SYTE - Enterprise Diversified

[Gregmal]

Ok. So there's nothing bold here at all....Let's either get some answers or put a bullet in this pig's head. A few questions/comments.

 

1. What kind of due diligence was done on this property? How is it possible to be blindsided by run rate $800K in annual capex(or did I misinterpret you remark about savings and this is actually -$200K per quarter in net losses, rather than just capex)? A novice RE investor would be able to see problems this large. I have bought real estate where admittedly, I did little to no due diligence on the specific property because I felt confident with my existing knowledge. But to find a gem where less than 2 years later you are generating annually expenses equivalent to 20%+ of your purchase price? And then selling for what amounts to pennies on the dollar of your acquisition price?? Either they knew of these issues and went ahead anyway(totally inexcusable and a breach of fiduciary responsibility), or they completely missed these things because they didn't know what they were doing in the first place.

 

2. Go back through this thread. How many instances are there were management does really shady shit, and then comes forward with some benevolent sounding excuse? I am fine with people making mistakes. The first time management does something where shareholders say "what a minute, this is foul", perhaps its a misunderstanding. Perhaps it just appears worse than it is. But this is like what? The 10th time these guys have done something sketchy? So yea, no one should be buying the "oh its totally benevolent" bullshit. After this many instances, its either 1) these guys are deliberately taking liberties and screwing shareholders if they can find the slightest excuse, or 2) they are totally tone deaf and oblivious to things that the common folk looks at and says "wow that's bad". Neither situation bodes well for people in this position.

 

My guess is that this is just typical Wall Street nonsense. Management takes massive risks and makes big moves with no consequence. If nothing happens, they make out well. If they hit a home run, they make a ton of money. If it fails, it's no biggie, shareholders pay for it. Nothing comes out of their pockets. They don't give back their salaries or bonuses. They just shrug their shoulders and say "sorry we tried and it didn't work out"...

[Edward]

I think some people here are going overboard. The Real Estate and HVAC acquisitions were clearly stupid. They were made for the obvious reason of skirting the 40% rule.

 

Not to compare, but even the mighty Buffett tried to preserve the textile mill business for a whopping 18 (!) years before giving up. Kudos to the CEO for quickly heading for the exit away from these disasters. Most people would have "given it more of a go", racking massive losses before conceding.

 

A lot of people think buying and selling a private business is the same as a stock. Couldn't be farther from the truth. Main issue is with management. We like to make fun of bad management teams as investors but a lot of them at least know how to keep the boat afloat under most scenarios. Where they fail is usually capital allocation, not day to day operations.

 

Here two businesses were acquired with apparent disregard for competent operating management. With the HVAC I am completely at a loss of what they were thinking, but at least with the real estate you could see they were actually relying on the seller (forgot the guy's name) to stay and manage the business, without contractually compelling him. Instead, the moment it became clear there was a difference in the visions for the business, the seller just bolted and ran for the hills leaving the business high and dry.

 

This is kind of basic stuff that should have been dealt with contractually at least before the sale, with clear clawback/sell back mechanism for the sale so if something didn't work as planned no harm done, here you go sir take back this thing. Unfortunately there were no grown ups in the room, just a fund manager obviously unused to private business deals. I wonder what kind of advice he took. Yes, advice sometimes costs money but this kind of hubris costs more.

 

So the shareholders are hurting a bit. Steven Kiel is hurting even more. I believe he sunk around 30% of his fund into this thing, probably more than any of you. Not only that, the poor guy is not going to get performance fees anytime soon. So double pain. I would say he has a major incentive to correct course, assuming he has learned something from all of this.

 

Some good words must be said. The internet business is doing pretty well for a cigar butt. The investment in Alluvial is a pretty good move. And the fund services business is a very good idea - wish there was something like that when I started my fund in 2011.

 

So in summary - stupidity aside, I think it is going to be OK. 2-3M$ were lost here, which is pretty bad, but at least its over for now. Only reasonably good, non money losing assets remain. Hopefully management can leverage that to get back on the horse and make some money for all of us. I think Steven kiel is a pretty smart, well incentivised, basically good guy. So my money is on him (Not too much though ;)).

 

 

 

 

[NeverLoseMoney]

I think deregistering from the SEC is a pretty obvious cost cutting option that will be looked at. The company doesn't really have the cash flow to justify being public.

