This is ugly:
There is currently a fairytale going around individual investor-focused websites like InvestorVillage.com, the Yahoo Finance message boards and Seeking Alpha that a tiny company with a handful of patents and little or no ongoing R&D is worth billions of dollars. The original company behind these patents cut off R&D funding, tried to sell the patents, failed to find a buyer or investor for even $10M and let the technology lie dormant for a decade. Fortunately for investors, or so the fairytale goes, these patents were purchased for a pittance, and the buyer decided to reverse merge into a publicly traded shell company, offering us all a chance to share its good fortune instead of keeping this value to itself as a private company. This company has an extremely active message board community, where various members discuss how this tiny company is going to make them all rich by extracting huge sums from the global technology leaders. Everyone agrees it is just a matter of time.
The big seller is gone, core business / legal front is progressing, cash issue will be cleaned up, stock price did not make any sense related to the news/events. I take advantage of unique opportunities long or short when investors are clueless and sensationalize every single event, good or bad. Just like $1.50 didn't make sense, if the PPS was at $10 with the current fundamentals I would be looking to short. True value is somewhere in between $4 and $6 for now. Let the events play out and my view will change.
Management execution, time, and patience. That is how you invest/trade to make money.
I am not too familiar with VHC as you, but attempted to play it in the past only to take a small lose. In regards to CNBC, I believe you are referring to Greenburg, which (correct me if I am wrong) he has played this game with VHC before. It seems to be a coordinated attack on VHC. Or have recent events occurred to question the validity of their suits?
I'll take your word for it as I am not that close to VHC - follow it somewhat but not at the detailed level I would if I owned shares. That's a real problem with SA articles....there seems to be no requirement for facts to be checked or accurate before the articles are published.
I think this is a well-written article. The longs are all bashing it of course, but the writer has backed up his statements with facts, especially regarding the outcome of other patent cases. I have been tempted many times to buy VHC but never have done so. I'm sticking with AUGT, AUTH and when I have some free cash, I think I'll pick up VRNG if it's still around it's current price.