% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Diodes Incorporated Message Board

Logicalthought 9 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 8, 2016 5:14 PM Member since: Apr 8, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    groundhog day movie

    by jgstaeger Jul 8, 2016 4:35 PM
    logicalthought logicalthought Jul 8, 2016 5:14 PM Flag

    This stock has had a huge run off the sub-$2 lows. To take another leg up company management has to prove it can make real money with all these deals-- the ball is in their court!

  • logicalthought logicalthought Jun 28, 2016 8:08 PM Flag

    In fact as of the end of 2015 Enel may have added to its position, as its own annual report as of 12/31/15 said that it owned 7.9% of ELON: www (dot) enel (dot) com/en-gb/Documents/FinancialReports/report2015/EIH%20FY%202015-published.pdf

  • Reply to

    Hale Partners

    by analogphoneline Jun 21, 2016 11:40 AM
    logicalthought logicalthought Jun 21, 2016 1:51 PM Flag

    It also depends upon how they reallocate the EXISTING R&D expense, but otherwise, yup, that's a great summary of the situation.

  • Reply to

    Hale Partners

    by analogphoneline Jun 21, 2016 11:40 AM
    logicalthought logicalthought Jun 21, 2016 1:07 PM Flag

    You guys seem to think this is a complacent board while forgetting that ONE guy (its Chairman) owns almost 40% of the company and wants nothing more than to make money here! Yes, he picked a CEO who couldn't get the job done, but then after giving him a chance he changed that CEO to one who seems as if maybe he can. Believe me, I own some companies whose boards should be thrown out on their a--es (hello MGCD and ELON) but this isn't one of them!

  • logicalthought logicalthought Jun 20, 2016 3:58 PM Flag

    Lol, "how do I know"? I know that NO ONE pays a 100% premium to buy minority shares in a public company, especially when the company is in the market looking for money.

    Oh sure, just "reduce some inventory"... except what do you sell NEXT quarter, lol? And "reduce receivables", because every company VOLUNTARILY lets its receivables be bigger than they have to be.

  • logicalthought logicalthought Jun 20, 2016 2:46 PM Flag

    Lol, it's nice that "they should have sold him 1 million shares @ $2" but guess what? HE WOULDN'T HAVE BOUGHT THEM!

  • logicalthought logicalthought Jun 19, 2016 1:18 PM Flag

    As far as "selling a board seat," the guy now owns around 12% of the company so he's entitled to one. I agree with you though that a current member should leave, as a tiny company such as this doesn't need the extra expense. Regarding what was said about additional spending and possible raising money for it, these quotes are from the last call:

    First Benck, then Whitaker:
    "we have hired some additional resources, a new head of sales, a new CTO, and we are adding some additional sales resource. We did do a restructuring that is allowing us to do some of this movement and kind of funded from within, but as we also add the new facility in India, again the restructuring that we have done is helping us there but we still believe that even all that considered that there is a potential that we will need to spend a bit more than we have been spending."

    "As you are probably aware we have a revolving line of credit with Silicon Valley Bank. It's a $4 million line of which about $1.8 million is available to us as of the March 31 reporting date. And then in addition you are probably aware that we have a registration statement, a shelf registration out there filed with the SEC, which also gives us another alternative means to bringing capital if we deem it necessary."

  • logicalthought logicalthought Jun 19, 2016 12:54 AM Flag

    The new CEO has made it clear that he wants to invest a few million bucks in growth capital for new product development and marketing, and on top of that, in order to win new contracts you need to be able to show potential customers a decent balance sheet. If the company went out to multiple investors to raise this cash it would've had to do the deal at a discount so I can live with an at-market deal. I'm much more concerned with what the new management team does with this money than I am with the terms on which it raised it-- even a 10% premium would've made a negligence difference. You have to realize that although it might take $2 to buy 2 million shares on the open market, no one would do that with this company until a turnaround is a lot more obvious-- thus the choice was between doing an at-market deal from a fundamental investor who is essentially now locked up, or doing a heavily discounted deal with lots of warrants with some really bad-news hedge funds. As an ex-banker, I can tell you that's how it works.

  • logicalthought by logicalthought Jun 16, 2016 8:51 PM Flag

    I hate to see them sell stock down here, but if they needed it for expansion it's good they did it with a fundamental investor who may not be going anywhere until this company is sold. As to the "Get Ready" post below this one: I think "this year" is too early-- these guys probably need a year or two to show some growth momentum (and thus get a much better price), but late next year is a good target. Assuming an EV of around 1x $45 million in revenue plus a few bucks for the NOLs makes roughly $3 the right price.

20.25+0.10(+0.50%)Aug 26 4:00 PMEDT