 

I have just a small suggestion for the Sitestar (internet) business. I don't really like offering suggestions, but since the company hired a consultant for the internet business, maybe they'd actually like to hear some ideas. I think Sitestar already does some webhosting for customers. Willow Oak offers fund management services. Why not offer webhosting to fund managers as well? Offer a specialized hosting service that caters to hedge fund managers, with a special focus on security and compliance.

 

You already know the website needs of fund managers and if you develop/hire the expertise around website security and webdesign, you can offer something that has value to fund managers. Webhosting can be a good business as long as you're not competing for low value customers (those using lots of data and looking for the lowest price) and are extremely efficient in offering support (you don't want any phone calls). Fund managers are probably ideal customers because their sites use little data (relatively simple websites and few visitors), but they still care highly about security and reliability of their hosting provider and are probably willing to pay a bit more for that if you can provide it. Your customers pay up front (typically for a year), so you get some float and it's recurring revenue.

 

Anyway, not sure if that could ever amount to anything material. I'm not presenting it as a "fix" for the business by any means, but just as a small idea that could complement Willow Oak's and Sitestar's existing offerings. It is something that could be implemented within Sitestar and would not require much investment, provided that the expertise to offer something like this is already present among Sitestar's employees.

 

I don't think Steven Kiel, Dave Waters and Packer are hosting their sites at Sitestar, so the first three customers should be pretty easy to get. :) And surely they'd be able to convince the other managers that were at the Willow Oak meeting in Omaha to host their sites with you as well... You already have the connections among a number of hedge fund managers and they are already paying for a service that they could be buying from you.

[Tim Eriksen]

Ok. So there's nothing bold here at all....Let's either get some answers or put a bullet in this pig's head. A few questions/comments.

 

1. What kind of due diligence was done on this property? How is it possible to be blindsided by run rate $800K in annual capex(or did I misinterpret you remark about savings and this is actually -$200K per quarter in net losses, rather than just capex)? A novice RE investor would be able to see problems this large. I have bought real estate where admittedly, I did little to no due diligence on the specific property because I felt confident with my existing knowledge. But to find a gem where less than 2 years later you are generating annually expenses equivalent to 20%+ of your purchase price? And then selling for what amounts to pennies on the dollar of your acquisition price?? Either they knew of these issues and went ahead anyway(totally inexcusable and a breach of fiduciary responsibility), or they completely missed these things because they didn't know what they were doing in the first place.

 

2. Go back through this thread. How many instances are there were management does really shady shit, and then comes forward with some benevolent sounding excuse? I am fine with people making mistakes. The first time management does something where shareholders say "what a minute, this is foul", perhaps its a misunderstanding. Perhaps it just appears worse than it is. But this is like what? The 10th time these guys have done something sketchy? So yea, no one should be buying the "oh its totally benevolent" bullshit. After this many instances, its either 1) these guys are deliberately taking liberties and screwing shareholders if they can find the slightest excuse, or 2) they are totally tone deaf and oblivious to things that the common folk looks at and says "wow that's bad". Neither situation bodes well for people in this position.

 

My guess is that this is just typical Wall Street nonsense. Management takes massive risks and makes big moves with no consequence. If nothing happens, they make out well. If they hit a home run, they make a ton of money. If it fails, it's no biggie, shareholders pay for it. Nothing comes out of their pockets. They don't give back their salaries or bonuses. They just shrug their shoulders and say "sorry we tried and it didn't work out"...

 

See the proformas in the filing.  The 200k savings is primarily from interest and SG&A.  I have no idea what near term capex would be but that would be in addition.

[DTEJD1997]

Hey all:

 

Looking at some notes from the ENDI meeting.

 

Am I correct that they only had $14,795 in fees from their asset management division for the 1st quarter of 2019?

 

If that is correct, that does not seem like a lot of revenue for a multi-million dollar public company.  That does not even seem like a lot of revenue for a 1 man shop.

 

How is this going to scale into something that makes money?  Even if the fees were to grow by 10X, it is not enough to make a difference?  How are they going to attract managers/investors with all the stuff that has been going on?  The company does not exactly have stability or a good record when it comes to investments.  Quite the contrary...

 

Then there is the sale of Mt. Melrose.  So now they have the interweb division, asset management division, and contingent payouts on the HVAC sales & real estate sale?  Market cap is about $16mm?

 

I am going to predict the stock opens down on Friday.

