OK, I'm gong to have a rant, after seeing Larks last couple of...

OK, I'm gong to have a rant, after seeing Larks last couple of trading sessions - Really? - approaching 1.00

Looks like it's going to go sub $1.00 unless someone has a rabbit and a hat. Appears likely some support at 1.00, then down to around .90 then all time trading low circa .74

I have now sold all my holdings but continue to watch this stock, as it has been, could be, and should be, a great little company.

Current market conditions for the sales of "luxury" products is very soft and the financials disclosed 22/02/24, show decreased sales of only 7.4 Million Dollars for 1st Half 2024, down 2.2 Million on equivalent results in 2023.

We are dealing with a company that has a market cap as we speak of 85 Million Dollars, and, at its intraday height of 5.62 per share, some 400 PLUS Million Dollars.

Sales of ~ 15 Million Dollars per annum. EBITDA Loss for this half of 0.4 Million.

This is a company that has been on the share market since listing as Australian Whisky Holdings in 2016, with a par value per share of .90 ( Two 30 for 1 consolidations saw this price achieved - .001 to 3.0, then 3.0 to 90 cents )

So 8 years in business as a publicly listed company, with 24 years prior being run as a small private business, starting literally from the kitchen table by Bill and Lyn Lark.

8 years of investment and capital raises.

Negative revenue. Share price back to nearly where it listed. Bugger all sales to work with, difficult market conditions, cost cutting to try and trim the sails, still working from the old Cambridge tin sheds established ~ 20 years ago by Bill Lark, big expenditure to purchase Shene Estate ~ 40 Million Dollars, with no sign of the previously announced and planned new Distillery and Visitor Centre anywhere on the horizon.

Nant another (expensive) holding which is a magic spot, but what real value is that expensive asset bringing the company?

Whilst all businesses go through tough times and cycles, I suggest interested shareholders read the annual reports for the last few years and have a look at what the Directors/Chairmen/CEOs have been paid. It's public material and it is not pretty in light of where the company sits today. We are not talking pocket change.

Make up your own mind about how shareholders money has been invested.

Damn shame, because Bill and Lyn Lark are the real deal, and I for one would think that a publicly listed company that has had access to significant amounts of shareholder capital over the journey, finds itself so ineffectual, and with so few runs on the board in terms of how all business is measured - EBIT, EBITDA, Profit, growth of new markets, and most other business indicators you would like to subject them to.

To be fair, sales of 15 Million per annum is obviously sales growth since inception, but still without positive ongoing profit being generated.

The "stock on hand" is about the only other thing that has also increased significantly, over the years, and I have also previously pointed out that the stock is valued by the company in their financials at a diluted 43% ABV, rather than the actual liquid in barrel at cask strength.

Lark always divulge this, and always have, but my research demonstrates that the Tasmanian Industry norm is cask strength liquid in barrel ~ 60 - 65% ABV.

This has the effect of putting more litres on the balance sheet, but I say again, Lark have always divulged this to shareholders.

I continue to look for a point at which I wish to reinvest, because I love the story, I love the product, and I wish Lark and the Whisky Industry all the best.

I'm not sure where that re-entry point will be.

One mans opinion, Sentiment is Watch: Rant over.