Seeking Alpha

Rick Krementz

Rick Krementz
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Rick Krementz's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Bob, that is exactly the clause I was referring to. I don't know if there are no authorized shares means that there is no effective registration. I don't know if the A-holders can use that to negotiate with Axion. I sure am not a lawyer.

    The clause continues with "at any time", so even if the failure is corrected rapidly, there are consequences. What consequences? I don't know, but my guess whatever they are, it is not good for the rest of the stockholders.
    Mar 23, 2015. 12:36 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    FPA - That is my point. The board may, in order to temporarily forestall bankruptcy, grant the warrant holders some exceptional relief. That's what I meant by "held hostage".
    Mar 23, 2015. 11:04 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Wow, I am humbled by the positive response. Thank you.

    I think it could be interesting to run for the board. I am not interested in being CEO because I could not dedicate full time, and Axion needs a full time chief. I think I could be a very productive Chair.

    I think we need to substantially change the board. If others are interested, please contact me.

    I am "back in the game" in a very small way, and bought back the shares I sold last June. While I lost 90% from 2009 to 2014, I avoided losing the 99% from 2014-present. I now have more shares than if I had done nothing.
    Mar 23, 2015. 10:47 AM | 15 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Bob, I don't want to be argumentative, but I do not absolutely know what happens to B-holders when the authorized share limit is hit. I remember near the end of the PIPE timeline there was a major cashless exchange of warrants for shares, otherwise this round of death spiral financing couldn't happen. Perhaps (speculation without knowledge) some B-boys have already profited handsomely, and the next step is holding the company hostage (having run out of authorized shares) for the next funding round. The B-boys may know getting approval for authorized stock may be difficult, so this is another way to extract a yet another pound of flesh.

    The payoff may be requiring Maxim to be the next funding agent, and the remaining B-warrants become extremely privileged. I do not know.

    Remember all the A-warrants are still out there (2.1m); none would have been exchanged. They become cashless conversions in certain situations, too. With a good lawyer, they may be valuable when the authorized stock runs out. Perhaps they do NOT get reset in the next reverse split?

    The non-retail investors from Maxim have already dumped the shares to a whole new group of investors, probably less informed than Axionistas. They are ready to be bilked by passing a new share authorization with a snazzy thousands to 1 reverse split and millions of new money raised. "SELL STOCK, NOT BATTERIES!"

    All this is speculative. I assume the Maxim financiers a) are making money and b) know many ways to multi-skin cats and hawk them to the unsuspecting.

    OTOH, you may be right and some of the non-retail Maxim investors are hurting and want the price to rise.
    Mar 23, 2015. 10:18 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Bob, I do not see much of an incentive for the holders of the B-warrants to continuously depress the stock price. The B-boys make a return on investment regardless of the price.

    Whether the price is 50 cents, 5 cents, or 0.5 cents, they make the same return, subject only to a little guessing about short term noise in the price.

    They exercise their warrant and sell. That action tends to drive the price down. I think their best strategy is exercise and then dump just about as quickly as possible. It doesn't really matter much what price they exercise at.

    Most of those who bought from the B-dumpers do want to see the price rise. But if they see continued price declines, they will want out as soon as possible, too. There will be just as much downward pressure as before.

    We share a lack of knowledge of the inner Wall St. workings. Perhaps there is some (unknown to me) chicanery that will be profitable once all the authorized stock is issued. Regardless, I see Wall Street's sole interest is getting out with as much money as possible, and doesn't care about the stock price or the enterprise it represents. Bankruptcy or liquidation is simply collateral damage.

    In other words, I can't be optimistic about the price staying above a penny, regardless when the authorized share limit is reached.
    Mar 22, 2015. 03:31 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Thanks for the compliment, alsobirdman.

    Just out of curiosity, how many others would like me to be on the board or CEO at Axion? Click on "Like".
    Mar 21, 2015. 10:11 AM | 53 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    EM - You are right; I stand corrected. I have been conflating "switcher" with "slug". A switcher is a single loco, usually diesel, that is used to move railcars short distances in a rail yard. A slug is an unmanned attachment to a diesel loco that adds additional traction motors, so high torque starts and stops are easier.

    My comments about a "slug" were referring to NS 999, as in http://bit.ly/1nEHWZ8. NS999 was intended to be a standalone, battery-only switching engine in a rail yard. No authoritative information has been released about NS999 effectiveness as a switcher. NS999 has been transferred out of Altoona to Roanoke for further testing. Rumor has it that it will be tested in a hybrid consist, but that has not been verified AFAIK.

    I stand by my thought that the generator-less pantograph-less NS999, which is not connected to a diesel-electric loco, does not seem (from afar) like a good technology fit to be a switcher. Obviously, real world railroad engineers can prove me wrong.

    I have consistently stated that a hybrid consist, i.e., a set of at least one diesel-electric loco and a battery-only loco connected together, appears to make sense. The size of the battery-only slug discussed to work effectively with one or two diesels is twice the size of NS999. As you wrote, there would be no reason for a slug to have a pantograph or a generator.

