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 : Green Oasis Environmental, Inc. (GRNO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: spinynorman1323 who wrote (10629)	7/2/1999 8:34:00 AM
From: Charles A. King	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13091

A career and a net worth destroyed because of the failure to tell the truth about a company with a brilliant technological achievement. Not telling the truth about an investment has a permanent effect on the credibility of the person who did it. If the person was too closely tied to the company, the company suffers as well. Even though GRNO has had years to try to do a deal, it has yet to sell and install its first plant, except for the plant in Charleston. Even though that plant is supposed to be operational, it doesn't operate. There are countless examples of companies supposedly with brilliant technological achievements that never survived. Why hasn't GRNO ever installed any plants overseas according to its business plan? Why are visitors impressed by the temporary operation of the plant and yet must try to get financing from a bank, even if they have substantial net worth? Why do they expect a bank to risk all of its principal even though the bank's reward is limited to its interest rate? Is it that even the entrepreneurs don't want to risk their own money on GRNO, impressed as they may be? How long can GRNO continue to "operate" by going through the motions of trying to sell plants, year after year? So what, you might say. Even if GRNO never sells a plant, there is the lawsuit against G&S coming up in 2 or 3 months. That is a slam dunk to pay off in a big way, after which GRNO can write its own ticket, right? Put yourself in the position of the person responsible for deciding to pay the malpractice insurance money to GRNO. Would you be eager to pay out that money to a company with a negative net worth, no income, no deals, and no prospects of same? If all you had to do is stall, month after month, year after year, until GRNO finally goes out of "business" and your problem goes away on its own, what would you do? The news has examples of law suit verdicts that never paid off - breast implants and asbestos are a couple that come to mind. None of those entities are the least bit concerned about their "reputations". Prudential converted retirement accounts into life insurance policies and that class action lawsuit still drags on, year after year. No, there must finally come a time for a manager to put aside the arguments of self serving lawyers, and start applying some common sense logic. GRNO has had many lessons and examples, over and over, of groups who are impressed by the story but are never heard from again. None of them are going to rescue GRNO from destruction any more than the lawyers are. GRNO has only one possible source of income left and that is the Charleston plant. Crude oil is higher now than it has been any time since November, 1997. Petroleum products lag the advance of crude, percentage-wise, putting a tight squeeze on refiners. That is because of the huge surplus of products produced during the time of the cheap crude. But it is possible to call Charleston, develop a relationship of sorts with a rep for a diesel distributor, and get an idea of what the plant should get for its diesel. The same for local feedstock. Making allowances for such costs as transportation and testing gives one the idea that the plant could be making money right now if it was running. If the plant had enough capital, it could buy cheaper feedstock and make some real money. GRNO could be earning enough right now to keep going indefinitely, regardless of what the G&S insurance company did. And don't forget the tax credits. Some time ago, I saw an article about some official figures about the surplus petroleum overhanging the market. The article said what the surplus was and the rate of draw down, giving me the impression that the surplus would be gone by the fourth quarter. Time has passed and I am not sure how the draw down is going, but NYMEX prices for heating oil and unleaded gas continue to climb. An example from my own records is the comparison of yesterday's closing prices with the prices of last March 4. According to that I see crude oil up 50% and heating oil up 45%. I think gasoline prices in the US have been distorted by refinery and transportation problems as well as government clean air decisions, so I prefer to focus on heating oil because that is what the GRNO plant makes. I think that any deal that would get the plant started immediately would be the logical step to take. An argument about the actual price of a part of the plant would not hold water. How can the value of the plant be compared with what we paid for it? That would be like comparing the price and volume of the stock now with the price and volume of February, 1997. Clearly, any deal that involved buying cheap feedstock and even eventually upgrading the plant would be the only sure way GRNO has of even surviving. I think that when petroleum storage surpluses are a thing of the past and when the plant has been operating for a while with cheap feedstock, GRNO will look a lot better. Who knows, it might even start installing plants. Charles