Shorts have been high on themselves since they found problems with companies in the China RTO space. They seem to think they are successful because, as Herb Greenberg said in his CNBC script "All RTOs are frauds." Herb is, if nothing else, a guy who repeats verbatim what the shorts believe. The real problem is with Chinese companies that have poor incentives and controls taking advantage of US markets while hiding behind the legal and language barriers. It's not with RTOs is general.
Shorts also seem to think that NOG has aggressive accounting problems. I guess as long as the price is moving in their favor, the facts can be damned. I find it amazing how the initial Bronte bashing piece compared NOG to a "peer" company, even though the alleged peer was in a different country, had significant production from different play types (not even the Sask. Bakken), and had production and depletion comparisons that were polluted by a large acquisition. The Bronte piece was quickly and convincingly refuted, yet it won't go away.
Ignoring the facts because of a recent winning streak has never been a successful investment strategy for me and anyone I've ever heard of. It won't be here, either. But the shorts have become so cocky from their recent successes in China and confused about the reasons behind their successes, that it will much more than facts to open their eyes. It will take a lot of time, and eventually losses.
Ah ha. Gotcha :)
Your last post reflected more focused thinking, and clear expression. Congratulations. You do seem trainable.
But honesty is yet your deap seated problem, less ammenable to correction from pointers.
Hoping for your improvement.
Ever hear the term "wordiness?"
You flunked again. Write with a clearly stated purpose at the start. Avoid both the appearance and the reality of opinonated verbiage.
State facts and explain their relevance to your purpose if that is not self-evident.
Remember that opinions are not in demand by informed readers, and carry no weight. After a while, intelligent readers will avoid your posts.
So now the stock is tracking with the oil price? Well, the last time oil was at this price was in late February. If I look at NOG it was over $30 per share. If your logic works, why was the stock 70% higher then than it is now with oil at the same price? The $40 mark by Cannacord is ridiculous. I'm pretty sure the insiders will again dump like crazy if it ever hits $25 again. Trust me, the insiders are working their calculators every day, evaluating their losses and gains. Wishing they would have dumped more above $30, or $25, or now $20. And, I'm sure they are not happy that their CEO hung them out to dry by dumping so much that it significantly impacted their net worth. All longs should feel that way.
It will be very interesting to see how things are financed going forward -- Do they spend a lot of their cash in stock buybacks? The same cash they just raised 6 mos ago to pay for drilling and land aquisition. As for the additional debt they now confidently say they can take on --- is it still freely available if oil drops below $75? Oil dropped well below $75 not too long ago, shortly after it peaked at $150. There is a lot more risk here than the Longs ever realized, IMO.
jamesis, you are correct but it has nothing to do with denial.
There are some (with good reasons mentioned) who think that this attack is problematic. Your point about them underperforming goes against the comment that boepd made concerning little affect by the bear attack if any. You are making Jack's point for him in fact, that it did have an adverse affect and then you imply that it is some fault of the company. This is the type of thing we have been reaading from you for a while.
I have no idea about what happens from here but I had a suggestion for stockmonger that I still think is a good one.
Based somewhat on that video that you did not seem to like about a similar situation.
What do you think? Good idea or not so similar?
Why not contact 60 minutes for a follow-on story to the bear attack and let the truth about all of this become revealed?
I know gloating is in poor taste, can't resist sometimes especially with the way longs have been on this board.
Oil prices down yes, but don't forget NOG has significantly underperformed its peers since mid March. Something more is going on here besides lower oil. I think longs are in denial.
Have a good day.
I suspect this is mainly directed at me, as I also have a number of short positions in various Chinese RTO's. I'm constantly surprised by how much time some longs spend doing research into short sellers. I suppose it's because you believe we're all engaged in a big conspiracy to impoverish you.
Frankly the fact that NOG is an RTO is by itself a pretty small red flag. Going to market through an RTO isn't a good look, but nor is it a sure sign of dishonesty.
You're obviously obsessed with Hempton's use of Petrobakken as a comparison point with NOG in regard to depletion rates. All I can say is that companies are like snowflakes, no two are exactly alike. And no comparison will ever be perfect.
I don't look for perfection, or certainty. I look for red flags, and to me the low depletion rate was just one of a number of red flags.
Once I've seen enough red flags, I know there's going to be a bull fight.
And just like a real bull fight, the bulls rarely win.
Spot, all of your points seem to miss the point except this:
"you believe we're all engaged in a big conspiracy"
Money is not at issue it is the method. If you are long, you can just wait, a month or a year is not the problem.
The leagleze that I had mentioned for you to read that Jack was kind enough respond to your post to lay out, explains the legal aspects which is very is revealing. Do you think he is just kidding?
The claims that stockmonger makes are illustrated with very specific examples. She clearly explains fraud. Maybe you think she is off base somehow?
The explanations that boepd (another very smart lawyer) pointed out are not merely hypothetical.
You should read all of their posts and you will understand what the issue is. People reading the posts are not stupid. Jack really does have a PhD & is a lawyer. You can google his published research papers if you don't believe it.
It is not so much about NOG but about the methods used to attack them that people find so deeply objectionable. This is because we are ALL (even you)supposed to be protected by law from such deceptions and misconduct.
Many people believe (and it seems pretty obvious) that there has been a manipulative short selling scheme. It has been written about by known authors who we all read in articles by ZMAN, Filloon, etc.
It not as you portray which seems more like a football game of the shorts against the longs, or as jamesis calls the pumpers against the bashers.
The people who have posted like Jack, stockmonger & boepd describe a behavior that is regulated by the SEC & enforced by them & DOJ.
You have at least TWO lawyers explaining in their detailed posts what is wrong and you sttill just want to ignore it.
Market risk is something everyone expects. Not intentional deceptions by hit pieces for the purpose of aiding profiteers supported by a program of follow-on negative propaganda.
Hope that makes it clear enough now for you?