 

 

[writser]

I am going to predict the stock opens down on Friday.

 

A bold prediction ..

[Tim Eriksen]

Hey all:

 

Looking at some notes from the ENDI meeting.

 

Am I correct that they only had $14,795 in fees from their asset management division for the 1st quarter of 2019?

 

If that is correct, that does not seem like a lot of revenue for a multi-million dollar public company.  That does not even seem like a lot of revenue for a 1 man shop.

 

How is this going to scale into something that makes money?  Even if the fees were to grow by 10X, it is not enough to make a difference?  How are they going to attract managers/investors with all the stuff that has been going on?  The company does not exactly have stability or a good record when it comes to investments.  Quite the contrary...

 

Then there is the sale of Mt. Melrose.  So now they have the interweb division, asset management division, and contingent payouts on the HVAC sales & real estate sale?  Market cap is about $16mm?

 

I am going to predict the stock opens down on Friday.

 

The slide confused me.  The slide must be referring to a specific portion of the asset management revenues, since the reported figure in the 10Q was 696,980 in the quarter.  That number does include change in value of Alluvial investment.  The 14,795 figure is about what Bonhoeffer should have generated ($12mm  times 1.0%/4 (quarterly rate) times 50% rev share).  Why is the revenue from Willow Oak Select and the fees generated from fund services not included?? 

[Orchard]

Here's the latest Form D on Willow Oak Select. If  this is the latest AUM count then they are making hundreds of dollars in fees each quarter and the fees might be included or not in the number but you wouldn't know by backing into it.

 

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1746896/000174689618000001/0001746896-18-000001-index.htm

 

[writser]

July 8 Investor presentation: link.

[Orchard]

It reads weird when you make a headline "Lessons learned" and then have the bullet points read "The local operator". Maybe you should change the headline from "Lessons learned" to "Who's to blame?".

[DTEJD1997]

It reads weird when you make a headline "Lessons learned" and then have the bullet points read "The local operator". Maybe you should change the headline from "Lessons learned" to "Who's to blame?".

 

Kind of odd to see "lessons learned" in a corporate presentation.  Even more weirder still is that these guys have to learn so many lessons.  I thought that by the time you were in the "big leagues" of a publicly traded company, that you were out of skool and knew what you needed to know to make $$$$ and drive the business forward.

 

I guess I was wrong.

[NBL0303]

I thought that by the time you were in the "big leagues" of a publicly traded company, that you were out of skool and knew what you needed to know to make $$$$ and drive the business forward.

 

 

Regarding your belief that you need to make money and have profitable operations to be a public company, would it only be so. I think nearly every IPO this year (and the last few years) would fail your money-making test.

[NBL0303]

I respect the Enterprise Diversified crew and I do not want to pile on at all. But I am blown away again, or my astonishment is just renewed, regarding the Mt. Melrose numbers. Mt. Melrose generated $165k in the second quarter, but had $250k-ish of COGS and expenses. And this does not even include write downs and whatever the $100k is in the "Other Expenses" (which I'm guessing are write-downs?).

 

These numbers seem to be so far off of what they were expecting (or maybe just what I personally was expecting for them as a non-shareholder cheering for the success of the company because of the people involved). With a real estate business like this - how are the operating expenses nearly doubling the revenues?

 

These are earnest questions, by the way. I would love to hear what others thoughts are on how a real estate business like this could put up these operating numbers. Again, I am really not trying to pile on - I think these are smart people involved in this - but I really would like to learn from this and understand these numbers/dynamics with the Mt. Melrose part of the story.

[Foreign Tuffett]

I respect the Enterprise Diversified crew and I do not want to pile on at all. But I am blown away again, or my astonishment is just renewed, regarding the Mt. Melrose numbers. Mt. Melrose generated $165k in the second quarter, but had $250k-ish of COGS and expenses. And this does not even include write downs and whatever the $100k is in the "Other Expenses" (which I'm guessing are write-downs?).

 

These numbers seem to be so far off of what they were expecting (or maybe just what I personally was expecting for them as a non-shareholder cheering for the success of the company because of the people involved). With a real estate business like this - how are the operating expenses nearly doubling the revenues?

 

These are earnest questions, by the way. I would love to hear what others thoughts are on how a real estate business like this could put up these operating numbers. Again, I am really not trying to pile on - I think these are smart people involved in this - but I really would like to learn from this and understand these numbers/dynamics with the Mt. Melrose part of the story.

