The dividend had ex/date of 8/4/20010 and the next dividend will be 1/3 of quaretly income. What is that future dividend, and if not known yet, when will it be known (date)and is based on earnings during what time period? thanks
i bought for a stable stock that psid dividends but sold when the price went up big time two days ago and feel that fda has made its point by taking on decoster, things will calm dowm down now and i might get back in for a dividend stock.
You are making unfounded slurs again.
What are the significant number of hens amount to? A pitance compared to the total.
You are a short or a short shill puffing up all types of BS on this board.
We both know that !!
Nahh!! Juat that there is an expanding body of powerful, compelling evidence they conspired to fix prices and violate securities laws. That ought to be enough. It is just coincidence that the guys who conspired to limit the amount of laying hens had two fires within approximately a year that wiped out a significant number of hens.
Your last post seemed kind of flaky to me. Perhaps you need to take a few deep breaths.
You make some decent points and then fip out and go ballistic on them way and above normal thinking
Relax dude this is only a message board
I don't get the linkage you are trying to make. Other than the fact there is litigation involved, there are no similarities.
Allergan actually countersued the FDA. Who is CALM going to countersue? Sparboe and LOL/Moark, for being rats?
It is even too late to put those two groups in one of the giant hen houses CALM burns down every year to keep a lid on the number of producing chickens while collecting insurance money in the process - the best of both worlds. Until I read the amended complaint, although I joked about it, I tended to give them the benefit of the doubt. I wouldn't be surprised if CALM's insurers are also a little concerned by what Sparboe gave up. Nevertheless, I have said that CALM will probably go up 2 points when they take Moe, Larry and Curly on their perp walk.
>>If they settle in this case, it is an open-ended question as to whether they would have to restate.<<
Any charge will be a current charge, CALM will not restate prior years. CALM is using management’s judgment, and the facts known at this time, to take the position that a charge is possible (not necessarily probable) and that charge could be material, but it can’t be measured at this time, therefore only disclosure is required.
If the assessment of a contingency indicates that it is probable that a material loss has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be estimated, then the estimated liability would be accrued in the Company’s financial statements. If the assessment indicates that a potentially material loss contingency is not probable, but is reasonably possible, or is probable but cannot be estimated, then the nature of the contingent liability, together with an estimate of the range of possible loss if determinable and material, would be disclosed.
If they settle in this case, it is an open-ended question as to whether they would have to restate. If the SEC or DOJ steps in and settles/convicts it is a virtual certainty they would have to restate. The restatement might not involve actual cash, but I don't think under those circumstances the dividend would survive for some period thereafter. Think BP and all those lawsuits you yourself think are coming.
I think you are being extremely naive, particularly about the securities fraud issues raised in the piece I copied here. Think options back-dating scandal and, yes, people went to jail for it.
I am trying to be patient here (pardon the pun about the pediatric practice scandal) but I have already told you why Sparboe broke first. They were the first and only party to the initial efforts to fix prices that got uncomfortable with what they were doing. They had evidence they could provide about their own role and its limitations, as well as, more importantly, what the others, particularly, the 3 Stooges at CALM were doing that allowed the plaintiffs to make their powerful "but for" (read the excerpt) argument.
I believe you are being myopic (staying on the medical theme) about the ramifications of this evidence and if you are watching the stock, it is IMO telling you something that it has not told anyone in the last two years. Despite some really desperate efforts to lift the stock, there is a buzz saw that has been tearing it up. Which side is going to run out of gas first? I don't know, but I don't think time is on the bullish side here.
Every day that passes brings you closer to the date when either CALM independently or some external force is going to force a reckoning. The graduated and grudging nature of the decline is IMO a lulling effort to slow or prevent the few retail holders left from appreciating the seriousness of the circumstances and leave them holding the bag as usual. You are an adult. Judge for yourself.
LOL/Moark is paying $25MM. There is a news release which you can easily find. The link to the document that NL was kind enough to post for the board's consideration is limited to Sparboe and I believe that is the latest release available. There is undoubtedly an amended complaint in the works that incorporates what LOL is disgorging to the plaintiffs. If you think the stuff that an outsider like Sparboe provided is juicy, watch for what LOL/Moark, a true insider, is going to spew. You won't need Rogaine anymore to grow hair on your head.
Agreed, to the extent that I know about these things. If I were a day trader I would do what you do. I am not. If they settle and pay, they don't have to restate earnings, do they? I don't know. I would assume that the expense would be a current expense, not accrued to the time for the bad behavior. Especially if it is settlement with no admission of guilt. But I don't know what FASB says about that. I have been privy to a massive CID from the DOJ on a pediatric practice obsessing on the charge for baby visits etc. Two of them. Both cost the practice a lot of money defending and then the feds went away. In this case there were no plaintiffs other than the government, which I think was tipped off by disgruntled competitors. I certainly agree that I would love to know why Sparboe settled so quickly. Can they keep that a secret? Seems like a shareholder would have the right to know. Who paid the money? I did not read that part of the document, if it was contained in it.