Else Nutrition Holdings Inc (BABY) Quote

there is no submission - FDA does not approve infant formula - they just set basic requirements

Anyone knows where we stand relative to our submission(s) to the FDA?

This is either a RS or trips before year end

Could be but I think she finances herself by increasing the number of O\S

How about a current honest value on The liabilities? The Debt? $Thousands? $Millions ???????? More?

Without an audit, I'd assume the numbers are really ugly

Our incompetent CEO is in panic and to stupid to look for help from a business type person. She enjoys a board made of scientifics discussing scientific subjects. for more than 3 years she did nothing to try to understand why the value of her company went down the drain. What a crazy dreamer !!!

Why no recent audits??? How hard would it be to put a current honest value on almonds, buckwheat and tapioca?

"When was the last time BABYF released audited numbers?"

Another way to do it. Good luck.

pual,
I've increased (at these current low prices)with intention of taking losses by year end.
Just selling on FIFO basis should provide the losses you desire.

I hope our CEO has now figured out that developing new products and\or adding shelves where to store our inventories is not really the objectives she should pursue.
I start to believe that if she doesn’t sell out her company and register rights we will have to write off our investment and include our loss as a tax deduction. At current price, I may sell out by year end, take my capital loss as a tax deduction (in Canada and Quebec) and buy back, just in case … who knows.

FDA approval has been waited for for almost 2 years and now the taste is another issue. Add that to the leadership of an incompetent CEO who doesn't know how to address these issues. As any incompetent business person facing such issues, our CEO think that cutting the expenses is a solution ... when it is generally another problem ... What a mess!

The whole "problem" could also be that their products taste like crap. Bought a container of their complete shake mix a few years ago and the only way my grandson would drink it is if I also put in a banana, regular milk and a few other ingredients. Defeats the purpose of paying a premium price for a plant-based mix. Never finished it so there's no way I was going to order it again. I'm really glad I sold all my shares (except 5000 in a forgotten account) about two years ago.

The whole "problem" could also be that their products taste like crap. Bought a container of their complete shake mix a few years ago and the only way my grandson would drink it is if I also put in a banana, regular milk and a few other ingredients. Defeats the purpose of paying a premium price for a plant-based mix. Never finished it so there's no way I was going to order it again. I'm really glad I sold all my shares (except 5000 in a forgotten account) about two years ago.

So..
How does the FDA oversee the safety and nutritional quality of infant formula??
Infant formula is a food that may be the sole source of nutrition for infants (i.e., children up to 12 months of age) as an alternative to human milk. The FDA regulatory requirements address, among other issues, the safety, nutritional adequacy, packaging, and labeling of these products. The FDA does not approve infant formulas; however, infant formula manufacturers must notify the agency before marketing a new formula. The FDA’s highly trained staff review these notifications to make sure new formulas meet federal nutrition, labeling, and other requirements. If a product does not meet applicable requirements, the formula may be deemed adulterated, misbranded, or both, and the FDA has the authority to take enforcement action. For example, the FDA can require a mandatory recall of product if the agency determines that an adulterated or misbranded infant formula presents a risk to human health.

Among the requirements for infant formulas, the FDA specifies 30 nutrients that must be included in infant formulas. There are minimum amounts for all 30 nutrients and maximum amounts for 10 nutrients. In addition, any ingredient used in infant formula must be safe and suitable for such use. Additionally, sanitary controls are required by law to prevent contamination and other safety problems from occurring. For example, manufacturers must establish a system of controls designed to ensure that infant formula does not become adulterated due to the presence of microorganisms in the formula or in the processing environment. Further, the FDA regulations set forth certain testing requirements of finished product for Salmonella and Cronobacter. FDA regulations also require that the water the companies use to manufacture formulas meets safety standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The FDA has specific requirements for labeling infant formulas. Information that is most helpful for caregivers of infants includes directions for preparation and use, and a pictogram showing the major steps for preparing infant formula, a “use by” date.

The FDA inspects facilities that manufacture infant formulas annually and carefully trains its investigators to ensure that every infant formula inspection is robust, thorough, and focused on the most critical aspects of the infant formula manufacturing process.

All Infant formula products sold in the U.S., whether produced domestically or imported, must meet all U.S. requirements, including those for safety and nutritional adequacy. Caregivers should use caution when ordering imported products online or from third party distributors because some of these products have not undergone FDA's rigorous premarket review process and do not meet U.S. requirements for safety or nutritional adequacy.

....

When was the last time BABYF released audited numbers?

The whole problem is MARKETING (Our CEO thinks it's a useless EXPENSE) and therefore dismal revenues.
People do not know about us nor do they about our offerings.
Our CEO only talk to shareholders and the topics (except for mandatory filings) always relates to additional products she developped and shelves she added. That means additional costs. We have more and more products sitting on shelves (inventories) and more and more shelves to put them on.
Bottom line:
- minimal revenues (she doesn't know how to grow,
- growing expenses she tries to reduce (she doesn't know the difference between ''expense'' and ''investment''). She believe marketing to be an expense.

JP, ET is around $4.00, but I guess $50 would be ok if you but 100K.

not convs but lot of warrants. I don't think they are tradeable.

Schwab charges $50 commission on foreign transactions. First I knew of that.

Are part of the problem convertibles?

