RE:ANOTHER DAY WITH MORE CONFUSING POSTS
Melida wrote: -As it relates to Pyro, "book value," at the present time, is a useless balance sheet item I ignore it. Interestingly, book value was an important item a few years ago in relation to Equitable Finance. A Canadian company that trades on the TSE. It ran into difficulties. Won't get into the details. The stock price got to a low point where it was trading at less than book value. And book vaule for this company was an important metric due to the nature of its business and assets. Essentially, book value told me that Equitable was trading at below it's asset sale value. Equitable basically just holds a whole bunch of mortages so if it was going under there would be a sale of all these mortgages. What the balance sheet told me was that even in this worst case scenario, this sale of all the mortgages would provide more than enough money to pay all liabilites with money left over to pay all shareholders an amount that would be more than what the stock was trading for. So, basically NO risk to the downside. Ask Warren Buffett. He bailed out Equitable Finance and made a killing. I'm proud to say I did well on my investment. The point here, as it relates to Pyro, is that due to the nature of it's assets book value is really low BUT does not tell the whole story. It doesn't come close. Book value does not include assets that are created/developed by the company. In Pyro's case the value of the company is based on Plasma torches and patents, non of which have been purchased by Pyro. It's all been developed by Pyro.
New point: As was outlined earier today by another poster, cash flow, receivables, potential... are what is important to Pyro. The poster indicated that Pyro was brutal with its management of receivables (read the post). There's no question that the big receivable that is slow being received has caused problems. Lots of problems. However, it is my understanding that Pyro is working through this problem. The situation is far from dire. And it always helps to get two big payments this week (total of almost $1,000,000.00). Pyro has indiacted (year end comments) that is has the cash to carry on business as a going concern.
Some posters are pointing to Pyro's losses as outlined in their financials as being something they have to somehow repay. This is not the case. In fact, these accountant losses can be carried forward to future years and used to offset future revenue. Therefore No tax to pay. What these posters need to understand is that Pyro has very little actual debt that actually has to be paid off. This, to me, is amazing given the very lengthy process Pyro has needed to develop the plasma torches.
There's a lot more to say. But I've done enough for this week.
Melida,
We are in agreement about the limited value of book value with PYR, and the importance of cash flow.
The issue here, is that there is declining revenues, the company has never been profitable, and the operations of the business are in question, given the growing accounts receivable, and the failure of the company to execute historically.
In addition, there is negative working capital, and this is the oxygen that accompany needs to survive.
You make the comment that:
“Some posters are pointing to Pyro's losses as outlined in their financials as being something they have to somehow repay. This is not the case. In fact, these accountant losses can be carried forward to future years and used to offset future revenue. Therefore No tax to pay. What these posters need to understand is that Pyro has very little actual debt that actually has to be paid off. “
I certainly didn’t make that comment, and I didn’t see anyone else make it either, so I’m not sure if this is just
a “ straw-man" logical fallacy?
I would say, however, that dismissing the accounting losses, from the balance sheet, and from the financial statements is a mistake in my opinion.
Sure , what you’re saying about taxes is true and that this is an accounting term, but the point is it can indicate something about the operations of a business.After all if a company can't generate profits year after year, and has declining revenue, and costs that exceed those -how can they keep turning on the lights?
The part of PYRs balance sheet indicates that PYR has negative retained earnings (which it calls “accumulated deficit”) of -$121.9 million as at December 31, 2023 (and its growing as it was $93,4 million at December 31, 2022)
This means that it has lost assets from its operations (rather than retained any earnings) because it has not been profitable.
The fact that this company has never been profitable, in some models, (its used in the Altman Z score) to predict failure to survive or bankruptcy.
If a company consistently operates at a loss over time, may signal that the company is struggling to generate profits and may face challenges in meeting its financial obligations, such as debt payments or operating expenses.
It also can affect ratings, the ability to secure financing and the markets interpretation of thier prospects.
For a company that is down over 97%-the market is speaking
all imo
for entertainment and education(mostly mine)
'don't invest based on what I or anyone writes here it's all just a big larf.