Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : The New Corporate Vision Inc. ( CVIA ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael Graham who wrote (2344)	6/14/1999 8:55:00 AM
From: K A Anderson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3596

Hey what are you doing posting my before lunch schedule (LOL) The final literals on the Texas real estate came in, so between that and the ArchivalCD stuff looks like these two are going to take the bulk of my time this week. It sure would be nice if staying on the high road for so long.... actually leads to the finish line. KAA

To: Michael Graham who wrote (2344)	6/14/1999 9:40:00 PM
From: Michael Graham	Respond to of 3596

Here are some questions I asked Keith on RB and his responses: Keith, I have a few questions relating to the news today. 1. Is this new joint project going to be dilutive? 2. Will this deal add to CVIA's revenue/EPS? 3. Will it add to book value? 4. I believe you mentioned that this has been a done deal for a while. If it does add to CVIA revenues, then in what quarter can we expect to see it? Regarding the 98 10KSB: If I read it correctly, IPOSITE, AHCD, and Phipps could not be treated as assets and therefore not count towards book value. 5. Is this situation only applicable to 98? 6. Will CVIA be able to report value for any of those subsidiaries/assets on future filings? 7. If no to part #6, then will other CVIA IPO's also not be able to be considered towards book value? Sorry for all the questions. Once again, I'm just trying to get a handle on some things. Thanks, Mike Ok here is my take on the answers, 1. I have never "diluted" shareholders, anytime we acquire or enter into a business situation, the shareholders have to see some black ink, or else the deal isnt worth us doing it. 2. Yes this is the main reason we went into this was to continue the build up strategy, along with assets that are generating revenue, thats what we need the most is constant cash flow. 3. Yes it will significantly add to the book value... but the oil drilling is the most risky of the lot... Rod Copeland knows the oil field like the back of his hand, and has done all the research including 3 d seismic surveys, so we know what is down there, we know the approximate amount and the personality of how the wells act........... the tricky part is drilling a well sometimes if you are off even 6 inches the well will turn up dry. Thats the only risk we have in both these ventures. 4. The 10KSB I didnt intentionally add value to the assets simply because Phipps didnt have his audits ready and I would rather say nothing than be wrong or overprice it. IPOSITE... I passed on also because I am not a big believer in "goodwill" valuations and that "creative" bookkeeping. AHCD I have no way of knowing how the market will react to the offering.. although I think it will be a very successful offering... I could nt attach value at the end of December because I hadnt seen there audits. These assets are valuable and are not junk, I just couldnt lay my hands on hard Verifiable value... the keyword is verifiable. So as opposed to misrepresent a value we chose to list them the way we did. 5. I am certain with the exeception of Phipps this was limited to 1998, Phipps does his audits later in the year and we have to have our done by May 1, so this is part of the problem. 6. Of course we will report values to the subsidiaries, thats why we are getting all this rolling... nothing would make me happier to book some legit value. 7. IPOS can only be considered to the book value once they are public and the stock is liquid.. if their stock is not liquid then we have to book it as a "non performing" asset... and I dont want any more of those. Hope this answers some of the questions you have... keep 'em coming. KAA