Our downfall has nothing to do with what the market does. The market went thru the roof for the last 3 years and BABYF went down the drain all along.
OUR PROBLEM IS OUR DUMB CEO!

JP, crap shot here. Know the extent of loss if Baby goes belly up and take a shot.

Stocks market this Sept was the worst in 23 years.

(CAD) Jun 2024 Y/Y
Revenue 2.63M
Net income -2.52M
And the boss keeps cutting expenses, adding shelves (inventories) and not doing any marketing investment. Hard to find a more incompetent CEO.

That could be except for ''surprise sales increase''. As for FDA approval (assuming it is still possible) it would change nothing unless our stubborn CEO also decide to invest in marketing.

If our CEO keep making a fool of herself, you may very well be right.

Harbor, perhaps! However we just might have (temporarily) bottomed out the last few days.
KIM prior to your prediction arriving at fruition, good things could happen: Buy out offer, FDA approval, Mgmt making bid to go private, surprise sales increase.

Its over gere. A RS or bankrupt in 6 months

And the woman stays silent, most likely in her lab working at developping a new product. How stupid can someone be !!!

I would rather buy at these prices than sell. BUY LOW and this is lowest.

Again, I don't own this obvious piece of junk. Never did. And pennyland patents never have real value.

Gee, a mix of almonds, buckwheat, and tapioca.

Maybe but i hope that someone will fet to our CEO and make her understand that she baddly needs help. Right now our market value is less than $10,000,000 or our yearly gross revenue. Even her may figure out that she is digging her own (and our) grave ???

Unless you believe that there must be a limit to the stupidity of the CEO. There is a lot of value in this company and the issue is not with the offering but with the way management doesn't talk to the market.
This being said, I agree that averaging down is generally quite a bad idea.

Turning into a micro penny soon

Nothing's dumber than averaging down on a failing (failed) penny stock.

Absolutely. As you suggest, one should however just bet money he can afford.

I did average down at $0,06 and may do it again. I just cannot believe that our CEO will be more stupid that I even think she is. She must to somehow find a little sanity and figure out she needs help or sell out altogether ???

I keep telling myself they aren't going belly up, and think the patents have value..
So the answer is yes in moderation. I know how much I'll lose @ 0 and can live with it.
Or, guess should have said, live without it.

IS THIS THWE BEST TIME EVER TO BUY AND ACCUMULATE?

Good suggestion but there is multiple ways to market our product. This being said, i believe that our CEO left her previous employment, frustrated to see the company invest in marketing instead of product development. She then decided to create this company aimed at developping products that she not only doesn't understand how to market them but is totally reluctant to SPEND any money trying to do any kind of marketing (She believe that INVESTING in marketing is a useless EXPENSE.
She will prefer to fail (she is off a good start) instead of admitting she is totally ridiculous putting inventories on shelves, expecting that it will sell by itself.
If she had good partners around her (such as BOD members) she maybe could be educated somewhat but she created a board made of scientific people most likely not qualified to help her understand ... unless she is even more stubborn than i tought ???

and the best and cheapest way to do that is one is online marketing! brick and mortar is not the path to follow - only one that would have made sense besides Walmart is Costco

Putting products no one knows about on shelves is close to spreading an inventory all over the place.
THE THING TO DO: Tell the people what we are all about and how our offer can benefit to them is MANDATORY. Our scientific CEO doesn't understand that and is so stubborn that she still believe after 5 years that people do buy product they do not know about.
WHAT WILL IT TAKE FOR HER TO FIGURE OUT SHE IS GONNA FAIL IF SHE KEEPS ACTING STUPID?

It was on the shelves but don’t know about now. This was when stock was around 2-3 dollars a share.

A decent bid shows up:
Bid x Size
$0.043 x 339,555
Ask x Size
$0.045 x 50,000
Real Time Equity Quote: Aug 29, 2024, 12:20 PM ETinfo_outline

LV, I dk if we are on shelves or just @ Walmart
on line. I seem to recall on line was mentioned.
I'll drop in for a quick check & see.

LV, I dk if we are on shelves or just @ Walmart
on line. I seem to recall on line was mentioned.
I'll drop i for a quick check & see.

Amazing how this went to all the Walmart shelves and now .4 pennies a share.
Junk penny stock now

I DK if the corp owns the patents or the individuals do.
Eventually if the Co goes belly up, the patents have value.

Not a bad idea (I did at CDN 0,065 recently). However till she decides to get help or sell out her company, we will not lose much but all we chipped in.
That story reminds me (among other stories), whe the Japaneeses did create the BETAMAX video technology being 20 times better than the then very popular VHS one. NOT UNDERSTANDING THE MARKET THEY WERE GETTING INTO, they ended up abandonning their project after failing to generate serious revenues. I also know about another Japaneese company developping a computer multiple times better than the then IBM product covering the whole market. Again, NOT UNDERSTANDING THE MARKET THEY WERE TRYING TO CONQUER, they endedup having to abandon the project.
In both cases the japaneese companies were made of much superior ENGINNEERS not understanding what the market they were getting in was all about.
Both companies failed miserably notwithstanding their much better offering.
The way our ''product engeneer type'' CEO behaves we may very well become the next example of a company failing notwithstang their much bette offering.

Bought a few also this a.m.