    Of course, just because hybrid consist appears to me (and others) to make sense does not mean it will work effectively for NS.

    My apologies to all if I have caused confusion.
    Mar 20, 2015. 02:38 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Typo clarification: I suspect the answers to 1 & 2, at worst, will actually be more nuanced.
    Mar 20, 2015. 11:31 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Amouna - I do not know the answers to 1 & 2. If I did, I wouldn't be asking.

    Even if the answers are "No" and "It sux", questions 5 & 6 need answers. I suspect the answers to 1 & 2 art worst will actually be more nuanced.

    For example, I have always thought the NS generator-less battery slug without a pantograph was a weird technology fit. Perhaps the slug project got "forced" by some manager who no longer is in control. Other corporate policies may then have prevented development of the hybrid consist concept, and carryover failure from the slug derailed it. I am not trying to be optimistic, but NS was perhaps failure as a customer, not a battery failure. I really don't know.

    The weight and volume of PbC possibly put it at a serious disadvantage to various Li technologies for auto start /stop, especially for a premium car like BMW. Wrong technology for the application.

    About the only thing we know is there were not catastrophic failures, such as fatal explosions. Not much to go on.
    Mar 20, 2015. 11:23 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    blauschuh - There are several unanswered questions. Changing the board has the possibility of answering them.

    1) Is the PbC battery as wonderful as many think it is?

    2) Why has no customer ever bought repetitively or implemented it in a commercial product?

    3) Is there an opportunity to make it a commercial success, or is it fruitless to try?

    4) If the company management focus is getting a return to shareholders instead of maximizing management salaries, can there be a business?

    5) Should the company be simply liquidated?

    6) Should prior management be "turned in" to the SEC for punishment.

    If a new board and management see a real opportunity, I think raising some capital from Axionistas is feasible. I also fully understand exhaustion; "Why bother" is appealing.

    My guess is the likelihood of recovering value from management, even with a conviction, is slim. OTOH, the articles recently cited do show liabilities to Maxim-type financiers, so the possibility is not zero.
    Mar 20, 2015. 09:24 AM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Amouna - I think you are drawing a very wrong conclusion. The issue is not that a union contract negotiator is always incompetent or worse. An effective negotiator very much should be looking out long term, and his focus should be on hammering out the best deal for all the companies involved, not just himself.

    I have clearly expressed my disdain for TG, but that was because of his individual actions at Axion, not because of his prior experiences. I have no idea how effective he was at Gallagher Elevator, and besides it is irrelevant today. If it goes to criminal prosecution, priors do make a difference, but that is another story entirely.
    Mar 20, 2015. 09:08 AM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Bill - If you read the three articles posted recently about death spiral financing, it seems to be a pretty thin line between legal and illegal. I don't know if laws were broken, but it sure does smell awful.

    Among the most suspicious items to this non-lawyer is the last minute inclusion of the cashless conversion clauses. While the sourceless rumor is that it was "forced" by a single investor, I think it may well have been part of the scheme from the very beginning, and slipped in at the very last minute to avoid detection. IIRC, the final update was after the close of business the night before the IPO. There had been another update without cashless conversion just a few hours earlier, so most people (anybody?) would not have gone over the very final document with a fine tooth comb. SURPRISE!

    This would explain TG's attempt to keep the authorized shares at 350m (17.5 BILLION shares pre-RS), since he knew and planned for the terrible price crash. Even after being called, he managed to keep authorized shares at 100m. Remember how many people poo-pooed the danger of 100m shares of stock dilution back then? All 100m will probably be issued in a week or two. Poo-poo becomes oop-oops.

    I am pretty sure attempting to deceive investors in that manner is illegal.

    The authorized shares were raised from 200m to 350m just the year before.

    Most of the board could probably be replaced at a special stockholder meeting, despite the staggered board terms. Bogan and Farley are appointees, since there was no 2013 Annual Meeting. [The meeting in September 2013 was the 2012 meeting] Usually an appointed director serves only until the next election. DeGiacinto's directorship is also empty. I assume there are one or two more directors terms ending in 2015, so a special meeting could probably replace them, too.

    If they had called an annual meeting on time, it would be pretty difficult to force a shareholders meeting, and difficult to replace directors. Since they didn't, it could be pretty easy.

    I appear to be an "expert" because of an hour on Google - nothing more.
    Mar 19, 2015. 06:04 PM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    Wish I had paid more attention to that article. I think I believed in JP's article then.
    Mar 19, 2015. 04:07 PM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    blauschuh - You and Amouna can ask DE court for the meeting! Maybe Bob A want to join you, too.
    Mar 19, 2015. 03:43 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Axion Power Concentrator 392: Mar. 14, 2015 [View instapost]
    It would be interesting to see what happens if a stockholder meeting was called. I suspect many of the new shareholders are, or will be very soon, lurkers here. Since management has not called a stockholders meeting within the required time, it appears to be near trivial to make it happen. No need to get x% shareholders authorization.
    Mar 19, 2015. 03:04 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
2,686 Comments
2,005 Likes