RE:RE:RE:New video interview w/ Peter, quick summary We know you are a professional but not a professional investor. What professional investor hangs out on stock house all day, only comments on one stock (check fdfd post history) and try's to add negativity to the stock they own. You simply don't fit the profile of a professional investor. Here is what I'm guessing is the actual scenario, you are some person without any dignity or morals surrounded by multiple computers connected to VPN to sign in to different profiles (I can think of a few) as not to be detected by Stockhouse as multiple accounts coming from the one IP address. Sitting in the middle of it all the screens is a red phone like the bat phone but in this case it is the bash phone. Your masters call and you go to work crafting posts containing both positive and negative messages to try and fly under the basher radar. You have no one fooled fdfd and you will never be accepted as along, not under this the fdfd moniker.
fdfd12 wrote: Maudite, how is that a superman punch.
I said all along .02 EPS which is $3M for 150M shares=.02.
NOT .10!!!!!!!
Peter agreed with me that the profit was $3M.
Guys I am a professional investor. I do not have only 1 stock like some here.
I know what I am talking about
PteRoy wrote: Peter with a superman punch right to the groin of fdfd and bcdude.
MidtownGuy wrote: Good video between Peter and George discussing Q3 financials more in-depth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz6ZjuREP1k&feature=emb_logo Mostly Peter was responding to -- and highlighting -- any potential questions about certain aspects of the financial statements, specifically:
1/ their net income showing on one line only $150K or so. But that's because of the net income from operations being offset almost equally by the share based compensation line item (when he rewarded staff in shares).
He said they also split that out separately, so people can see that there was net income from operations of 3.1MM, and not just the 150K-ish that some might see when they don't notice the above offset.
2/ the strength of their cash on hand / cash flow
3/ the line item of "billings in excess of cost and profits on uncompleted projects" not being an actual liability as listed, but an accounting mandate that one can only book % of project complete regardless of the cash received toward that project -- the excess cash from payment then listed separately in that line item (which is future income).
In more dept: Peter defines the line item named "Billings in excess of costs and profits on uncompleted profits". It shows (under liabilities) a line of $9.3MM. He's clearing up the fact that it's not a liability in the traditional sense, but a clause that has to be put in these days because of the old Enron (and Nortel, frankly) days. It means, PYR has already been paid $9.3MM more than what they've delivered on the project, but can't book it all.
This is an outcome of the old Nortel and Enron days, when they used to book forward sales prior to delivering, which would create false expectations for future sales and a false sense of what's been sold vs. what's been delivered.
So now companies are only allowed to book the % of a project complete, not the amount of money they've received. So if they get paid 100% of a project up front, the % of that money related to the % of the project that is yet to be complete cannot be booked until the project is delivered (or next % timeilnes are met).
The upside of that, is that that $9.3MM is guaranteed future revenue yet to be included on the books.
4/ the strategic investment gain from HPQ that effects income in the amount of $15MM, and while that amount used to be listed under PYR operations it now has been pulled out and listed as a strategic investment.
He reiterates HPQ is a massive, multi-tiered strategic investment for PYR:
a/ Partial ownership in HPQ that drives strategic investment income for PYR based on any HPQ share price gain ($15MM this last quarter alone)
b/ co-ownership of HPQ battery powders division
c/ being the supplier for the technology that makes it all happen for HPQ. Interesting that much of the stuff they talk about in the video is directly related to things they've read on the forums. They even mention "chatter on the forums..." about certain things they then discuss. They are actively reading forums for concerns.