RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Passport acquisition Either ebidta positive next year or 8m loss. Take your pick. It's not rocket science. You rather have Ausa keep 30m cash and burn 8m this year so we have 22m left?
Your assumptions is that rev stays the same for 10 years? LOLS
Well if rev stays the same without the deal. Ausa will be bankrupt in 5-6 years.
With the deal, the worst case scenario if rev stsys flat is 10 year to recoup the investment with a potential to grow and uplist to the TSX with US entry.
Without the deal, the company goes bankrupt in 5-6 years.
Franklinsing wrote: After 2 years of failed deals and stagnation. 4M in losses year 1 and 23M in losses in year 2 with no real revenue. Now the company wants to change its whole business plan to pivot from what I was told I was investing in. I am within my rights to want to understand the transaction that I'm supposed to vote for. I actually appreciate Kush for bringing information but all shareholders should be given the information without asking for it. How do you know that none of the revenue is from AUSA? When and how was AUSA ever great? I would be ok with the deal if Passport was to keep the cash in the company to grow but it is really to pay out, which Scott is 51% owner of.
Paying 8x multiples on future projected earning is out of line in the ATM, cash management, and payments space. At the 2021 rate it will take 10 years to make the money back.
How are any of these comments nonsense? I'm not asking people to give me credibility just that they look at the ideas and facts in this transaction to make the best choice for all shareholders.