RealistGhost21 wrote:
Calm down Qc,
The way you wrote let me guess that you are probably in anger that the SP is a mess and everyone that might raised concerned about the company my be perceived like traitor and I understand it. Being blind doesn’t help anyone here. But this is not a reason to be angry at me Qc after all I’m in the same boat. But because I want to help a little about some points you just raised I have replied below to all your points. Of course I prefer a discussion but writing is the way it works here so hope it will help you understand better.
NOTE: I had to removed some expression by #$% from your previous email in order to respect the expression policy of this website.
#1- In your first para Qc which is : how the bank will perceive the risk of investing in that company? Bro.... look at their Q over Q growth. Have you asked for a bank loan personally over the last couple years? revenu and increase in revenu is all they want."
The answer : You are wrong Qc I recommend you read the law Loi sur les banques (L.C. 1991, ch. 46) here is the link (I'm not going to read it for you no offence)
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/fra/Lois/B-1.01/index.html
#2- Now about your second paragraph I quote: "No one invested in ''those warrants'' they invested into a private placement and got a share plus a warrant. thats how it work."
The answer: Wrong again do your DD . A stock warrant gives the holder the right to buy shares at a certain price before expiration. The easiest way to exercise a warrant is through your broker. When a warrant is exercised the company issues new shares, increasing the total number of shares outstanding. Warrants can be bought and sold up until expiry ...Thats how it works.
#3- About If supreme will be profitable why would they need loans from banks? are you serious bro? ever heard of business growth? acquisitions?
The Answer: Yes I heard about buisness growth that... but now you saying that you are also confiming the fact you do not expect HUGE very huge profiatbility like over $200/annually net profit annually for this compagny on it own ... so there is a serious risk she will not be able to reinvest enough of here own money to increased her asset.
#4- What are you talking about when saying they will look at Supreme Financial Engagements? Have you looked at their balance sheet?
The answer: Yes I read their balance sheet every time they are publish since 2016..but Again please read the law Loi sur les banques (L.C. 1991, ch. 46)
#5- How will they look at 17m warrants expiring? like a good thing for them.
The answer: For the current shareholders like you and myself yes but not from the Bank's point of view they won't and again it is the federal law that prevent it...which is a good thing otherwise Bank will be shareolders of almost everygood compagny in this country and we would also haved gotten hit harder during the fiinancial crisis of 2008 that hurt the U.S. & Wall Street.
Again more easy to understand once you have read the law on the canadian bank of 1991.
#6- Its interesting how much you talk shlttt about Supreme and the Banks.... yet you forgot to mention the latest BMO involvment in the latest 2.45$ debenture no warrants.
The answer: Calm down please I'm not talking badly about Supreme and the Banks QcTrader this absurb saying that... I raise concern that I believe deserve to be mention... it is a kind of balance I try to provide between heratic people who just praised the compagny futur success without trying to look at the risk. With that its seems you ARE the one who doesn’t read the financial from Supreme..LOL…because it is obvious! Here is the proof …about the last $100 millions bought deal that took place in Oct 2018. This was not BMO but BMO Capital Markets a subsidiary of BMO very important to make the difference here. BMO Capital Market lend money that’s come from investors not from the common people who do deposit their money at BMO because the law forbid it in Canada. BMO Capital Markets’ s involvement during the last bought deal was only a signature to acknowledge the validity of the public agreement … in other words Supreme was their clients so Supreme paid BMO Capital Markets as a Third party to confirm the validity of the warrants issued on the TSX.
#7- Bro you are out to lunch. you have absolutely no idea what #$% you are talking about and that i guarantee you.
And you can also look at my history ive been on stockhouse since early 2014. and ive been on this stockhouse board since it was SL pre-consolidation.
The Answer: Yes your post history is full of contradiction too. After answering all the false allegation you just said previously… I have no others logical choice to arrive at the conclusion that you are the one who have no idea what you are talking about. Nevertheless I wish you the best and hope success to this company and long time shareholders.
Respecfully.
