Thanks for the quick response Matt. .........Hi,"Wayne"!
..despite the 3 post limit!
Dear Matt-
Having gotten around the limit:
What you said seems to be a lot more important than
guessing what CVIA will do next week. I must admit,
I feel I'm "poking fun" at the stock compared to what you
are thinking.
Way previously I speculated about the following and
still believe it. ((These are only thoughts, but I give them
a high probability with time,))
I remember comparing CVIA performance to another stock
which I only tracked instead of investing in. This was
Agrabiotech (ABTX). At the time, broadcasters were saying
"One sector which had been largely ignored during the previous
market surge was the Bio-tech industry. It should be getting
attention from investors now." [as WOTD's industry is not in
the lime light either, but will be with some flight from today's
inflated sectors ]
I checked them (the companies) out finding ABTX interesting for
the virtue of it's name/price/youth and decided to keep tabs.
News came out of an acquisition, another - another, and so on.
Lots of them. They called these "mom and pops" in their
releases. My head was spinning. How were they going to afford
all that. I thought the company people were being overly
"gutsy". [as many will wonder how is WOTD going to afford this]
What I overlooked, was -these mom and pops were presently
capable of supporting themselves, so they are making their
own payments to the previous owners! Price was 2.25 then,
and went to 19 9/16 within the year. Of course now it is down
a bit, and everybody on the thread is talking off topic now.
But that was what they would call a 10 banger? It began from
a logical and stable price. [cvia is at a ravaged price]
When CVIA is logical and stable:
my numbers put us at .06, but I had used excessively low
revenue and PE figures. I recall someone (Brad I think) who
did a very thorough analysis which put the figure near .17
-Tony
From a given stable price, as above, I would expect it to parallel
ABTX, over an identical year, but factoring in two unknowns:
1)the acquisition method must be at least as feasible as that
of ABTX which I believe is more than possible. These are real
people and their market is more plentiful.
2a)dilution from the present funding (reg s) could adversely effect
.06 to .17 if reg s goes for a larger portion of the company,
slowly lowering the present price as well for the duration.
We will see that and be able to adjust.
2b)that reg s may maximize revenue in the shortest period <---ouch
of time by allowing the company to be crippled or destroyed
in the process.(anything is possible)
Though I haven't looked at your web page yet
(you surprised me again) I agree with 1.50 a year after stability
if they make their acquisitions correctly, and perhaps well before
then. Also, knowing that investors project into the future
for real progress "being made today", with an "early" 1.50,
2.00 would not be far behind. (and mistake, or no mistake
2.00 = 2.00)
So, though I am no type of a researcher at all,
time allows me to agree with you Matt. CVIA must simply get
through it's present situation, and hopefully these particular
Reg s lenders are being "unique" to the cause. Though their very
label would suggest otherwise.
And I just found out our "Wayne" is a couch potato.
I hope with cable, popcorn, and a Stuffed Parrot!
I discovered by accident cable TV is very valuable if left on.
...The stock market channel! The ideas flow out of it continually
and well after 4:00 MARKET CLOSE. This is what turned me on
to [ABTX], To bad I didn't have any fun. Too late for
that one now! But not too late to check your web page, Matt,
which I will. I'm very glad that you may be a life time
member soon. For soon it wouldn't be the same without you.
(I think they should give you an honorary membership if you
ask me! We'll try to make it worth your while.
It's quite obvious you're not here for recreation!)
Dave |
