Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0

The Worst "Shareholder Update" Ever.  Prepare to need a drink

CCTR (China Crescent)

In this web-cast, the founder and CEO (Philip Verges) of China Cresent says and suggests the dumbest things I've ever heard in a web-cast. 

You can find it here: http://chinacrescent.com/webcastshprv_20091201.htm

Prepare to have stomach pains in disgust if you own shares in this company, or stomach pains from laughter if you do not.  (I for one own shares as a speculative bet, as the company does seem ridiculously undervalued... but after listening to this, well, I'm not surprised).

In this, Philp basically suggest to improve your investment approach with otcbb stocks and CCTR by means of selling when there is substantial returns, and simply repeating that multiple times.

On slide 6 he acts like a $0.02 stock is a great thing because it will have a larger daily trading volume than a higher priced stock would.  He acts interested in the fact that of the most 100 actively traded pink sheet securities, 12% of dollar volume accounts for 93% of share volume.  WELL DUH!  When a stock is trading at 2 fricking cents, any dollar amount adds up to a lot of share volume.

Later he acknowledges the share price of CCTR has gone down (to a price of less than $0.03), and has been asked the question "who is selling all the stock", to which his reply is "who is buying all this stock!"?  Wow.  The completely wrong answer to that question in the face of the stock being killed.  If the stock appreciated in price, maybe that would be an appropriate response.  Oh, and the answer to who is selling all this stock... Well, from Sept. 30 2008, to Sept. 30 2009, the weighted average common basic share count went from 1,536,351 all the way up to 49,607,610!  And the weighted average common diluted share count went from 3,840,878 all the way to 124,019,025.  See it for yourself: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/745655/000115752309008195/a6104723.htm  And then he acts like the stock is better positioned to double precisely because of it is down to just 2 fricking cents.

On slide 12 is where it gets real bad.  He is advocating the company believes that $0.30 is their suggested fair value target price per share, and then says about the recent dip in share price that "there are some that speculate that the dip in share price was in response to an increase in the number of shares issued and outstanding".  WOW REALLY!  "some", "speculate" such a crazy thing like that!?!  AND THEN he says: "I can not uh believe that the increase in issued and outstanding is the sole reason responsible for the dip in share price".  "No, your not going to find me uh uh believing in uh the current issued and outstanding accounting for the share price." "If that caused uh some people to lose confidence in the company and sell their position, well, ummm ummm, maybe that created some momentum which brought the share price down".

More quotes yet:

"I believe that the share price has a high likely-hood to realize highs that were achieved earlier this year"

"uh, I believe that the company can exceed what those highs are"

"I believe that the $0.30 share fair value target price is still a reasonable target price for the company, um, at 120 million plus shares, at 200 million shares, at 300 million shares!"

"Even at 300 million shares I believe $0.30 is a reasonable suggested fair value target price per share"

In conclusion, my suggestion to Philip Verges and the rest of the management at China Crescent is to run this business by focusing on actual operations.  Quit trying to be some type of school for penny stock "investors".  You are not good at that, and the things stated in that web-cast are absurd and should be embarrassing.  Focus on the business, not on justifying the terrible share price depreciation.

RK

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

You mean for the price of this post, 10c to the Thurgood Marshall Academy, I could have had five shares of CCTR?!  I feel ripped off!

:)

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

lol.  More like 3 as the price is almost hitting 3 cents.  But you'd be left with a penny... which might be able to buy 10 shares of it in a couple months.

 RK

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

I don't think I'd ever invest in a company that diluted itself in such a grand fashion.  Unlike many investors, I'm not one of the school that you should automatically avoid a company because of dilution (which normally is a reflection of the past, not the present and future), but when the dilution is that huge, then yes ... I'd keep far, far away. 

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

I almost died laughing. Awesome stuff.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

Now all I need is the bank ceos to state historical prices of their stocks as the basis for why share prices will go up, even as they do massive share sales.

 

"But don't worry folks, Citigroup is definitely worth 30, no 40, no wait 100 dollars, even if we issue 10x the current outstanding shares!" 

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

Wow

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

 "I believe that the share price has a high likely-hood to realize highs that were achieved earlier this year"

Companies should NEVER talk about their share price.  That is your first red flag.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

"Buying high and selling low - essentially hedging."
Um, what? 

"We just don't believe the long term investment opportunity comes from long term investment appreciation."
I think I just got a nosebleed.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

This is mind-numbing...great find!

I bet it makes sense if you replace the company name with "blackjack" or "roulette."

Posting a link on our editor's blog. 

-Anand Chokkavelu (TMFBomb)

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

ROFLOL high comedy indeed!

Print the post Back To Top