snow
12 hours ago
What makes t his post unconvincing:
"2. Nasdaq Uplisting: Management has made it clear that their goal for 2024 includes uplisting to the Nasdaq. This milestone, once achieved, is expected to significantly elevate the companyโs visibility, potentially driving new investors into the stock.
3. Expanding Business Divisions: Beyond telecommunications, iQSTEL is making strides in emerging technologies like IoT, electric vehicles (EV), and even the Metaverse. These new revenue streams provide additional growth avenues that arenโt yet fully appreciated by the market."
The goal is for uplisting this year. There are just over 3 months to go. The pps will have to jump more than 1,000% for this to happen or there will have to be a reverse split. There is no assessment of the chance of this happening. Are there any significant new revenue streams?
oldman69
3 days ago
To clarify their official response to a RS is:
"Hi Dan, two things to be aware of: one, the company has no plans at this time for a reverse split. Secondly, if anything like that were to occur, it would only be in concert with investment bankers who would be infusing capital, possibly assets or through other means is part of a careful up listing plan. Further, we would seek shareholder approval to make sure everybody was in support. There would be no surprises"
Good enough for me!!!
theSauceman
3 days ago
Sauerkraut, show me. Unless you can I'm sticking with the belief that the PREFER not to. I am bullish on $IQST and have hoped to see "no RS" mentioned by the company. Never have I seen an absolute NO. IMO they have left the door open just a crack in case push comes to shove and they have no other option in meeting their goal. If they are serious about NASDAQ and the timeline they have set runs out, then they could be faced with a decision. Thus the door is open a crack to prevent them from being cornered in to admitting they ever said "absolutely not." Do your homework and I believe you will never find that they ever said flat out NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate and admire their persistence and drive to get to NASDAQ organically. And I certainly hope they (we) do. I think the company is strong enough, but if the clock winds down I will respect their decision and know they never lied about it. They will not surprise me and though I may think that a chosen option is not the best, I expect that $IQST will fill its spot in the sector.
theSauceman
3 days ago
The interview was a little flat. But then that could be personalities and presentation. It seemed to be largely reiteration... but at least they did reiterate. I think their goals for $IQST are adequate and acheivable. I like that they are not shooting too high, but keeping goals within reach. One quality of the interview was their indication to keep the timeline moving, even with intention to realize some finalizations sooner than later. So, these two lack some people skills, but I suspect their intent for the growth of the company, and for the share value, is sincere. I look forward to wading thru the mire of negative feedback with them to see, and benefit by, the success of the company.
STRICTLY MY OPINION FOR MY OWN ENTERTAINMENT. NOT MEANT AS ADVICE OR SUGGESTION BY ANY MEASURE. BEST TO ALL.
Boiler_Master
4 days ago
I don't invest for 1 year out Snow. 3 years out, 2027... I would expect they hit their 1B revenue goal. 25 to 50M net (2.5 to 5%) but focus would still mainly be on growth to achieve the 1B revenue so net will probably be closer to the 25M. At that point I'd say average P/E is 25-30 but they should trade well above that bc YOY performance will be well above average (8-10% annual improvements). Maybe 60x earnings would be fair. But going conservative, 25M net and only a 25 P/E that'd be a 625M market cap which is a 1,916% improvement from today's valuation. On the higher end, which will be alot more realistic if they have streams of revenue from multiple industries by then... 50M x 60 P/E = 3 billion market cap. So low end bearish case would be around $3 a share with high end being well over $10.
You'll say I'm crazy, just pumping. But is a net income of 2.5% and 25 P/E pumper talk? No, it's an extremely bearish prediction.
What would you project the 2027 numbers and valuations to be on the high and low end?
snow
5 days ago
I sggest that those who disagree with me regarding the recent interview with management listen to what they stated. I regard their performance as weak. It looks as if the biddders agree with me:
"GTSM 0.1627 10,741 11:12
CSTI 0.162 10,000 10:36
CFGN 0.162 5,000 09/17
CDEL 0.161 5,478 11:13
INTL 0.161 5,000 11:13"
theSauceman
1 week ago
That's why I'm willing to look at whether I believe what they're saying or the bashers that call them liars, and the stats. And I'm willing to sort the stats to the ones that either show or don't show growth. And when the grow becomes continuous and is multiple, approaching exponential, then I'm willing to understand the costs taken out before net profit. Like I said, for me, it boils down to what I believe about who's truthful and who's mistaken (or lying). Afterall there is more motivation to lie against the company than from within (at least as much).
STRICTLY MY OPINION FOR ME ONLY. CHOOSE YOUR OWN PATHS AND I HOPE YOU ALL PROSPER.
Boiler_Master
2 weeks ago
Snow referenced T-mobile as a telecom comparable having a P/E ratio of 23. Meaning the market cap is 23x annual earnings. But T-mobile is a large established company with average annual performance now. Back when they were a high growth company crossing over into profitability they traded at 770x earnings.
T-mobile first became profitable in 2013 showing a net income of 35 million. Their market cap in 2013 was 26.97 billion. That was a P/E ratio of 770. Google it. If T-mobile is any comparison to how we should value IQST, as Snow initially said we should based on T-monile's P/E ratio, even 1M earnings at the same 770 P/E ratio would put the SP above $4.
Valuing a high growth company based on current earnings alone is ignorant. If you want a one ratio valuation, you are better off using P/S than P/E. T-mobile's first profitable year, they were at 1.1x sales. For IQST a 1.1 P/S ratio based on 290M revenue and 185M shares would be $1.57 which IMO would not be unreasonable at all for a company operating around break even while showing over 100% YOY growth.
There are countless companies currently on the Nasdaq operating at a loss with valuations in the hundreds of millions, and even billions. That's because you invest in a company for their future 1, 3, and 5+ years out. Not what they did last year. Previous years are good to track and trend out future performance, but that's about all.
Boiler_Master
2 weeks ago
That's interesting. I have never thought highly of you. I can tell you're obviously smart and understand what you're talking about, but you leverage that into misleading people.
I actually realized I would never respect you the day you said T-mobile was a great comparison to value IQST and used T-mobile's current P/E ratios as a Fortune 100 company to tell people IQST is basically worthless. Then when I provided their historical valuations, back when T-mobile was the size of IQST and losing money, their valuation then applied to IQST now showed IQST as being massively undervalued. You immediately flipped and went from saying T-mobile was the perfect comparison, to saying T-mobile is a ridiculous comparison bc the data didn't support your agenda.
I make honest mistakes, I'm human. But I have good intentions. You, well you're intentionally misleading people. You try and sound smart so they'll believe your bullshit and think your opinions hold more weight.