I guess the less said about the issues at hand the higher the share price will
stay... right? LOL
Meanwhile...
Anyone taking bets on TSIG's first quarter rev's based upon historical
performance. Here's my best guess.
Call center $ 26,000
Total cards 54,000
NMF 30,000 Should have been in the millions.
Babe deal 2,000 Should have been close to a million or more.
(You did sell at least 150 cards, didn't you Sam?)
Various 15,000
Shareholders 7,000
E-Commerce 0 Too early
CD's 36,000
NMF 11,000
Babe 1,000
Shareholders 24,000 Since we're here for the convenience of the company,
shame on us for not doing more.
Total 116,000
Overhead $1,275,000 including the cost of CD's
Net ($1,159,000 )
Even if the above happens and it would once again indicate piss poor execution, it
does establish a base point for the beginning of a revenue trend line. Not
really great. Should have been substantially larger but at least one
to begin the measurement process.
At current share price levels and with now 150,000,000 (looking forward) shares
outstanding, TSIG will have a capitalization of $37,500,000. Still kinda puny as
compared to most in the Internet sector.
If the trend on overhead continues North to let's say $650,000 average monthly
for the year to a grand total of $7,800,000 and Signature doesn't fire TSIG
and ramps up to at least 35% of the $30,000,000 annual billing to say 10.5 mill
and then attenuated to 5.1 mill for the half year lost then at 25% gp TSIG
should earn 1.3 mill.
If E-commerce can bring in another 3 mill gross revs with 50% gp of 1.5 mill
and the cards generate 4 mill at say 75% gp of 3 mill the company has a chance of
reaching break even sometime late this year. Not bad on the one hand but no
where near close to some of the rabid speculation here on the thread.
Certainly no where's near the potential that we all believed to be here when we invested.
Myself included earlier in the year until I began to dig into the background
history of the CEO.
These numbers would IMHO have a serious chance for substantial improvement with
J Hwang or J guild taking full responsibility for same. There are no personalities
involved here. Just money and business, not to mention a long history by which to
judge the future. Don't believe for one minute that Guild and gang have
as much to do with the revenue outcome as you would like to believe. Those positions help
enormously but in the final analysis, it's the position at the top that is responsible.
Too many good teams in the past have failed and bailed with the situation just as
it is today. The results of the past are there in the filings for all to see.
All in all 25 cents a share ain't a bad deal... under normal circumstances.
However, I have a sneaking suspicion that we will see the RCLA fulfilled so as to provide
another 26,666,666 shares to our CEO and then the dreaded Reverse Split that we
all fear so much. Lot's of losers and only one winner.
The company, and especially the shareholder's, need someone at the helm with a
proven track record and someone above all else that cannot continually tinker with
the various share counts for their own personal gain that continues to dilute
shareholder value.
The CEO alone has that power, not the Chairman of the Board.
SC
|
