IN GENERAL, I refrain from making predictions about the short-term price movements of stocks. I don't believe it is necessary to do that in order to be a successful investor, and I certainly could be wrong in this assumption that I am about to make. I don't really care if I am, because I am interested in WILCF for the long-term. BUT, I believe that WILCF could trade up at least 15% in the first week of 2006 for several reasons:
1.) The end of the fiscal year will mark the end of the tax-loss selling. Who is going to be selling WILCF for 3.10 now who didn't wanna sell it at that price last week? The stock closed near it's 52-week low (with the exception of that one trade at $2.20). So anyone who had it and wanted to sell it soon could have sold it and taken a nice tax-loss on it last week. I think that the sell-side liquidity is pretty much over for now.
2.) There is a dividend coming up and many "dividend chasers" will start to buy the stock in anticipation of it.
So, here's my BOLD PREDICTION (That could very likely turn about to be totally wrong) for the first week of 2006: I believe that WILCF shares will trade as high as $3.50. If it doesn't happen, that's fine. If it goes lower I might even buy more. I'm simply saying that based on the factors I outlined above, I think WILCF is ripe to trade higher this week. Zac
Second, you are being "bold." I have almost never attempted to predict short term swing in Micro Caps. You saw Friday morning how literally, a 300 share trade moved the stock to 3.03. Just keep your long term perspectives. However, the factors that you note are correct, and all else the same, should move up prior to the ex date. Don't be surprised, however, by a 12 cent drop in share price on Jan 9th.
Third, I agree with you on a share buy-back as being a reasonable strategy, but $3.75, in my view, would be inadequate. Would leave too many investors underwater. My long term target is a lot higher than that. The stock was $4.00 just a month ago before tax selling began.
I agree that 3.75 would be lower than the value of the company. But the purpose of a buyback is to increase value to existing shareholders, not "bail out" the ones who want to sell. With a tender offer, no one would have to sell and the shareholders who choose to remain would be well-served. Zac
I think you have a good chance of being right. I was at my brokers a couple of weeks ago, there was a guy there whose only interest in the stocks he had just bought was how much and how soon he could expect dividends. Check out the rest of the sector for this stock. It has one of the lowest P/E's and higher dividends. This is one of the cheaper stocks. I think there's a lot more room for it to go up than down. Terry
The comparisons on all counts are good with the exception of ROE - where they are pretty weak comparatively. I believe it was Zac who pointed out before that ROE is held back because of the large amount of cash they have earning no more than MM rates. When you have a third of more of equity earning 2%, it's difficult to achieve good overall rates.
That's what it's important that in 2006, they do something to boost that ROE - as I mentioned before, I hope they look to the US (or European) market to achieve that.