How about that latest Motley Fool video by Austin Smith. He said:
....Skull Candy is a young brand and unproven.......
....in the consumer electronics space you don't want to rely on brand over the long run....
....I don't want to bet on either one of those companies [Zagg & Skull Candy] for the long run.
Ouchhhhh! Maybe somebody should call Cramer and see if he has changed his mind.
On SKUL, looks like the 5-wave impulsive move down on a 30-minute intraday has morphed into 9 waves as I previously pointed out as a possibility. If this 9th wave can get under 12.90 then my 12.76 target is in range. The weekly pivot support-1 is at 12.62. Or it could just truncate the 12.90 low.
After it completes wave 9 down, I would expect a 3 wave correction up. It could be a zig-zag up or just go flat.
I'd cry a river for ya Forget, but like I said, I don't have any time to feel sorry for you nor ponder the source of your incessant bullying complex. I'm just sick and tired of your ignorant, non-justified, one-line heckles.
By the way, You said "when WYY starts a trend it usually goes for months." Then you shouted, "Technicals never worked there, go and ask the others on the board."
First of all, those two statements are in direct opposition. How can it be trending if technicals don't work? What, they only work when it suits YOU?
Secondly, I don't even question whether "technicals" work on a particular issue. If there is supply and demand I can generally analyze it.
Thirdly, why would I ask someone on the Yahoo WYY board if the "technicals" are working? Like you, those folks are likely all bag holders with a self destructive bias and no clue about supply and demand of the stock itself.
WYY is in trouble. The "technicals", as you call them, are basic and elementary. Get out of the weeds, back up, and look at the monthly chart beginning with the fall of 2008. It's a classic head and shoulders top. It's like a perfect one; a thing of beauty. They don't get much better. In August of this year it fell thru the neckline and this week it went up to 60 cents testing the neckline which was at 57 cents and rejected it.
There it is, plain as the nose on your face, and you're still in the stock. Why? Because the last quarterly numbers were good and the company has so much promise? Or is it that all your buddies on the WYY board say the "technicals" don't work? Tell your buddies there is a high volume low at 10 cents and that is where it is eventually going. See what they say to that. My bet is they don't want to hear the truth and will behave like you; ridicule you and call you a blind squirrel or some such diminutive name.
keep shorting there Onepoint..love when those technicals fall by the wayside(as they will) and other realities such as sales, pe's and profits trump all what you say...and seems you changed your tune on that 9/share #$%$ from prior..and how bout that Obama winning technical 30 count you were waving?..seems to have changed there too...better just use your technicals as ONE indicator that SOME trade on..there's a lot beyond just technicals that drive a stocks pps....short on......
Kevin, you said:
"-my exit strategy for these companies is to hold for many years..."
That's a buy-and-hold strategy, but IT IS NOT an exit strategy.
If you want to hold long term let me suggest at minimum watching a 12-month moving average on the S&P500. Go long and stay long when the SPX 12-month MA is sloping up and sell when it turns down; slopes down. I use this for my investments and also to identify the major trend for my trading. Using this strategy for investing, you could capture 60 to 80% of the major moves. To reduce the lag inherent with moving averages I also use Martin Pring's KST system. I had to code it myself into my trading platform.
You also said you want volatility. Traders want volatility but I'm not sure long term investors should welcome it. SKUL has volatility, but it hasn't gone anywhere in the last year, and down since inception. Sometimes boring cyclical stocks are way better. Take Whirlpool, WHR, for example. They make appliances....boring....but you could have doubled your money in the last year.
The demographics make sense for SKUL because of the growing population of 13 to 30-year-olds. But there is so much competition and other than branding they have no moat. In the 60's Playtex had a moat; revolutionary bra material. Also there was only one company that made the pill, Syntex I think, now that was a moat. Intel and Microsoft had moats, now APPL is in that seat. SKUL doesn't have any kind of a moat and just like Austin Smith at Motley said, in the long term branding alone won't hold up in this space. I couldn't agree with him more. It's not even a good trading stock because its hard to get short and therefore can only be traded one way. In my estimation this is a classic example of the founders and their investment bankers picking the pockets of the public. Also, keep in mind that there is a very good reason that $12 is defended so vigorously. A lot of funds won't or in many cases can't own stocks under $12. Once this decisively breaks $12 it'll get hit hard and may never see $12 again. The bottom line is that we should be "investing" in sectors and stocks that are moving up faster than the S&P500; the leaders.
One last jab at the baggies: I love these lines: ".....it's all about the earnings next quarter....". That's moronic. The intrinsic value of stock is not "all" there is to the perceived value of the stock. Rather the intrinsic value is just a part of the perceived value of the stock.
I would agree branding alone won't hold this space, but also believe skull makes a solid product. A very serious argument could be made that they make the highest quality gaming headphone with Astro, and have leveraged this technology across other Skull gaming headphones to seriously compete for a large portion of this market space. Never seen a bad review of these headphones.
Have you read the online reviews for Skull products? Nearly all suggest a quality product for the price, Can you get better ones....sure if you want to spend more. I think they have a solid business model with their full warranty. So branding aside (which they do very well) the company employs a solid business model with a vision. Because of this I don't see them as a flash in the pan.
I'm conservative businessman in my 40's. Probably not buying Skull, but respect their product and the company. I think traders feel the same way and struggle with understanding the desire for these products (we don't think like a 20 year old) and thus have a difficult time believing the growth story. That's why I suggest earnings has to be the story and proof. Don't have to have a moat, just be very good at what you do (Nike, Monster energy, Lulu). And there's a much larger audience for which they only need a very small share of to be successful.With only 28mil shares outstanding, doesn't take but a couple mil in net income to noticeably bump up the EPS.