 

Mt Melrose vacancy rates are (or at least have been in the recent past) extremely high. I first mentioned this last November. 

[NBL0303]

I respect the Enterprise Diversified crew and I do not want to pile on at all. But I am blown away again, or my astonishment is just renewed, regarding the Mt. Melrose numbers. Mt. Melrose generated $165k in the second quarter, but had $250k-ish of COGS and expenses. And this does not even include write downs and whatever the $100k is in the "Other Expenses" (which I'm guessing are write-downs?).

 

These numbers seem to be so far off of what they were expecting (or maybe just what I personally was expecting for them as a non-shareholder cheering for the success of the company because of the people involved). With a real estate business like this - how are the operating expenses nearly doubling the revenues?

 

These are earnest questions, by the way. I would love to hear what others thoughts are on how a real estate business like this could put up these operating numbers. Again, I am really not trying to pile on - I think these are smart people involved in this - but I really would like to learn from this and understand these numbers/dynamics with the Mt. Melrose part of the story.

 

Mt Melrose vacancy rates are (or at least have been in the recent past) extremely high. I first mentioned this last November.

 

Thank you - I did not realize the high vacancy rate. As you pointed out before Foreign Tuffett, I believe, that Lexington's real estate market hasn't tumbled or anything - so unexpectedly high vacancy rates could be signaling a significant underlying problem.

[racemize]

I respect the Enterprise Diversified crew and I do not want to pile on at all. But I am blown away again, or my astonishment is just renewed, regarding the Mt. Melrose numbers. Mt. Melrose generated $165k in the second quarter, but had $250k-ish of COGS and expenses. And this does not even include write downs and whatever the $100k is in the "Other Expenses" (which I'm guessing are write-downs?).

 

These numbers seem to be so far off of what they were expecting (or maybe just what I personally was expecting for them as a non-shareholder cheering for the success of the company because of the people involved). With a real estate business like this - how are the operating expenses nearly doubling the revenues?

 

These are earnest questions, by the way. I would love to hear what others thoughts are on how a real estate business like this could put up these operating numbers. Again, I am really not trying to pile on - I think these are smart people involved in this - but I really would like to learn from this and understand these numbers/dynamics with the Mt. Melrose part of the story.

 

Mt Melrose vacancy rates are (or at least have been in the recent past) extremely high. I first mentioned this last November.

 

Thank you - I did not realize the high vacancy rate. As you pointed out before Foreign Tuffett, I believe, that Lexington's real estate market hasn't tumbled or anything - so unexpectedly high vacancy rates could be signaling a significant underlying problem.

 

I think jeff usually buys stuff that needs work to get the cash flow going--I kind of assumed he wanted to get a big business going so bought a lot of stuff that needed development, hired a bunch of guys to do the work, and then it was just too much cost to get through the redevelopment phase for the parent, and now it is costing an arm and a leg, since the buying was based on what it would be after redevelopment, not where it was at purchase.

[InelegantInvestor]

I respect the Enterprise Diversified crew and I do not want to pile on at all. But I am blown away again, or my astonishment is just renewed, regarding the Mt. Melrose numbers. Mt. Melrose generated $165k in the second quarter, but had $250k-ish of COGS and expenses. And this does not even include write downs and whatever the $100k is in the "Other Expenses" (which I'm guessing are write-downs?).

 

These numbers seem to be so far off of what they were expecting (or maybe just what I personally was expecting for them as a non-shareholder cheering for the success of the company because of the people involved). With a real estate business like this - how are the operating expenses nearly doubling the revenues?

 

These are earnest questions, by the way. I would love to hear what others thoughts are on how a real estate business like this could put up these operating numbers. Again, I am really not trying to pile on - I think these are smart people involved in this - but I really would like to learn from this and understand these numbers/dynamics with the Mt. Melrose part of the story.

 

Mt Melrose vacancy rates are (or at least have been in the recent past) extremely high. I first mentioned this last November.

 

Thank you - I did not realize the high vacancy rate. As you pointed out before Foreign Tuffett, I believe, that Lexington's real estate market hasn't tumbled or anything - so unexpectedly high vacancy rates could be signaling a significant underlying problem.

