[LBWR]: Promoter Creede Bighorns ("Cris") attempts to justify that 5% of the revenues of a business is better than owning 100% of the business
.
1. First read up on how Labwire, Inc. issued false and misleading press releases on the K-9 buiness, here: http://snipurl.com/289c2 and here: http://snipurl.com/289c7
2. As a reminder, in recent SEC filngs LBWR finally admitted that LBWR never really owned the K-9 business, and specifically, that it only received a 5% commission on Revenues for introduction of business to a private company that operates the K-9 business.
3. LBWR also admitted in the recent SEC filing that the private K-9 company was actually 50% owned individually by the CEO of LBWR, Dexter Morris, aka G. Dexter Morris, aka George Dexter Morris, aka George Morris.
4. Labwire, Inc. and the message board Promoters such as Creede Bighorns have previously pumped the stock by stating that its businesses have 20%-30% margins.
5. Now read this post by Promoter Creede Bighorns where he attempts to justify that 5% of the Revenues from a private K-9 company is better than owning 100% of the K-9 business:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=29192686
6. So what do we have here?
7. We have LBWR that spends management time in sales and marketing to bring in K-9 business that it refers to a private company that is 50% owned by the CEO of LBWR personally. LBWR doesn't own any of the private company. It also appears that the private K-9 company and its management is based at LBWR's headquarters.
8. In addition, according to the pinksheets filings by LBWR (http://snipurl.com/289di), and this is something that Promoter Creede Bighorns fails to mention, we also have that LBWR advanced about $250,000 to the private K-9 company to cover its overhead.
9. If we look only at one of the K-9 contracts that LBWR claimed to have signed with a big company, the $11.25 million contract (http://snipurl.com/289c2), the income that would result for 100% ownership at 30% margins would be about $3.4 million. However, Creede claims that it would be better for LBWR to only receive 5% of the gross revenues, about $0.56 million while paying for sales and marketing to bring in new business and while advancing about $250,000 to the private K-9 company.
10. Something is not right here in Promoter Creede Bighorns attempt to justify that $0.56 million (less sales and marketing expenses and amounts advanced to the private company for overhead) is better than $3.4 million for the LBWR stockholders - and this is just one of the many K-9 contracts that LBWR has claimed it has signed.
11. Is Promoter Creede Bighorns worried that start-up expenses would be too high for LBWR to own 100% of the K-9 business?....well, guess what - LBWR has advanced the start-up expenses, about $250,000, to the private K-9 business that it doesn't own.
12. What is wrong with this picture?
13. What ever happened to the $250,000 that was advanced by LBWR to the private K-9 business that it doesn't own? - Shouldn't LBWR stockhoders be concerned about whether this money was ever paid back to LBWR, particularly when the private K-9 company that received the funds is individually 50% owned by the CEO of LBWR, Dexter Morris? This, of course, is the subject of an upcoming blog entry by the_worm06.
_______________________________________________
1. First read up on how Labwire, Inc. issued false and misleading press releases on the K-9 buiness, here: http://snipurl.com/289c2 and here: http://snipurl.com/289c7
2. As a reminder, in recent SEC filngs LBWR finally admitted that LBWR never really owned the K-9 business, and specifically, that it only received a 5% commission on Revenues for introduction of business to a private company that operates the K-9 business.
3. LBWR also admitted in the recent SEC filing that the private K-9 company was actually 50% owned individually by the CEO of LBWR, Dexter Morris, aka G. Dexter Morris, aka George Dexter Morris, aka George Morris.
4. Labwire, Inc. and the message board Promoters such as Creede Bighorns have previously pumped the stock by stating that its businesses have 20%-30% margins.
5. Now read this post by Promoter Creede Bighorns where he attempts to justify that 5% of the Revenues from a private K-9 company is better than owning 100% of the K-9 business:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=29192686
6. So what do we have here?
7. We have LBWR that spends management time in sales and marketing to bring in K-9 business that it refers to a private company that is 50% owned by the CEO of LBWR personally. LBWR doesn't own any of the private company. It also appears that the private K-9 company and its management is based at LBWR's headquarters.
8. In addition, according to the pinksheets filings by LBWR (http://snipurl.com/289di), and this is something that Promoter Creede Bighorns fails to mention, we also have that LBWR advanced about $250,000 to the private K-9 company to cover its overhead.
9. If we look only at one of the K-9 contracts that LBWR claimed to have signed with a big company, the $11.25 million contract (http://snipurl.com/289c2), the income that would result for 100% ownership at 30% margins would be about $3.4 million. However, Creede claims that it would be better for LBWR to only receive 5% of the gross revenues, about $0.56 million while paying for sales and marketing to bring in new business and while advancing about $250,000 to the private K-9 company.
