RE:RE:Folks Who Believe In This Company Time
Wrong!!! I put caveats I said depending if the company gets a contract it can start trading $2.50 and go $20 plus but if it doesnt get a contract it can trade between $1 to $3 being a fair price for the tech and what it has to offer. I strictly recall this....the $20 plus was going on the basis of the amounts of monies the company could make based on being able to make space conservatory telescopes at 1/3 to 1/2 the price. I laid calculations out on the average of those telescopes being about 200 to 300 million as what was stated. I calculated on half so 100 million to 150 million most likely using a profit margin of 20 percent which is what I used because that is what independent business shot for at the very least at least that is what my Uncle told me being in business. So you would have 20 million to 30 million. The shares were not diluted to the extent because the companies of Paul and the Dugulas were not joint at the time I was making these calculations. Initially by the way I wasnt liking the extra shares but I did say they are the developers of the tech so ok. In any case I forgot the share count but it was not 147 million or thereabouts what it is now. I think it was around 40 to 60 million I cant remember so it is hard to run the exact calculations but I will go on 60 million so if at 30 million that is .50 I did put a multiplier on incorrectly as I was doing a 10 to 20 times so I would have said at 10 times that would be $5 and 10 times it would be $10. I would have likely said if the company had 3 or so deal and near 100 million = 100/60 (outstanding shares) or roughly $1.67 so $16.70 at 10 times and 33.40 20 times. That is what I know I would have said and calculated and I know for a fact I said if the company gets contracts depending what they are the can be $2.5 but I see $20 plus and again if not $1 to $3 they didnt get a contract. They got to $3.76 I did however said when the equity was getting nailed down to the $2 range It is still worth getting. . So i am not going to lie about what I said but that was two or more years ago and we both are going by memory but I know I put a caveat on contract contingent 100 percent sure as well as where I calculated. I also clearly remember talking about mechanical and electronically parts to the telescopes how they work etc. So sorry you have remembered wrong. As for my calculations I have come to learn more recently that you dont multiply revenue by 20 percent what by the looks of it lot of people do...full wrong. When companies are not even EBITDA positive in a quarter and are more on the loss side the revenue when obtained should not be touched but depending on what it is quarter to quarter comparison the share value will reflect that generally if loss by x amount it will likely show a loss per share basis if the quarter is more despite being at a loss it may be possible that the share value stays even to the value or moves up despite still in loss. Now this is what I talk to some people saying the financials are not entirely about profitability but about strengthening balance sheet. Let's make this easy loss of 600, 500, 400, 300 for first year...second year it is 500, 400, 300,200 for year two...total loss year 1 ($1800); total loss year 2 ($1400) so in this very clean and easy example the year over and quarter over revenue strength in year two is better. If the first year some quarters are better than the corresponding quarters the following year whatever the difference and loss of share will be reflected in share value conversely the better performance as a gain. This is what people including myself mean when it doesnt matter if companies are running ongoing long term deficit that if they improve the balance sheet they will likely go up if not down. So no multiplier however if the company is EBITDA positive I would multiply by 2 to 4 times so let's say you have .40 after dividing revenue by outstanding and the company is EBITDA positive then you have a stock range of .80 to $1.60 but only when EBITDA positive if not same as above whatever losses or gains year over year quarter over quarter which correspond is calculated as above as to what I have been seeing in relation to share values. Now if the company is net profitable this is where yes people use the 10 to 30 times multiplier usually 25 times. .40 would be $10. When I calculated out for shg i used 2 to 4 times on EBITDA positive and came up with what inevitably was $1.40 to $1.80 from my recollection but prior to that I was calculating $1.50 to $2.0 but the company diluted and I needed to adjust for that. I ran two figures as one was fully diluted the other took into account shares currently outstanding but not those hold escrow to be issued. The brokerage who gave their assessment said $1.10 and I vocally stated that was a low ball looks like for the most part I am not wrong. In any case, yes I said $20plus for nxo but as mentioned contingent on the types of contracts and what I already stated previously. I wont give a price target without reasons for them. So why 10 here? First off to this day I hold this should not be less than $2. Period as being fairly assessed on earning community status on 3 large tech firms pages...additionally i am basing on one smoking gun deal meaning any of Nvidia Qualcomm and Arm. .now if people recall I clearly stated on any contract outside of those three the company can trade up to two dollars...this what we have is not quite the contract I specifically was talking about. I am talking about tangible numbers nxo has entered into a 5 million contract with so and so doing such and such so contracts with dollar values. Now I will say it again depending on contract(s) other than the ones everyone is after this company can trade at $2.00 now I cant remember if I said this before nxo was a partner. My feeling is probably not more if we signed some major cell company and the reason is it wouldnt make sense that nxo will trade at $2.00 with any other contract not a cell and yet say with being on the community page be $2 so I likely said this at a time Double Take was the focus and we were talking about all the cell companies...for DT I posted about all the main binocular companies and thinking what it would be to partner with them Olympus Bushnell etc. Hopefully those who read this post start remembering what is said all here again I dont give a blanketed share value without a reason. So these are my reasons for $10...first we should be fairly priced in what has been earned $2.00 but no less than $1.50 that is to my perspective and what I have strongly maintained. One contract with the big guys I am saying will yield $10/share because that means nxo contribution into cell phones maybe graphic accelerator chips for video games which Nvidia is hugely known for...so not only cell phones. As for DT I think that is dead. I wouldn't get into raising capital