Half of the volume today was from the shorts.
Such aggressive shorting has been going on since Dec 12, and that day the stock closed at $2.84.
So, those shorts are not making any money, but rather, they're trying to push the stock down. There are very few real sellers left.
Once again h_grant_h:
1) Cannot explain how any of the detractors of this company are wrong when they state the business model consists of buying at an industry standard LE and then using Dr. Cassidy to haircut that LE before sticking fractional investors in the product. If that is not fraud as regulators claim, then it is unethical since the original LEs are not disclosed.
2) He cannot explain why the non-disclosure of all fees and commissions is not unethical.
3) He cannot explain why the so-called returns given to investors does not include all those policies that have extended and are in premium call, been premium forwarded or have been resold.
4)) Misrepresents facts to his own likeing. For example, he posted that LPHI is doing fractional business in CA and CO when in fact they are not.
5)) Misrepresents short sellers, who are mostly out of the stock. There are around 800,000 shares of shorts in the stock. This number was much, much higher several years ago.
6)) Misrepresents the profits made or not made by short sellers. This stock is down over 60% TTM and a lot more than that from the peak. Anyone short probably did quite well.
7)) Acts as a paid stock promoter by telling people this should reach $10 per share without any fundamental analysis. He neglects to mention the company no longer makes money, has negative free cash flow, with nothing to indicated that this will turn around.
8) Neglects to mention the company is anything but an open book, refusing to broadcast their annual meetings, refusing to offer full disclosure to fractional investors, etc.
9) Neglects to mention the company pays a dividend in excess of revenues (there have been no profits in recent quarters) that mainly benefits one person, the CEO.
10) Neglects to mention that any one of the several civil plaintiff lawsuits, if successful, could wipe out the cash currently on the books.
11) In the traditions of fraudsters, h_grant-h lies about the SEC by saying they could simply shut LPI down whenever the Commission want to. We have heard this before from pumpers of LPHI during the entire decline of the stock price (over 80%). First, they said any investigation would amount to nothing. Then they said the Wells notice would never happen. Then they said LPHI "beat" the Wells notice. Then they said LPHI would get the SEC suit thrown out of court. Now this h_grant-h pumper is stating that the SEC will certainly lose otherwise they would have shut the company down. The SEC is involved with civil and not criminal matters, and anything they do takes time. The fraudsters don't care if it gets in the way of a good story (or good lie).
12) Refuses to discuss the entire resales scheme, which is designed to keep the business afloat. There is only one reason I see for a resale, and that is when a fractional investor has to dip into his/her pockets because the policies he/she owns are not maturing on time. Theses policies are not maturing on schedule, but the company does not disclose in financial statements how many investors have to sell their policies. Is this ethical?
13) Refuses to explain why on the LPHI website there are links to presentations by the CEO promising double digit returns! Is this ethical?
One of the interesting aspects about the free message board is that you can see through a lot of things that are troubling those long time residents/losers.
For instant, the most often encounter is that some of the pretentious "experts" of the board try to ask you questions they don't have a real clue, but have bothered them for such a long time. They want the answers so bad, but they have no way of getting them. They're clueless in reality and they suffer from the same "illness". They become so hopeless.
That's why a message board can be very helpful, if you really know what you're doing and did your homework thoroughly.
Once again, we hear from a pumper. This is what the pumpers, likely paid or working for a distributor, have always done before bad news hits:
1) Deny that the business model consists of taking a policy priced by industry standard LEs and then changing it (poof!) to a new LE up to 50% shorter by the stroke of a pen. There is not disclosure of this purported business model to clients. This is the basis of why the government regulators want to put LPI out of business.
2) Deny that part of the business model is based upon selling people hope, specifically promising double digit returns, and evidenced by the company CEO stating this in two forums that can be linked off the LPHI website.
3) Attack the messenger, in this case the plaintiffs in the civil suits (including the SEC), instead of defending their arguments when they know their argument is worthless. For example, pumpers first said the SEC found nothing in their long investigation. Then the pumpers said the Wells notice meant the SEC found nothing and would never materialize. After the Wells notice came the pumpers said LPHI beat it! When the SEC decided to pursue a case against LPHI, the pumpers said it would be dismissed. When the judge refused to dismiss the case the pumpers continue to attack the SEC. This current pumper uses the faulty logic that the SEC could just shut LPI or LPHI down by the stroke of a pen, when in fact the SEC is involved with civil and not criminal issues. This pumper denies the plaintiffs in the other civil suits have a case even after their class action suits have been certified.
4) The pumpers have no valid reason why there is currently a dividend higher than the most recent revenues. They never mention that the dividend primarily enriches one person.
5) The pumpers misrepresent what has happened in the past. Our current pumper denies LPHI no longer does fractionalized business in CA and CO. He points out that LPI owns policies in CO when they have been (mostly) sold to raise cash.
6) The pumpers deny the true total return fractionalized investors are getting, since they have no valid method to calculate those returns. They deny the premium forwarding and resales are a result of poor returns.
7) The pumpers never, ever, state the number of resales and why the resales are necessary.
8) The pumpers love finding a scapegoat, and in this case it is the shorts. What they fail to mention is that shorts have made money. It is hard not to make money when a stock is down 60% YTD and much, much more from the high. The pumpers also deny that the short positions have dropped to around 830,000 shares.
9) The pumpers always have a price target, in this case $10, but never have any math explaining why the stock belongs there. They conveniently forget this company has red ink and by their own admission will not see it reverse unless the SEC suit is settled favorably.
10) The pumpers always deny there is a need for full disclosre of fees and commissions. They rationalize that full disclosure is not necessary.
11) The pumpers never mention anything that can possibly invoke Howey. For example, the pumpers will not mention the number of resales, why the premium forwarding is necessary, or who is helping and promoting resales (and for what purpose).
12) The pumpers never, ever mention the declining cash position.
13) The pumpers never, ever mention the dismal and embarrassing results of the two Regent portfolios advised by LPI.
15) The pumpers never, even mention that the Life Partners margins are far higher than anyone else reported in the industry, despite having no technological or business advantage that would allow for such higher margins. THEREFORE, THE HIGHER MARGINS MUST RESULT FROM A LOWER LE BEING ATTACHED TO EACH POLICY PURCHASED BEFORE RESELLING THE POLICY TO FRACTIONAL INVESTORS. THERE IS NO OTHER EXPLANATION.
Must be some bad news coming. There always is a John the Baptist figure that shows up on the board before something bad happens. Are you the rebirth of Pamela. We miss her so.
Half the volume today was from shorts. Really. Not 53%. And, you think we are being speculative. But, thanks for stirring things up. The board was slowly going to sleep and you woke it up.
You will cycle through like the rest of the self appointed "experts". BTW - where to you get your degree in psychology? Baylor?