RE:Speaking factuallyGood to have you aboard BeR, you provide a sound viewpoint and good information of which I agree with for the most part...my main concern is the nascent assessment to a degree, as they have been building this company for this market for 4yrs+ and to, what appears to be not ready with product supply is unacceptable. That said I believe it was a combination of reasons some more acceptable than others and while not the end of the world it does not fit the MO of the company and the overall quality mind set.
I agree that to build what is intended requires much more than just growing grass, with this level of quality, on this scale and be able to sell at a competitive price in the marketplace this is a special company....the focus on taste, aroma, right down to the meticulously trimmed bud packaged. This company is definately in a league of it's own for now but there will be competition coming as demand for this level of quality increases.
Your projection of SP growth 2-5yrs out will be of the currently planned facilities built out and operational, expansion in the global marketplace, etc but the progress/ growth targets that the company has set for the interim need to be achieved, with much better quarterly sales starting this quarter and sales from the fully operational existing facility of ~250k square feet by year's end, JMHO....Opt
BeRealistic wrote: I have lurked here for quite some time and watched the so called "pumpers" and "dumpers" bicker back and forth. A lot of conjecture and misinformation thrown around. So lets just deal with the facts.
Firstly, I noticed a big issue around here are the convertible debentures. If you have never invested in a nascent industry, I trust you don't know how financing generally works. The financing in not only a nascent, but also grey market industry is further complicated. So while not ideal, this type of financing is NORMAL for this industry. The company at full dilution (if they decide to convert ALL of the debentures) would be 360,000,000 shares, not great but nothing to raise many eyebrows over.
The second part of this obviously, is the arbitrage play that most debt investors will exercise to protect their debt investment from default, which is to hold a short position in the equity to hedge against the debt they hold. They do this so if a company ends up defaulting, they are still able to cover part of the loss with the short. If you look at Supreme's short positions in terms of % of volume and value, it is 17.8%. Which, if you take into consideration other large players (ACB, WEED, etc) is right on the money. So all this talk of "big increases in short position" is balony.
Thirdly people seem to think that this stock is mispriced, it isn't. It is priced right where it should be for a company currently generating 10.7mm (pro-rated) in revenue a quarter. How much do you guys think a company that generates $42mm in sales per annum suppose to be worth? The real meat and potatoes will come once full capacity is built in.
Now in terms of governance and leadership, yes they are a little greener than some other management teams, but they really haven't done anything reckless or misleading. They seem quick to respond to investor questions (I've spoken with management on more than one occasion) quickly and effectively. My only gripe with them is in the use of cash right now, I would like to see them invest in short term t-bills or bonds to earn a little interest to help offset the borrowing cost, but that is insignificant.
I and a associate who has litterally decades of experience as a CFO of many large corporations in Canada have looked closely at Supreme and found no glaring issues. I think they only glaring issue here is investors who aren't well versed in investing having grossly over-optomistic expectations for Supreme.
20 years ago if I got 40% return from any company in a few years it would have been a home run. I think some users here bought on hype and got burned and are now overly pessimistic.
Supreme is a finely run company that will have share price growth in the medium term (for you traders thats 2-5 years). I've been doing this a long time, I invested in Canopy when it was still on the venture, I invested in Photon Control when it was on the venture, and I invested in Open Text 15 years ago when it was worth 300% less. I have a pretty decent track record, and I'm not sure why there is so much fuss on this board. I literally registered because of how much non sense is being spewed here.
Take care people, remember when you invest nothing is instant. You may be coming down off of a sugar high from the explosive FOMO rally, but this is how a nascent industry going through growing pains operates. Don't get caught up in the day to day, and only focus on relevant news and look at the financials objectively.