Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Nutritional High International Inc. Ordinary Shares C.NHL


Primary Symbol: SPLID

High Fusion Inc is engaged in the manufacturing, processing, and distribution of infused edible products. The company's operating and geographical segments include Palo Verde; Pasa Verde; Oregon; Colorado; Nevada and Washington. It generates maximum revenue from the Palo Verde segment.


OTCPK:SPLID - Post by User

Comment by LiquidOctopusV2on Aug 15, 2019 3:58pm
194 Views
Post# 30033592

RE:options, warrants and freeshares

RE:options, warrants and freesharesI've given my take on the Neutrisci deal many times.  Nobody ever argues with me but the question keeps coming up over and over again. EAT and Neutrisci jointly developed product, we've even seen the packaging.  EAT doesn't have a manufacturing licence in California, so they're not making it yet.  There is nothing in their deal that could even fall through.  If recent company statements about having their Sacramento manufacturing licence and facility up and running by the end of the year prove to be true, they'll likely start making *ahem* the mint. 

The Marley deal is less of a straightforward story.  EAT is still the manufacturing licence holder for Marley Naturals and several other well known brands in Oregon.  But you know, as well as I do, they've done a pull back recently and they've sub-licenced to a third-party manufacturer in Oregon.  What I can't tell you is whether or not they'll make any money having sub-licenced those rights or if it's just a manouver to avoid breaching their contract with Marley Naturals.  

Either way it's a pullback.  Most certainly they've done this to avoid doing further capital expenditures in an attempt to demonstrate they're on the "short-path" to profitability, which is something the cannabis sector is currently under a high degree of pressure to do.  Frankly, investors, including me, want to see that but there is a strong case to be made here that we're being a bit skittish and ultimately hamstringing our companies expansions.  But whatever, the market is what it is and the company needs to deliver on California as a priority. 

As for the reverse-split downaward share cylce.  It's not an impossible scenario in the long-term but it's improbable.  This is still a company with a solid and growing revenue stream, a clear market plan (for quite a while now) and an easily understandable business model. 

geodcan wrote: are only free or cheap if you are one of the lucky ones that are on the receiving end.  The rest of the shareholders are caught up in the dilution.  EAT has a lot of shares in the float and when companies get too bloated they just do a consolidation, which is usually the deathknell for small companies, at least most of the ones that I have been caught in.  Most that do consolidations usually drop back to the preconsolidation price and then dissappear from lack of interest as do the assets.
You can't rely on our securities watchdogs because they are relatively useless and late to the party.  The assets dissappear before they are even aware of it.  Morals and scruples are non-existant with lots of management, who rely on the fact that "everybody does it"!  It doesn't make it right and is a case for keeping a close eye on the money.
In that respect, getting fair value for dollars collected for shares is also a thin line of distinction that can quickly escalate to fraudulent behavior.  I want to think that EAT is above that, but have had the occasion to wonder about some of our tangents that cost a lot with little in return.  False starts and intended relationships like the Marley deal and does anybody know what is going on with Neutrisci deal?  glta and dyodd


<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>