 

I think jeff usually buys stuff that needs work to get the cash flow going--I kind of assumed he wanted to get a big business going so bought a lot of stuff that needed development, hired a bunch of guys to do the work, and then it was just too much cost to get through the redevelopment phase for the parent, and now it is costing an arm and a leg, since the buying was based on what it would be after redevelopment, not where it was at purchase.

I think everyone is being awfully unfair to Jeff here, especially management. Steven Kiel's letter of 12/11/17 says that the parent committed its next $10 million of capital to Mt. Melrose. It seems clear that Jeff was acting based on the commitments that had been made to him, and then the commitments changed. He was removed from the business, it appears, and it is not a surprise that performance suffered without him.

[racemize]

I respect the Enterprise Diversified crew and I do not want to pile on at all. But I am blown away again, or my astonishment is just renewed, regarding the Mt. Melrose numbers. Mt. Melrose generated $165k in the second quarter, but had $250k-ish of COGS and expenses. And this does not even include write downs and whatever the $100k is in the "Other Expenses" (which I'm guessing are write-downs?).

 

These numbers seem to be so far off of what they were expecting (or maybe just what I personally was expecting for them as a non-shareholder cheering for the success of the company because of the people involved). With a real estate business like this - how are the operating expenses nearly doubling the revenues?

 

These are earnest questions, by the way. I would love to hear what others thoughts are on how a real estate business like this could put up these operating numbers. Again, I am really not trying to pile on - I think these are smart people involved in this - but I really would like to learn from this and understand these numbers/dynamics with the Mt. Melrose part of the story.

 

Mt Melrose vacancy rates are (or at least have been in the recent past) extremely high. I first mentioned this last November.

 

Thank you - I did not realize the high vacancy rate. As you pointed out before Foreign Tuffett, I believe, that Lexington's real estate market hasn't tumbled or anything - so unexpectedly high vacancy rates could be signaling a significant underlying problem.

 

I think jeff usually buys stuff that needs work to get the cash flow going--I kind of assumed he wanted to get a big business going so bought a lot of stuff that needed development, hired a bunch of guys to do the work, and then it was just too much cost to get through the redevelopment phase for the parent, and now it is costing an arm and a leg, since the buying was based on what it would be after redevelopment, not where it was at purchase.

I think everyone is being awfully unfair to Jeff here, especially management. Steven Kiel's letter of 12/11/17 says that the parent committed its next $10 million of capital to Mt. Melrose. It seems clear that Jeff was acting based on the commitments that had been made to him, and then the commitments changed. He was removed from the business, it appears, and it is not a surprise that performance suffered without him.

 

Oh, I wasn't trying to say anything about Jeff.  It just seemed like he thought he should scale up for the future, but then the costs were much higher than management expected.  All speculative, but it seems plausible, and no one had to act in bad faith for it to happen (though I would have thought communication would be easier than that).

[JayGatsby]

• Enterprise Diversified retains a 35% ownership stake and plans to deconsolidate financial results as of June 30, 2019

• Enterprise Diversified overall reported debt as of March 31, 2019, is expected to decrease from $8.1 million to $1.2 million

• Overall real estate monthly debt service is expected to decrease from approximately $58,700 to approximately $6,400

• Public financial reporting results are being determined and will be provided in the company’s quarterly report as of June

30, 2019

 

I guess it remains to be seen in the next Q if there are any parent level guarantees / contingent liabilities? Not sure why the word "reported" is in there.

 

From press release:

As consideration for the transaction, Woodmont paid the Company $100,000 and agreed to assume full responsibility for the management and operation of Mt Melrose and its real estate portfolio. The Company has retained a 35% membership interest in Mt Melrose, with Woodmont now owning the other 65% membership interest.

 

Weird deal. Unclear how the debt is treated. Maybe I'm missing something or reading too much between the lines late at night.

[Sportgamma]

I respect the Enterprise Diversified crew and I do not want to pile on at all. But I am blown away again, or my astonishment is just renewed, regarding the Mt. Melrose numbers. Mt. Melrose generated $165k in the second quarter, but had $250k-ish of COGS and expenses. And this does not even include write downs and whatever the $100k is in the "Other Expenses" (which I'm guessing are write-downs?).

 

These numbers seem to be so far off of what they were expecting (or maybe just what I personally was expecting for them as a non-shareholder cheering for the success of the company because of the people involved). With a real estate business like this - how are the operating expenses nearly doubling the revenues?

