And we are getting to the time when shooters and hunters want to reload and practice for Deer Season.
When is this problem going to be fixed?
This has gone on now for years, actually and I have bought new ammo that I have never bought before and it
shoots terrible compared to my reloads.
Are there some hunters and shooters on this board who reload? I'd like to hear from ALL of you!
It is really stupid to argue against buy backs by saying that the purpose is "to maintain the value of the shares". That is in part 3.
Grammar? That's just ignorant. It is not a question of grammar, because grammar refers to sentence construction. It is just the wrong word; a question of English. You copy and paste, but that's no excuse. Your remedy is to quote more intelligent sources.
For starters, "6 Bad Stock Buy Back Scenarios" is title of the piece written by its author, Ben McClure.... I copied and pasted it for you to be able to locate the article. If I had authored it, I would have used the word myself as I agree with Ben it is the best choice of several words that could be used. You infer there is some kind of subliminal intent by using the word to "color" the situation. He clearly and directly states he believes the practices are "bad"... You're worried about the word "scenario".... Haven't you ever heard someone say " the best possible scenario?".... Read the article. Anyway , this is a forum to share investment ideas, not middle school grammar...
libertee4all....regarding your English and your use of the word "scenario"......Strictly, a scenario is ‘an outline of a plot’ or ‘a postulated sequence of events’: the worst-case scenario. It is often used loosely to mean ‘situation,’ as in a nightmare scenario, but this should be avoided in careful writing......from the oxford dictionary
My gripe is that I wonder if Golden , Monheit, and Saltz are any brighter. They know how to line their own pockets though. That is a big concern. When the wind was at our backs I overruled my policy of not taking a position in a company that I had management concerns with. The wind has shifted to a headwind now IMO. To put it in direct terms without pulling punches, I don't trust SWHC's board to look after the common shareholder's best interests. RGR has the same industry headwind but I believe their management to be more shareholder friendly. Obviously at 10 there is much less risk in the stock than at 15-17, but this is more likely a value trap than a bargain. I'm still on the sidelines here. Single digits still look likely to me.
1000 waYZ 2 Use youR knEw
hUB E sHoTgUnrEEfLEvibRaToE pOpEIl juST ThE RIghT hEIghT MAN.
juST liEs dUCKSD tApE
QuAK, QuAk, QuAk
we wood like 2 liSt ThEm INDY VIDUal WiThOuT uSinG
rUs T lAnGuAge.
thAt's mY knEw hUbb E's nAme IS
She was a dunce for not selling at 15, 16, or 17, why do you think she is any smarter now. She is barely possessed of her own smarts, i wonder how she gets to manage a company, huh?
BTW, SEC Form 4 data shows Ms Wadecki sits on the boards of 2 other companies: Quest Resources and Infinity Resources along along side of SWHC's "Three Stooges": Golden, Monheit, and Saltz.... One might surmise the 4 of them have "tea" from time to time and that the topic of things like the timing of stock grant sales might pop into the conversation. In any event, her recent sale suggests the three "wise men" didn't convince her she should hold out for, say, $15 a share.....it will be interesting to see what they do themselves. Golden is of most interest to me.
Some Bloomberg anti gun liberal will have a "field day" with this insider sale. Just watch...if Golden dumped some it will be a bigger deal in reality. Wadecki doesn't know what end of a gun to hold... The sales historically have been announced over a several day period.