Really, the whole board is at fault I would think. They could've/should've settled...hindsight being 20/20 of course but the endless legal back and forth could've been predicted. Also, have they tried using a new legal team throughout this at all ? seems pretty obvious that their lawyers suck
Is it on the IBD list ? saw somewhere...maybe Stocktwits...that it was. If so, that means mo-mo in (which will run it up likes this) but then also mo-mo out once the trend breaks
Maybe my AYA.V will finally get picked up in the discussion too. Boo to IR for not getting the story "out there" better.
seriously. only thing I cna figure is there's a fund who is looking at earnings related volume as their exit day for whatever reason. Fidelity has been a seller per the Dec 31 filing.
ISB facility extended until April 30. 8-K here http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/932699/000117152012000298/eps4626.htm
Here's another one http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/23177
Would love to know what valuation this implies for OPT vis a vis MCT...
$40mm was what the judge put the expected up front payment from PIP to SIGA would have been had they done the deal back in the beginning.
Here's the math people. SIGA gets the first $40m of NET PROFITS and then they split the rest of the PROFITS 50/50. Looking at some of the analysts estimates, in 2012 and 2013 projected NET INCOME was around $230 millon on sales of $460 million. So SIGA gets $40m then 50% of the remaining $190 million, or $95 million. Total to SIGA of $135 million of NET INCOME in 2012/2013. 51 million shares out so thats $2.64 of EPS. Figure they do 1/3 of the contract in 2012 and 2/3 in 2013, just being simply about the EPS thats probably 90c or so and 1.70 or so.
Now that the overhang of this trial is gone we can say with reasonable confidence that SIGA will have EPS of 80c or so next year and that will nearly double the year after. And then there's the follow on for 12 million doses and any sales elsewhere. And the other stuff in the pipe. Sure seems cheap to me right here...hope it gets puked when it reopens. Memories of buying Imclone under $10 after Martha Stewart debacle.
Based on the 10-Q from Jan 31, they have $52mn of cash/securities. Subtract total liabilities of $6mn and you get net cash assets of $46mn. Divide by fully-diluted share count of 11.5m and I get a Cash Book Value of $4.00.
Since they are burning cash, I'll sub out the current run rate of $18mn and I get a haircut value of $2.43/share. Sure seems like a decent risk reward tradeoff, especially given the positive news flow. Risk about $1 downside to a year out cash value for what could be a lot more upside.
They filed an amended S-1 today regarding their planned secondary offering. http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/showFiling.go?webmasterId=91327&name=ECOTALITY,%20INC.:%20S-1/A,%20Sub-Doc%201,%20Page%201&link=http%3A//quotemedia.10kwizard.com/filing.xml%3Frid%3D23%26ipage%3D7679153%26DSEQ%3D1%26SQDESC%3DSECTION_BODY%26doc%3D1&cp=on
Looks like they cut the proposed offering (aggregate value) down. Likely as a function of a reduced offering price. ABB is listed as intending to buy shares in the deal.
Note the first woman's questions in the Q&A....EBITDA is expected to be 270m-280m or so. At the low end, thats an EV/EBITDA multiple of 4.65x (using a share price of $8.25). ENS is at 8.3x for a comparable. JCI is 11.5x. Granted XIDE gets a ding for the miss and Q1 guidance, but still, 4.65x sure seems cheap. Am I missing something ?
Does anyone know how CLNE's BAF conversion business compares with the others in the space like WPRT or GMTI ? I know WPRT is an OEM-side conversion while BAF and GMTI are both after-market, but in terms of technology any info on who's is better would be appreciated.
I dont think anyone has posted a correct interpretation of this yet. The way I read the filing - and the notations in particular - I'm not sure he sold anything. Note 1 says the 358,862 shares were acquired at $1.90 pursuant to a warrant exercise. Thats clear enough. Note 2 says "The shares represent the exercise price paid by MacAndrews & Forbes LLC (formerly known as MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings Inc.) ("MacAndrews & Forbes") to acquire the 358,862 shares reported above. The price of the shares was calculated pursuant to the terms of the warrant." That note goes with the 82,924 that at first glance appear to have been sold. If I multiply that share count by the price noted, the total amount is equal to the amount I get if I multiply 358,862 x 1.90. Put that together with the wording of the note and I think its just a reporting quirk for how they 'book' the exercise cost of the warrant (warrants usually carry an exercise price plus the cost of the warrant itself).
I heard from a friend who follows the stock that a large shareholder has been liquidating. The way it trades I definitely believe that. If you were trying to sell several hundred thousand of an illiquid name like this, the best time to do so is when there's news. Also remember, funds sell for any number of reasons totally unrelated to fundamentals. Could be that the analyst who liked the name left; could be they lost some big investor(s) and are liquiditing across the board; could be they have a market cap of price point threshhold that it fell below. Could be anything. Based on the news flow it sure seems like the selling has nothing to do with fundamentals. So...good time to accumulate some cheap stock at nice prices. I am long-termer, so good for me. As a caveat, thats not to say that I am too stubborn to identify (and take advantage of a trading pattern). Sold some at 2.60 first thing today and bought em back at 2.47. I'd love to play that game everyday.