BUD (ASX) Ann: Acquisition of LIFX and Share Placement

Originally posted by techfacts ↑

Seriously @Send2deking an @bentas74 is this the best you have, personal insults. For all your upramping and no ability to back it up with reasons why.

Yet for all us downrampers and negative people, who are actually realists and who use common sense when assessing companies and management, can you please explain to us why a 50% discount make any sense at all.

Lifx sells 1.8m ligh bulbs and is bleeding money cannot make a profit. BUD buy this loss making retailer so they can add revenue to the topline yet add more losses to the bottom line of an already under stress business being BUD, then borrow $40m to pay for Lifx, with debt to pile on top on the already loss making companies, so this is all looking awesome right now. Then to top it off, management decide that selling the product with a 50% discount while maintaining the same cost base is somehow going to make them profitable this year. In anything it is going to halve their revenue and increase the losses by 50% because cost of sale has not changed, WOW, this is great thinking by management. Next we will see OHMs for half price...awesome.

I know the uprampers and people with rose coloured glasses will argue that these companies are start ups, fast growing businesses and so on, they arent this anymore, they public listed entities with SH money, debt laden businesses with massive burn rates, trying to find a way to breakeven. I hope they can achieve breakeven for all shareholders.

Regardless, it would be good to understand why the uprampers think this situation is a good one and why it does not signal desperation by both companies? IMO

Expand

Just to say this - did you notice that most of the uprampers continue to paint a picture of good health while they quietly at the same time been exiting or looking to exit or have exited. Where are all the advocates now? One has turned detractor, many have exited weeks or months ago - they did not procrastinate.
So while people often say non holders don't know best , at least they don't have conflict of interests. Examine with a reality check- heavy involvement in a stock makes it hard for people to think straight.
I had warned the guys in BIG previously, one stayed in denial to the end and lost $1m because he didn't want to pay CGT, he lost his capital as well. This is not BIG , far from it but I see it being in the similar sort of boat to a lesser degree.