Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Media Arts Group, Inc. (MDA) Message Board

  • MDAwatcher MDAwatcher Jan 7, 2000 12:43 PM Flag

    Any hint that Exclaim is a failure

    would be a PR nightmare for MDA. They've
    exclaimed to the world the importance of putting a fortune
    into the project, obviously creating the need for a 20
    or 30 million dollar new credit line (when coupled
    with the fact that TK and KR took 15 mil themselves,
    leaving the company with less cash then my grandkids have
    in their Christmas savings account)!

    It might
    be my imagination also, but it seems that everything
    about Exclaim is, well, foggy. Who owns it, who paid
    for it, how much was invested into it. Maybe it is my
    own lack of prowess in reading annual reports, or
    reading press releases. OR, maybe it is foggy,
    intentionally.

    Is Exclaim making a bloody fortune, hence a possible
    desire to channel revenues away from MDA minority
    stockholders? Or is it losing a fortune, hence a desire to hide
    the failure and the undermininf of confidence in MDA
    that would create? Or, is it breaking even and
    lackluster, but viable?

    God forbid any stockholder
    should know. Perhaps the MDA thought is that, like Jack
    Nicholson felt about the public in "A Few Good Men'... "we
    can't HANDLE the truth".

    I personally can handle
    the truth, and would like to hear some of it. I would
    like MDA shareholders to start being treated like
    intelligent adults who invested their money openly and
    honestly, and stop being treated like fools who exist to be
    cajoled, spun, manipulated and used.

    Thom is a very
    good artist. MDA sells a good product. Why is their
    this need on their part, OR, why has the public gotten
    the idea, that they are not forthcoming with
    shareholders. WE are not 'the enemy'. We are the ones who
    purchased stock to HELP the company and make some tidy
    personal profits in the deal. We are not the enemy. We are
    the ones who want MDA to prosper. Why are we not
    dealt with openly? Is it just so insiders can make all
    the money? Is the answer that simple?

    I WANT
    to be a big supporter of MDA and everything they
    are. All I, and anyone else has asked for, is just a
    fair shake. A modicum of consideration.

    But We
    are the malcontents... branded traitors..


    This is an absurd situation. And an easy one to
    remedy. A little forthcoming attitude from Mr. Kinkade,
    and probably everyone on this board and off it, and
    in the investment community would rise to the
    wholehearted support of this company.

    What in God's
    name does it take to wake up some people in San Jose
    to simply be open with their own troops?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • KR is one of the few shareholders who will make out like a bandit when it comes to Exclaim.

    • moral_denial_association moral_denial_association Jan 11, 2000 9:16 AM Flag

      and can see Raasch taking a big piece of pie from
      Exclaim. It makes perfect sense. This gives him a big tax
      write for MDA and he will get to start all over again
      with a new company and new stock. Raasch's 1 year will
      be up soon and my gut feeling is that he won't go
      silently. He helped build MDA (and helped destroy it) and
      will want something in return

      The other
      question would be, would TK/MDA keep the shares or retire
      them, or a combination of both? They own most of the
      company and all they have to do is call a special share
      holder's meeting to amend the contract, etc.

    • http://www.lindaanderson.com/productDisplay/themePage/0,6540,15|topic|thumbnail|full|8|354|Collectible%252BBrands|Thomas%252BKinkade,00.html

    • When/If the MDA/TK web site gets off the ground
      is MDA going to allow the other TK websites,
      specifically his brother's web site, to continue? It doesn't
      make the MDA site all that special if the others are
      allowed to go on. There are also other independant
      distributors of TK's work that sell TK's products on their own
      web site besides the ones that have been recently
      posted here. For MDA share holder value/web site value
      to be fully appreciated, will the new legal man at
      the helm, require these other rogue distributors to
      change their tune and stop proliferating TK's image via
      the Web and their own sites? Hey, if they're
      distributors, they have contracts and anything can be written
      into a contract.

    • "Stock goes from 3 to 4. Nothing but a technical
      rebound. 1-25-00 is the last day to buy in to close a 1999
      short-against-the-box position via regular way settlement for 1999 tax
      purposes."
      Why would somebody want to this? It will be taxable
      income in 1999.
      BTW you are entitled to not share my
      opinion that's what makes the market.

    • and MSFT will soon, some day, pay a dividend. MDA
      can't pay one because the principals saw to it that
      they would get the excess earnings.

      Run with
      your gains at 5 to 7. It will be your only chance. The
      shorts will be back like ants on a popcycle.

    • I hope we will be in good light.

    • Stock goes from 3 to 4. Nothing but a technical
      rebound. 1-25-00 is the last day to buy in to close a 1999
      short-against-the-box position via regular way settlement for 1999 tax
      purposes.

      Exclaim is lame and it's all the same.
      Suckers abound with TK's remains.

      I'll play in
      this sand box if I want to, Mr MDA/watcherz. When did
      you leave the building and what price are you willing
      to accept for your shares? Someone sure gets touchy
      when his name gets mis-spelled. Sounding like the KR
      we all know so well, only out for himself.

    • You wrote: "I think TK feels the mob at the gate and placed a "buy" order today."

      It is quite possible you have also given Thom the title for his newest painting, "The Mob At The Gate".

    • neither do most hi tech companies. They believe
      that money reinvested in the business will yield
      better returns for their shareholders.
      Investment, in
      my case, is for capital gains. I invested in this
      company because:
      It has great fundamentals
      Has
      increasing revenues
      Low PE
      Low multiple to
      sales
      Has the same disadvantage as Martha Stewart, a one
      person band, but is valued at significantly lower value
      using any criteria.

      I believe the reason the
      stock is low is because it missed its Q2 forecast,
      based upon some stupid (IMHO) decisions to go into
      markets it didn't belong in (lazyboy for example) and
      introduced a phased release of limited (Potentially
      unlimited) editions.

      I think they saw the errors of
      their ways and changed directions. If they execute (big
      if) then the stock will at least double in the next
      12 months.
      I for one am willing to take this
      risk,

    • View More Messages