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

Qihoo 360 Technology Co. Ltd. Message Board

  • stockselector357 stockselector357 Apr 19, 2012 12:39 PM Flag

    Why Qihoo will become much bigger:

    With 60% penetration of the browser market, Qihoo is the first stop for users going online. This puts them first in line, ahead of Bidu and Tencent, for directing traffic. There are so many ways to increase monetization when you control the traffic and can follow users as they click on other pages through your browser. Baidu and Tencent both have market caps above $50 billion, while Qihoo is only at $3 billion. The stock is down at this level partly because investors find it difficult to imagine a newer entrant competing and succeeding in gaining share in a market historically dominated by Baidu and Tencent. But being forward thinking and seeing potential before the masses do is exactly what investors need to do in achieving superior returns.

    Some people are selling today because the 20F came out and the stock popped 20%+ from where it was yesterday. These are short term traders who will miss the big long term move in QIHU as the story unfolds.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • board morons....We don't want to discuss nor do we want you shorties discussing FMCN on the QIHU message boards....Long and sick of hearing from you idiots.....

    • Didn't QIHU have an easier time faking it too? Most of these frauds get tripped up because they don't have the cash they've claimed to earn, have extra debt or have aquisitions they can't support. QIHU has only claimed to earn about 30 million since going public haven't they? Seems they could have faked that much easier than say FMCN with their huge cash hoard.

      FMCN and VIT have had more time to create large holes in the balance sheet... gives me some hope that they are more likely to fail. balkes, any thoughts on VIT appreciated.

    • Well, DTT got away with a specific clause in IPO-related filings that does not require QIHU to disclose material failures in internal reporting until their next 20-F, which will not come out till 2013.

      Some of the other frauds have been in the US public markets longer, which meant that DTT could not use a "blind eye" defense when it came to their audit duties.

      This filing is perfect because it allows them to collect fees for another while the notes in the filing indicates that there ARE indeed material reporting issues, and that they would have been caught by a proper audit - had one been required.

    • With a number of companies that DTT had refused to sign off on I was surprised they did for QIHU. I agree that the fraud thesis is still the same whether DTT signs or not. I haven't sold any of my puts either as I had june expirations. I don't expect anything to make it drop below prefiling prices but also think it will drift toward those.

      Do you know if any of the companies DTT has dropped this year were filing 20F's? Or were they for 10ks? I don't know, but plan to look into it tomorrow. I'm not very educated on the differences of the auditor's responsibilities for the different filings, and am wondering whether perhaps the 20f allows the auditor to turn more of a blinde eye.

      I would imagine SEC is probably upset about the filing, but is fairly limited in what it can do. But maybe I give the SEC too much credit at wanting the ethically right thing.

      Good luck out there.

    • You're quoting a Bloomberg article where the author still might change his wording on reflection. Leon's a smart guy and has been at this for a while. It's unlikely he'll stick with an article that indicates a company has received an "unqualified opinion" when the facts point in the opposite direction.

      However, the BB article has little to do with the trading action. No amount of grey is going to stop the bots and the momo guys from buying this higher. It will take an April '13 audit action from this company to return to true value.

      This is how Kerrisdale put up its great '11 returns --- short during the audit season.

    • Clearly not a good development. My estimation of DTT-main has been lowered. Along with that of course my FMCN take-down thesis is shaken a bit (albeit the fraud thesis remains intact and strong).

      However, I have not sold anything ... yet ... and may not. I'll wait for more info ... it may not come. I'm inclined to ride it out (FMCN) but will reserve judgment for now.

      AS for qihu, I expect it to settle some ... other very questionable companies have lowered somewhat after the initial "kick" of having their SEC documents signed. QIHU's price is way out of range, but the put expirations are too short to keep going without a catalyst. For now though, I'm going to wait and see what new info arrives ... while keeping an eye on possibly leaping over to another short. SEC and PCAOB seem powerless here. We'll see.

    • Matt,

      Now that DTT allowed QIHU to file the 20F, what do you think this means for FMCN? I personally felt more confident on them walking on QIHU than FMCN. Are you changing you FMCN positions at all. I personally am thinking about shrinking my FMCN bets, considering some of them are already fairly profitable. Most of my stuff is puts so for me its pretty much 500% win or 80% loss on the signoff. This is all extra speculative money to me, but still sucks when you lose.

    • This will drag on...

      OP wasn't really misleading. read it again. The only part arguable to be misleading is "qihoo is the first stop for users going online" its a hyperbolic statement so don't take it too seriously, especially from a pumper on yahoo. I somewhat agreed with you on that part because I understand how it could sound misleading to you.

      Yes, I read and agreed with you that according to the metrics (that you link non-stop) there are more active users of I.E. than 360 browser. But you incessantly keep pointing out QIHU is wrong for calling themselves a market-leader for the sole reason of not being the #1 browser by number of active users in China.

      However, not everyone shares your opinion.
      The CEO of Mozilla China credits 360 Browser as the popular local browser and the article was published on August 10, 2011.
      It can be safely assumed the reason Qihoo calls themselves the market leader by penetration rate is because they ARE the most popular local browser by active users. They can arguably claim they are the market leader.

      Enron and Madoff are intricate frauds of a completely different nature. Your argument against QIHU is simply that they're misleading investors into thinking they're the king of browsers in China. Which they can possibly argue as true, whereas Enron and Madoff were cooking books on an unseen scale that not even a lawyer with a golden tongue could get them out of.

      Would a company sell itself or its products short? Compare the advertising of DirecTV and DISH. They each claim they're the better service posted with their own metrics. QIHU's statement as market leader isn't necessarily wrong nor right as they never made clear which metric they used. You're only assuming and jumping to conclusions without asking.

    • You hold a higher regard for mass investors, the press, and Deloitte than I do.

    • Qihoo 360 Technology Co. (QIHU), a Chinese developer of computer security software, surged the most in 10 months after a filing showed that auditor Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu consented to its financial statements for 2010 and 2011.

      Qihoo’s American depositary receipts climbed 20 percent, the most since June 7, to $24.68 at 3:31 p.m. New York time. The ADRs earlier soared as much as 27 percent to $26.18.

      Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu said the company’s “consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position” of Qihoo as of Dec. 31, 2010 and 2011.

      The filing demonstrated that Qihoo’s “financial figures were checked and audited, which is a good refutation of allegations by some short sellers on its business and a positive to its stock,” said Qi Guo, research analyst on U.S.-listed Chinese Internet stocks at ThinkEquity Partners LLC in San Francisco.

      Qihoo rejected in an April 3 statement allegations that were raised in a Forbes magazine article a day earlier that Qihoo’s “revenue model” had changed since its IPO. The company also refuted accusations by companies including short seller Citron Research, which disputed Qihoo’s sources of revenue in reports since November.

    • View More Messages
52.87+0.21(+0.40%)Aug 31 4:01 PMEDT