-
01-08-2008, 01:55 PM
#211
Impatient, do you think I should change my name to Patient then!
I first came in when the price was about 25c (4 or 5 years ago?). I'm afraid my guess is the price will not get up there again for 2 or 3 years yet, even with revenue currently growing at 30% to 40% compound. But at that stage it will probably be a mistake to sell out, since the revenue should have a fair chance of continuing to grow at that rate.
The big news for me now is that, finally, I really cannot see this company going bankrupt now. With likely revenue of at least $1 million this year, it seems to me this company has at last got a definite future. Doesn't make up for the years past, but there is nothing to be done about that now except shed a few tears maybe.
-
01-08-2008, 06:17 PM
#212
Originally Posted by simla
Impatient, do you think I should change my name to Patient then!
Go on, I dare you :-) But don't change it back when
a) you're still sitting there staring at a 5c-8c share price in 3 years' time or
b) you'll read Barry's announcement in 2009 that due to the recession, rising costs and blablabla the company has no more funds to go on.
Hopefully either won't come true, but the auditors weren't too optimistic either, were they?
Anyway, pls don't talk about PERCENTAGE growth in revenues - from a miniscule base any extra dollar looks like a huge growth. When we have multi-million dollar annual growth values, we can talk again. Till then, STAY POSITIVE :-)
-
02-08-2008, 07:27 AM
#213
Okay, we can continue this in 3 years!
-
02-08-2008, 06:13 PM
#214
Member
Anyone go to the AGM? any more news?
I found this in the Otago Daily Times, which is quite significant.
while research revenue from food giant Nestle stood at $470,000 to date with an expected $750,000 by the end of the year.
-
02-08-2008, 09:28 PM
#215
Originally Posted by THEONE
Anyone go to the AGM? any more news?
I found this in the Otago Daily Times, which is quite significant.
while research revenue from food giant Nestle stood at $470,000 to date with an expected $750,000 by the end of the year.
Never read anything into a billion dollar company handing out chicken feed for a bit of R&D.
Maybe a couple of Nestle R&D managers needed an excuse so that they could have an annual ski holiday in Queenstown.
Just balancing the statement.
-
03-08-2008, 06:18 PM
#216
Even for Nestle, I doubt that sort of money is considered R&D poultry comestibles...
-
10-08-2008, 10:22 AM
#217
Blis K12 Throat Guard was in the LifePharmacy junk mail this week, which is the first time I have seen it advertised in NZ for a very long time. It was on the same page as Codral, Coldrex, Sudafed, Strepsils, and Robitussin, which is probably pretty sensible positioning. Pretty late in the season of course. Anyone seen it in any mainstream media?
-
11-08-2008, 11:18 AM
#218
Can anyone explain to me why there are ALWAYS shares for sale for 6.5c? It is only ever about 20,000 shares, but it is always below the price where the market has shown willing to buy. And whenever these shares are bought, another parcel of the same size and price appears soon after.
The only plausible explanation I can see is that someone is trying to keep the market down. But the advantage of doing that defeats me. Wiser heads than mine out there please?
-
11-08-2008, 12:55 PM
#219
Member
Possibly a broker placing a standard low bid and waiting for seller offers?
-
11-08-2008, 06:48 PM
#220
I just think that's what someone realistically thinks the shares are worth and he or she's happy to offload their shareholdings at whatever price possible. If they believed they were worth more, I am sure they would ask for more (who wants to make LESS money than possible?)
I have a suggestion though, simla - BUY them if they are actually below the 'normal' selling price. Take a mortgage out and buy as much as you can, ha ha ha. Or do you perhaps truly think they are not the bargain you make them out to be (of yes, and let's applaud the one pathetic little mailer ad in...how many years?)?
For someone to 'try and keep the market down' sounds like some far-fetched conspiracy theory to me. Any suggestions as to who shot JFK? :-)
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks