Historically, it has been UNCOMMON for TUES to have trading days when volume is below 100,000. But light trading days have suddenly become more common of late. It was surprising enough to have a 5 day trading period, 1/20/09 through 1/26/09, in which TUES traded under 100,000 shares for 5 days in a row. But it was even more surprising, in the most recent SEVEN trading days, 2/9/09 through 2/18/09, in which TUES traded under 75,000 shares for 7 days in a row. What is so surprising about this, is the last time we had volume this light, you have to go all the way back to early 2002. From a one month period, from 1/23/02 through 2/13/02, there were, for some strange reason, MANY days in which the stock traded less than 50,000 shares. At that point in time, the stock was generally trading at $16-17. But 2 months later, by April, it was at $26-27.
I'm not saying, per se, that the EXTREMELY light volume we've been seeing in TUES is suggestive of anything in particular with regard to where the stock price may be going, but I do find it VERY INTERESTING. And my take on it basically, is that those that wanted to get out, because they were "sick of losing money" on it, have GOTTEN OUT. And, at $1, the remaining shareholders who might be predisposed to get out, basically have an attitude of "refusing" to sell, at prices at, or below $1. That SHOULD mean that we've got support in here, unless of course, earnings deteriorate, they start losing money, and don't meet their projections. Meanwhile, buyers are "refusing" to buy because they are AFRAID that the stock never seems to want to go anywhere, and has declined SOOO much. Furthermore, it "looks" like it MAY want to break $1 on the downside, so "why buy now, when you may be able to get shares for cheaper?" (That's kind of what I've been doing, waiting for, say, 80 cents, or 70 cents.) But really, it is quite possible that that may never happen, and there are just not enough sellers coming out to take the stock down. Although mind you, I HOPE there is still more selling to come, because I would like the chance to buy more of this at 70-80 cents, and I DO think, that if it can convincingly break below $1 (like if someone decides they want to get out of 100,000 shares), that it could bring out the "final rush" of sellers, who don't know how to read balance sheets, and figure that a break below $1 is the "final road on the way to zero."
Personally, if the stock stays down at these drastically underpriced levels, I think it is more likely than not that this company to be bought out, probably at $5, or more.
I LOVE BEING A CONTRARIAN, and being able to "know" when the markets are WRONG!
Well, my point before was that it was FOOLISH to not have a good CHUNK of "long-term exposure" here, at this point. You could have waited for $1.01, and owned no shares, and if you "missed out," on the way to $5-10 in the next 2 years, you'd be kicking yourself. I'm looking to probably increase my position around 40%, if it drops to 70-80 cents, and 75% if it drops to 60 cents. I doubt it will get below 70-75 cents, though. Or even 80-82 cents. But once it starts "flirting" with breaking below $1, it's dumb to be buying shares at, say, 96-98 cents. After all, the short-term support has been BROKEN.