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 : FAMH - FIRAMADA Staffing Services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ricardo A. Biondi who wrote (6003)	3/12/1998 6:43:00 PM
From: Freddie Forte	Respond to of 27968

Ricardo...That may be what Ira meant. 4 x earnings which would equal your number. Maybe he took out for lunch money.

To: Ricardo A. Biondi who wrote (6003)	3/12/1998 6:46:00 PM
From: CO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27968

Ricardo, I would guess that the difference of the .43 EPS and the .36 EPS, would account for the shares held by the current shareholders of the company FAMH is merging with. I think the move to NASDAQ is fantastic ! Cheryl

To: Ricardo A. Biondi who wrote (6003)	3/12/1998 7:01:00 PM
From: BILL HOJNACKI	Respond to of 27968

I was wondering the same thing, perhaps Firmada needs to issue a few more shares to cover the warrants given to the NASDAQ company in exchange for their stock? This would dilute earnings for 1997, maybe enough to come up with the $.36 number. Bill H.

To: Ricardo A. Biondi who wrote (6003)	3/12/1998 7:03:00 PM
From: paul j. gourley	Respond to of 27968

I like Ricardo question the .36 EPS. Is the delay of the audit to the SEC due to a revision from the reported.1085 to a .09 EPS. I also thought that we were looking at being in the $2-3 range on our own accord. At a 4-1 swap, we would have to be trading at an $8-12 range. Would it not be the same thing as a reverse split (like Jin, I hate those 2 words). At least with the rs we do not have to issue any debentures. I have been long on FAMH maybe I'm missing something or cautious. Please correct me if I am wrong. Paul J Gourley

To: Ricardo A. Biondi who wrote (6003)	3/12/1998 11:30:00 PM
From: John Fairbanks	Respond to of 27968

No, it would be 4X our current EPS except that you need to account for the small number of shares that the other company has outstanding. Actually that could be a signature we could use to look for it... if you take that .36 EPS post merger, and remember it is from FAMH's earnings alone, we can calculate the number of shares outstanding that would give us .36 with FAMH's 97 revenue. The subtract out the number of shares FAMH would bring to the table which is basically 10MM after a 4 for 1. Ira's example in the press release is basically hypothetical since the terms are not set, but we can use this to determine the number of shares outstanding in the shell company that he was using in his example.... one we know the number of shares outstanding, we start looking for a company in Minesota (I think?) that has that many outstanding shares and seems to meet the other criteria. A little research work would turn up the company...