RAIT Financial Trust Message Board

They started the Roman catholic church on similar principles..

Traditions over God's commandments..

Volume over logic..
Hype over reality
Fear over faith

Realize sheeple "over" cliff..

Hey how about some tunnel vision?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pJrETLqFOI&feature=related

OK, then allow me to correct you, again.

First, content is secondary to volume. Volume is ruled by organization. Organization is evaluated by goals. Hence, the length of my posts are correlated to the goal of my posts: appearance of substance.

Had enough?

"Indeed, the reverse split makes the stocks more readily comparable. NRF's low at the market bottom was $1.25. RAS low at the market bottom, split adjusted, was $1.35. NRF is up a little more than RAS from the bottom, but not much more, and RAS has better fundamentals ... more potential upside, at least in my view."


Lets try this again, last time from another POV.

What would NRF's price be had they done a reverse 1 for 3 split?

Apples to apples.. I don't need to write 10 paragraphs of propaganda to distort and twist reality.. It's not in my time-space continuum at the moment.

There is no way to know what RAS price would be without the reverse split. It is probably the case that it has hurt RAS price. It is probably the case that, without the reverse split RAS probably be trading at a somewhat higher price than it is now, but still a sub-$5 price. It probably would not have been able to do a secondary if that was the case.

Nonen of that changes the fundamental. The reverse split did not, in and of itself, create any dilution. You seem to have a fixation on the reverse split as a signal event. I would have preferred no reverse split, but there are plusses and minuses associated with the action, It wasn't all bad. It plays no role in my comparison of RAS and NRF ... and should not.

Indeed, the reverse split makes the stocks more readily comparable. NRF's low at the market bottom was $1.25. RAS low at the market bottom, split adjusted, was $1.35. NRF is up a little more than RAS from the bottom, but not much more, and RAS has better fundamentals ... more potential upside, at least in my view.

Your question is a valid one and one I periodically pose to myself. As in all previous analyses I've completed, the one recent yielded the same result: there simply are no negatives concerning RAS now and going forward, taking into account all reasonable future economic scenarios.

Hope that helps.

Davis,
Would you mind going through the exercise of creating a case AGAINST RAS. What do you see as the potential negatives? and how do they correlate to the current share price?

My research compares apples to apples not denial to fact.

Did NRF do a 1 for 3 reverse split? NO! So what would the equivalent factor be in the SO had RAS not done a reverse.. 24 mln 4 mln more than 20 mln offered by NRF.

getting paid 6.4% to wait seems like a very nice position to be in!

What you are missing is that good fundamentals do not, in and of themselves, set the timing of a recovery. You can guess the timing, but you can't know.

The encouraging thing here is that the market hasn't really allowed MREITs, as a group, to recover to the levels they should be at. RAS has been held down more than most, but that just means it should see more upside from here.

Good luck. You have the fundamentals right.

A troubled Past five years.......

A bad merger.

A reverse 1 for 3 split........

Significant dilution In order to pay down recourse debt....

Now the future is looking much better as you note.......they have fixed so much in the past two years.......