 

These are earnest questions, by the way. I would love to hear what others thoughts are on how a real estate business like this could put up these operating numbers. Again, I am really not trying to pile on - I think these are smart people involved in this - but I really would like to learn from this and understand these numbers/dynamics with the Mt. Melrose part of the story.

 

Mt Melrose vacancy rates are (or at least have been in the recent past) extremely high. I first mentioned this last November.

 

Thank you - I did not realize the high vacancy rate. As you pointed out before Foreign Tuffett, I believe, that Lexington's real estate market hasn't tumbled or anything - so unexpectedly high vacancy rates could be signaling a significant underlying problem.

 

I think jeff usually buys stuff that needs work to get the cash flow going--I kind of assumed he wanted to get a big business going so bought a lot of stuff that needed development, hired a bunch of guys to do the work, and then it was just too much cost to get through the redevelopment phase for the parent, and now it is costing an arm and a leg, since the buying was based on what it would be after redevelopment, not where it was at purchase.

I think everyone is being awfully unfair to Jeff here, especially management. Steven Kiel's letter of 12/11/17 says that the parent committed its next $10 million of capital to Mt. Melrose. It seems clear that Jeff was acting based on the commitments that had been made to him, and then the commitments changed. He was removed from the business, it appears, and it is not a surprise that performance suffered without him.

 

I would agree with you there.

 

"I am excited to announce that we have reached an agreement with our chairman, Jeff Moore, to have him join Sitestar as an operator. We are reorganizing Jeff’s existing business, Mt Melrose, into a wholly owned subsidiary of Sitestar. Jeff will become the president and continue to manage the business as he has done previously. Sitestar will add significant working capital to the business and provide Jeff with the freedom to allocate that capital. As part of this transaction, we are acquiring Mt Melrose’s current real estate portfolio in Lexington, Kentucky.

 

I have long admired Jeff. He is the reason that I originally got involved in Sitestar as a passive investor, and he is the reason why, when it became necessary to get actively involved, I was willing to do so. I suspect I am not the only investor who trusted in him. We have been richly rewarded.

 

 

To Sitestar’s detriment, we had never previously contemplated having Jeff in an operational role. I am happily surprised for this opportunity. It originated several months ago when Jeff made a public comment on Twitter that he was seeing significant opportunities to expand and that his bottleneck was capital. I knew Mt Melrose was doing well and quickly growing, but I was not aware of just how well. I reached out to him to see if Sitestar could be helpful as a funding partner. After weeks of discussion, it became clear how well Mt Melrose would fit inside of Sitestar. It truly is complementary to our other businesses.

 

Mt Melrose is at an inflection point. It owns 122 residential properties and has the potential, with Sitestar’s help, of becoming the dominant property owner in Lexington, Kentucky. Jeff’s strategy is to find undervalued properties, repair and upgrade them, rent them out to tenants, and own them indefinitely. This is a similar strategy that attracted us to Sitestar in the first place. 

 

Mt Melrose’s current portfolio is exceptional. Jeff is an excellent, passionate, operator. He uses debt appropriately. And, Lexington is the ideal location to take advantage of rising rents and rising property values."

 

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1096934/000156459017024810/syte-ex992_9.htm

[Sunrider]

Absolutely agreed. Although I only spoke with Jeff once many years ago, I definitely have more trust in him and respect for his behaviour through the whole Sitestar Saga than for "It's not my fault, let me try some other idea, Kiel".

 

[ratiman]

I'm not going to comment on this because I'm pseudonymous, not an expert in corporate governance, and it's none of my business. I just want you all to know that I have reached new levels of maturity and will not be launching an all-out flame war that would see me getting doxxed and banned from the site. This is probably best for everybody.

[Jurgis]

I'm not going to comment on this because I'm pseudonymous, not an expert in corporate governance, and it's none of my business. I just want you all to know that I have reached new levels of maturity and will not be launching an all-out flame war that would see me getting doxxed and banned from the site. This is probably best for everybody.

 

LOL.

 

./bow

 

./support

 

8)

[writser]

Meh. So boring and mature. This forum needs more riots.

[Foreign Tuffett]

Q2 results out. Get your abacuses out folks, we have more significant accounting changes.

 

https://www.accesswire.com/555630/Enterprise-Diversified-Inc-Announces-Second-Quarter-2019-Financial-Results

 

Best of luck to these guys, this last year has been a hard row to hoe for the company.