QcTrader wrote: how the bank will perceive the risk of investing in that company? Bro.... look at their Q over Q growth. Have you asked for a bank loan personally over the last couple years? revenu and increase in revenu is all they want.
No one invested in ''those warrants'' they invested into a private placement and got a share plus a warrant. thats how it work.
If supreme will be profitable why would they need loans from banks? are you serious bro?
ever heard of business growth? acquisitions?
What are you talking about when saying they will look at Supreme Financial Engagements? Have you looked at their balance sheet?
How will they look at 17m warrants expiring? like a good thing for them.
Its interesting how much you talk shlttt about Supreme and the Banks.... yet you forgot to mention the latest BMO involvment in the latest 2.45$ debenture no warrants.
Bro you are out to lunch. you have absolutely no idea wtf you are talking about and that i guarantee you.
And you can also look at my history ive been on stockhouse since early 2014. and ive been on this stockhouse board since it was SL pre-consolidation.
gl.
RealistGhost21 wrote: IMO This is the Big Questions Qc,
I have said
before the news from Supreme about their positive Q4 few weeks ago that I was personnally in favor of keeping the SP under $1,60 till Dec Friday the 13th. (people are welcome to look at my historical post since I only post about Supreme).
I said $1,60 CAD would be great and reduce Sharedillution but now since Supreme might not be able to honor the 17 millions share in return of those who invest in those warrants in 2016 the Bog Questions remains how the Banks will perceived the risk of investing in that compagny.
Thats a double edge blade IMO and here is why:
If Supreme is expecting profitability in the futur (I means real and big) why would they need financement form Banks??? But by saying they will go through that option in the futur is raising more than one problem actually it brings up two concern.
The first one being that profit won't be enough to auto financement project in the futur which is a real deception.
The second problem is that they now refer to get financement through the Banks. Banks are not speculators in Canada and they will look at Supreme capacity to respect their financial engagment. How they would look at 17 millions warrants expiring worthless in Dec and maybe the 42 millions expiring worthless too in Dec 2021? From a Bank point of view the risk is maybe to high for them to accept giving the money to Supreme. If not the interest rate they will require is going to be extremely high which is sending the message that futur earning will be heavly taxed by those obligations that the compagny will have to respect.
As I said possibly a huge potential but the opposite is also true It could be a huge desaster incoming. As investor we have to remove emotion form analysis and this is why the SP is were it is now since 3 ago.
QcTrader wrote: brentkosta, how about raising at a lower interest multiple?
We all know non-dilutive capital is slowly stepping in and will only increase from now til next year.... plus with current economic interest going lower and lower..
What if FIRE doesnt dilutive much anymore but rather picks the non-dilutive tier 1 bank combined with organic growth?
brentkosta wrote: Those warrants are obviously going to expire worthless. Then they'll need to raise money at a much lower multiple in the new year.
RealistGhost21 wrote: It is ironic have choosen a symbole of destruction as an icon and as name for their stock. Something is wrong here with the warrants that Will expire in december at$1,70 CAD. The only way To exercice 17 millions warrants at that price would required at SP at least above $3 To absorb the high volatility price of that stock and it is would be expected the from the SP to drop around $2. Now why the SP should reach $3 when we already know what is coming for the next 2 Q? Would you like to be owner of thise warrants purchased in dec 2016? Do you think the small investors who did purchase those warrants did not believe in this compagny in 2016? Should they be concerned and be pround of how they are going to be treated by the compagny to have provided financement in 2016? IMO even if in the futur the compagny success in many years from now it doesn't mean Will know success...what happen in December 2021 when not 17 millions share are going to be dilluted but 42 millions share are going to be dilluted? Advise do your own DD. For those who invest a large stake already I recommend To stock buying and wait for the new investors here of course there is a potential opportunity To but some share but be aware of the risk in the long gun. I wish nothing bad to this compagny and also nothing bad to the current Shareolders. It was not stupid To believe in this compagny before but now it is not the time for current shareolder To promote the compagny but to the compagny To promote properly itself and in order to do so it needs To perform a miracle.