and production thoughts even if licensed whatever too costly. Better to prototype show things work and let those who want the chip or whatever pay the cost at least until you build cash recognition and can then move into taking more control. First build strong financial strength to avoid equity dilution unless you will make massive amounts to offset the dilution and not just revenue high gross profit margins 20 to 40 if not higher. With around 150 million outstandings you dont want to blow these up that much more without strong revenue and gross profit margin offsets. With 20 percent gross I take out 50 to 70 percent to get to bet so I see that as net 6 to 10 percent...EBITDA for instance is what it stands for earnings before interest taxes depreciation amortization and these eat a lot of monies and the reason if any even get here that is quite impressive even more so net profit. In any case before people either misquote or dont remember reas and try to commit to memory one thing I will not give a price target just because there will always be things that I say will warrant and justify them. So Damn wrong overall even if you are right in the $20 i never said at years end it would do that unless it got contracts and depending on them it can be $20 plus by years end and again if not deserves to be between $1 to $3 that again I am 100 percent sure I said. Anyways you know what I have based $10 share the company must have at least a contract with a huge player a partner and if not and not contrary to agreements any giant cell company to use nxo tech but if it is divided among other contributors to be safe I will say 1 to 3 deals of this nature coupled with other deals like pristine...I am going a bit conservative so if the share price doesnt get to $10 on a big cell contract it should with another one or two of that nature as well a few other pristine type deals...but just note I am saying it will likely need 5 or so deals 1 to 3 big cell video game with the known companies as well as another 2 to 5 other deals...i dont believe 1 big deal will quite do it unless there is a lot of hype or the company is involved with splitting monies on tens of millions of chips...i have been hearing it may work out to .20 a chip but that is just a best guess as the real amount will only be known when the deals are inked. A buck a chip no doubt is way better so who really knows in this sense...all dependent on how many hands involved manufacturing/production distribution storing and advertising costs so .20 per chip sounds quite realistic...that being said i am spelling out clearly so that Damn you and anyone else does not come back saying something I never said or did where parts are right but they are missing nearly all the significant context which makes what you have stated very distorted and as i first wrote Wrong!!! I will not be viewing all these things I am viewing the share value but dont mistake that in saying these things are not needed rather they are suoerfous to the end result. I am not going to worry will we have Samsung Google etc etc I will only see the success that is my job all the arrangements and particulars are not I just laid out all that I said because I dont want you or anyone else to misquote and not think I dont have my reasons giving things in an airy fairy way. That said moving forward I will not say very much if anything at all I just did to set record straight and hopefully everything starts to ring a bell because despite it being 2 years or so what I stared is 100 percent what I stated then. In fact, I remember one of my firsts posts. I said that I finally got in and that is when I paid $1.44 per share but I forget how many I bought and said a week ago I saw these at .80 and should have bought then and surprised to see it rise this much. I also said a year or so back (as to my recollection not 100 percent sure though) I saw these at .15 to .20. I honestly didnt buy when I saw that because I read telescope and thought how much monies is in the home telescope market...I bet there is not a bad chunk but I made light of it however bought on seeing the huge price jump. At the time I was trading between nxo and xmg trying to take advantage of both their rising prices and trying to hold as close to equal amounts in both. Now Damn I held 13,000 shares nxo prior to which I had shares in some many different companies made some lost some but on the whole was $20 or thereabouts down and I decided to hold nxo and Pat for awhile. Because both were a ways off commercializing I was only going to keep one. Out of fear if pat did not work properly at any given time to protect against an active shooter(s) i did not want to get into a law case related situation I sold the pat and made 20% on it overall. I already mentioned I sold nxo heavily down lost in doing so and overall lost how much I didnt keep specific track and in many if not all ways I still dont. I look at all my holdings together whether up or down more so then teasing them apart. I gambled $72,000 of that I pulled out 40,000 put into comics I have $10,500. To make it easy I will say that is all I have and will minus the comics as well even if it stilts my assets but I do so because unless the comics are as liquid as the $10,500 i will keep it at 0. So let's say I am 61,500 down not all nxo. Having said that from when I repositioned as I mentioned and showed all my holdings typed out not in quantities but cost average and increase I am 135 percent up. Thank you for your saying sorry I appreciate that but you know I am not at all concerned and that is coming from a time my portfolio dropped to $1100 maybe less so there have been comparatively huge gains shg 10 times mrs 7.1 right now the others double some less and nxo and spor 10 to 20 percent down. I know without any uncertainty as I said there is a huge positive reversal coming to all my shares especially when they are reduced by 33 to 50 percent off the peak no way they should be. 20 I can see that but more no especially because of the way stronger news as well ...more in nxo today vs when this was both $3.76 and $1.53 way more. With things looking to happen 2nd half I see huge gains. Barclay states there will be unprecedented growth in the US not seen since 40 years ago. The world will be pushing hard for lost time and economic recovery along with covid variant head winds being removed through max vaccination there will be stability and growth so theoretically the stocks should rise however with higher borrowing costs Wallstreet and all financial market makers will need to inevitably accept the higher lending costs...overall still more favorable...without covid there were calls of a looming and most likely bear but right now covid had hammered things down and with all the stimulus and spendinga there will likely be a strong foundations of stability and growth real good time to increase stocks. Hope this clears up any misconceptions