anyone here still in imgg? i was in it for a little while back in the spring. i just saw the p/e is 4, the p/s is 1, and the stock hasn't really moved up or down lately. is it just dead money these days, or is it worth taking a stab at it again down at its current price level?
The proof in the pudding is the share price that is 1/2, 50 percent of its $13 high.
Again, in classic market manipulation insiders/controlling parties run the share price up THEN sell the backside decline presumeably to zero as they will have far more shares than potential buyers. Unsold shares viewed as spoilage.
Several months ago FARO had a new high of 35. It's had several new lows and in between highs which have helped the traders and pumper dumpers, but not the true longs.
I wonder how many are being hurt because they listened to the hype and bought on margin.
Bart keeps asking how many stocks have the potential FARO has. Screw the potential. It hasn't lived up to it price wise. You'd think we were in a depression. I bought at 11+ and I'm still pissed off. Imagine how the people that bought at 25 to 30 must feel.
I buy stock to make money, not hold hands with the company until they decide to promote the products. Spend a few dollars and get sponsors to let the world know their in business with a hell of a product.
Bart telling us about the new job postings is nonsense. It hasn't made us a dime so far. He says these lower prices are an opportunity to buy cheaper.
If he has been trading (and I believe he has) his profit from it has probably made him 30 or more points, so he's already at about a price of 60 by making money both ways. And the game goes on.
Stop kidding yourselves.
Barnum was right!!!!!!!!!!
Great post! Totally moronic and misguided, but the spelling, punctuation and grammar are all superb!
You've been taking lessons from bart in posting specious arguments that avoid directly addressing the issues posed I see!
Beach, that is a fair observation. Perhaps I should have said 3-5 years.
However, I am reminded of the Docs confidence that the market will be there in the future for measurement products. I think that the company is almost at a market (both product, marketing, and market share) and financial position that it will be difficult to supplant them - and they could buy any new upstart with something interesting.
I used to use a non contact system when I was making millions of parts per day of very small brass and SS parts measured to .0001".
This was based on a vision system of lenses and focus lengths and things of that sort. This was considered very accurate for its time about 12 years ago. I believe it is still being used even though probably a laser system would be more accurate and most likely faster.
With my understanding of FARO's system, it is essentially an improvement over the vision system I used. It is not inconceivable that the Docs could hav e started with a similar system but with my knowledge of them they did not.
However, my point is this. The laser systems could have been an evolution from vision systems and the DOcs, being astute, would have been at the cutting edge of that technology. Surelly they would not have continued with the vision system once they had become awaaare of the laser abilieties. At the least, they would have gone down both roads, eventually veering to the one with the most promise.
Likewise, I would feel confident that the Docs are keeping abreast of any new technology and surely(?)would explore that to at least evaluate whether it was an appropriate use of their resources.
If a new technology presented itself, it seems that self preservation would dictate that they veer in that direction.
Finally, it doesn't seem to me that there will be much basic changes for the forseeable future. Sure, there will be improvements in laser guns, gearing, materials etc but I do not foresee any major (not the word I want to use) change or genesis which will make their basic concepts obsolete. Perhaps sound but with the small apetures and blind holes etc you would have an echo problem.
Sorry this is so rambling. I hope you can understand what I am trying to say.
Finally, I have been out of the business for a long time so maybe I am just full of
"Watching a stock run down from 35 to 17 to save 5% on taxes????"
Why is it that you think that you only save 5% on taxes between long term and short term? Typo or trying to intentionally mislead people?.....OR are you just in that low of a tax bracket?
All of the above, just one man's opinion.