RE:RE:RE:invitationSIMPLICITI1 wrote: Exrower,
I thought you were more sophisticated than that. And your attempt to sensationalized a rational post is beyond the pale.
KTM doesn't apply logic. He simply weaves these tidbits of information into his one sided perspective that is anything but balanced.
Regurgitating information provided by management without determining or at least assessing its value or merit is dangerous, particularly when your intention is to publish it in support of his long held views as to the company's valuation.
By way of example. He ragged on and on about Exro gaining access to the components they need to manufacture their products. That is not a big deal. it certainly is expected though.
The BOM has been static for several months if not a year. SOP doesn't happen without them.
As to the number of components, I for one am a bit surprised by the number 1000. More detail is needed as that is not a small number from a manufacturability and QA perspective.
I could go on....
At the end of the day he provided nothing more than a "spun" version of what Sue provided in her 15 minute webcast.
For many many months now he's continued to promote valuations that are so far from reality that at the end of the day makes one question not just anything he posts but why Exro would quasi legitimize it. Which they have now.
I believe his heart is in tbe right place, and he is free to continue deliver his opinion as he most certainly will.
AS WILL YOU
AS WILL I
There appears to be a need for his particular flavour of kool-aid among impatient investors and shareholders. Himself included.
Peace out.....
I personally find KTM very rational and makes a LOT of sense about the points he makes about Exro. Even his example of profits exro could make from one model of one vehicle for one year when he chose of the example fo the new Ford Lightning made total sense and seemed a very realistic possibility. Even if his numbers are slightly infated it gives you a realistic idea of the potential here if and when automakers get on board.
I find all his videos informative and mostly backed up by facts. Ironically his first video about how he first discovered this small company from a Calgary Herald aritcle back in 2020 and then went into the stock full bore after he learned more about Sue, her pedigree and what she was willing to sacrifice at GE for this lilttle start-up. Eerily simialr to how I also discovered this company whick I dipped into but when Sue signed on I went into the sp bigtime as I always like third-party validation and if someone as smart, experienced with motors and former CEO of a GE division thinks this is good enough to give up a lucrative and secure career at GE then that was HUGE validation for the potential here
If you have issues with any of his videos why not give us some examples? Wanto to start with the Lightning analogy?