OTCPK:SPLID - Post by User
Comment by
Bobthebuilddron Apr 12, 2017 3:49pm
124 Views
Post# 26114462
RE:RE:silly questions
RE:RE:silly questionsThe LAK deal is similar to the Pablo deal. Except EAT can profit in nevada. So there going to get rental revenue and be able to produce there own edibles and oils. You don't need 20k sq feet to make oil and edibles so why not rent the rest of it out? If they have 10 properties by the end of the year all making 500k in rent. That's still 5 million added to the bottom line every year with little to no maintenance. Plus they have somewhere for there edibles and oils to be produced in each building. Rent free. I get it. Everyone is mad cause edibles and oils seem to be getting pushed aside while this turns into a REIT. They will come shortly by the summer. Then its blue skies and green days instead of this ridiculous half a cent loss everyday
DiligentSon wrote: Something we can agree on geo. I was never a fan of the LAK arrangement.
geodcan wrote: just read the latest nr and it raises a question of `why do we need LAK? Have they done their change of business and how long will that take? Have we run our course on raising money under our own monicker? Possibly! Working LAK into the equation will just delay things and create an opportunity for Posner and friends to double dip by the granting of shares and options and warrants for a new company to do what Nutritional High is/should be doing. These guys are like Scrooge McDuck hiding in their money pits and we still can't buy a product in Colorado! It seems that we are copying what happened in Colorado which is opportunity to slop at the trough while accomplishing very little by way of adding to the bottom line and taking care of shareholders! This is more wool being pulled over our eyes while they are raising and wasting investors dollars on frivolous moves. glta and dyodd