10. Something is not right here in Promoter Creede Bighorns attempt to justify that $0.56 million (less sales and marketing expenses and amounts advanced to the private company for overhead) is better than $3.4 million for the LBWR stockholders - and this is just one of the many K-9 contracts that LBWR has claimed it has signed.
11. Is Promoter Creede Bighorns worried that start-up expenses would be too high for LBWR to own 100% of the K-9 business?....well, guess what - LBWR has advanced the start-up expenses, about $250,000, to the private K-9 business that it doesn't own.
12. What is wrong with this picture?
13. What ever happened to the $250,000 that was advanced by LBWR to the private K-9 business that it doesn't own? - Shouldn't LBWR stockhoders be concerned about whether this money was ever paid back to LBWR, particularly when the private K-9 company that received the funds is individually 50% owned by the CEO of LBWR, Dexter Morris? This, of course, is the subject of an upcoming blog entry by the_worm06.
_______________________________________________
posted by the_worm06 | 5/10/2008 02:35:00 PM
6 Comments:
162
+10
GB-ND
c. Bighorns
Creede,
Oh my...I am impressed
So now you are going to pay for another promoter to call 162 securities brokers to spam your promotional material about LBWR.
Wow!
Say, do you think, by any chance, that LBWR has filed false and misleading statements with the SEC regarding the amount of common shares issued for cash in 2007?
Nah, that couldn't be - after all you continue to say that these guys are real clean cut - you know, like their Securities Counsel.
good luck to you
regards,
the_worm06
This comment has been removed by the author.
Creede,
Here is another question for you. Do you think that LBWR obtained this Bank Credit Line with the false and misleading Financial statements for 2006 that it filed with pinksheets.com?
You know that false and misleading income statement with $73,000 in net income as opposed to the restated figure of NEGATIVE $500,000, in addition to the false and misleading Shareholders Equity figure for Dec. 31, 2006 of $859,000 as opposed to the restated figure of NEGATIVE $200,000?
http://snipurl.com/213iu
2. Line of credit
On February 13, 2007, the Company established a $300,000 revolving line of credit with Frost Bank that matures on February 13, 2008. The interest rate on the outstanding balance of the revolving line of credit is a floating prime plus 1% and is due on the 24th of each month. The principal balance owing by the Company at September 30, 2007 was $121,933 and accrued interest payable was $-0-.
180
+10
Now this sounds like an Ivy League eduation.
http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=24579812
Posted by: twoggle
In reply to: sandintheshorts who wrote msg# 5734 Date:5/11/2008 4:50:35 AM
Post #of 5741
Not that it matters so much what the cash flow was two years ago.... The company's financial statement that was available to the public at the time of Creede's questions (April, 2006) shows that it was cash flow positive. Of course, financial statements submitted later in 2006 show later quarters to be cash flow negative. I don't think anyone but someone selling the stock short would care about ancient history.
There is no evidence from the filings that Dexter was selling shares at the time of Creede's question. There were some shares sold, probably later that quarter. But the O/S has stayed pretty steady:
O/S on June 30, 2006: 139,799,001
Current O/S in IBox: 140,899,001 (almost two years later!)
Float =~ 17 million shares.
Increasing revenue, essentially no dillution compared to almost every other pinksheet company, very low float, moving (slowly) to the OTCBB, filing with the SEC, ungagged TA, and a CEO with many years in the field! Who would be dumb enough to sell their shares now!? I'm buying more!
T
GB-ND
c
Creede,
thanks for the info
and would this be the same "twoggle" that just got nailed by sandintheshorts on the IHUB message board as shown below?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=29221166
Posted by: sandintheshorts
In reply to: twoggle who wrote msg# 5744 Date:5/12/2008 1:23:14 PM
Post #of 5746
Twoggle, how wrong you are.
Any experienced manager will have internal monthly and quarterly cash flow numbers within days of when the month or quarter ends. If you review the pinksheets and SEC filings you will see that LBWR was cash flow negative during 2006. You will also see that it was cash flow negative during the first quarter of 2006, and more importantly you will see that LBWR was cash flow negative during the 2nd quarter of 2006, which is when the date of the posted message falls on.
Regarding the sale of shares. Do you really expect us to be that stupid to believe that Dexter meant that he wasn't selling shares on that particular day? Again if you review the pinksheets and SEC filings you will see that LBWR was selling shares during the 2006 2nd quarter, which is the quarter that the date of the post falls on.
regards
Shorts
Post a Comment
<< Home