus public sectors, yet it is still amazing that you are valuing SAM at about $24 million, when it was acquired for about $600,000 only a few months ago.
You make up numbers such as 30% valuations, which again, shows your inexperience, with all due respect, in the pink sheet area. Given the company has been bashed down to a level where sentiment is extremely negative, it is IMO priced as a scam.
Why are you making personal attacks here?....What numbers are you saying that I am making up?...my discussion of private versus public valuation is very clear. Regarding investor sentiment, yes it is very negative, but not because of "bashing", it is the lack of performance by the company that has resulted in the drop in the stock price. In my opinion, it is still not at a price that would be considered a scam....that would be closer to $0.001/share
You have an opinion and your repetition of it won't make it the correct one. I'm not claiming that my opinion is correct. It's an opinion, nothing more,nothing less.
With respect to the merger, I agree that this issue needs to be explained and, as I've posted many times, the AF's should provide the information you have requested. The company is priced as a scam at this point because they failed to produce AF's as promised. AF's would answer many of the questions and the uncertainty and the failed promises price the company as a scam. It's not rocket science.
Again, the company has more downward pressure in price in the coming weeks as more and more people realize that it is a scam
Although you may not be aware of this, pink sheet companies rarely file merger documents anywhere. They are non-reporting. So your request at this point is an empty one. It's a generic type bash and one which could be applied to virtually any pink sheet company.
I don't like the fact that the SEC doesn't require this type of information. I've advocated full disclosure in this area for years, along with full disclosure in the areas of toxic financing, insider sales, paid promotion sales, Naked Shorting, MM manipulation, hedge fund trading in these companies, all sources of manipulation in my opinion, and all factors which create uncertainty and risk in this market. However, the fact is that we have an inherently scammy environment and most investors in this area understand this. Perhaps as you get more experience you will begin to understand that private party transactions are largely irrelevant to a discussion of any pink sheet stock. It's doubtful that your valuation model would fly even in the OTC BB area but that's getting off topic.
So again, you fail to provide any backup to your 4 times revenue valuation of the Sulja/Sam combined business. Very well |
