Quite the contraire my friend,,
Most by and hold folks don't impact the price of a stock..
In your example, they are all bailing...I don't think so...
The intraday traders do. They are buying and selling based on
the chart movements...They don't care about the dividend as
much as they are in scalping .20 or .30 on the stock price...Add
in the shorts who create the volatility in the stock price and you get movement.
The buy and hold folks are the majority of shareholders but it takes a minority
few to really move the price up or down...
I think Cooper has been playing the short side to offset his paper losses on the buy side;
So he has an interest in bashing here...my opinion only..
This data (insider shares bought) is the reason I like this stock...
Insider buys give a great long term picture on the stock's direction...
The insiders are not trading this stock--instead, they have an investment in this security.
There are two groups here. Traders and Investors with with different financial objectives
and I believe the information here should be sorted out based on the objective of the
purchaser of the security (Trader or Investor) .....Short sellers have created great buying
opportunities for the long term hold folks and the insiders at PSEC have taken advantage as
well...I love a stock that is owned and continually accumulated by insiders...
for a trader, perhaps, yes,,,,
for an investor absolutely no...
1) PSEC has variable rates + on the upside...
2) at these prices with reinvested dividends, you will pay off your stock
purchase in five years......and you still get to keep all of your stock..
H e says the same thing because nothing is changing much. They lend money and get paid principal and interest. It is a risk adverse model. It can be looked at as boring business model...It is not as if they are launching new model cars or developing new drugs...I don't know what you are looking for within these webcasts. Perhaps he is repeating the same over and over again because he may feel many of the listeners need to hear it 3 times or more before they understand the huge value presented here....
Where are your facts?
Or are you just making this up?
Have not seen your screen name before...
The reason for the thumbs up is that the posts make economic sense to those that are financially trained...
The reason for bashers getting hit with thumbs down is because no investor with a financial logic
structure as it applies to the markets can stand the bull being propagated here ........
I believe you may be misdirected on this one.
I believe one interviewer asked Grier if a current shareholders would
be hurt if they did not participate in the spinoff and he said,,,no,,,and
that in the short run the spinoff would be revenue neutral..and of course
the whole reason for doing the spin off is to get revenue positive results in
the long run....Remember, they are receiving premium for their shares so
the money's brought In will surpass the investments going out. I think they
are looking at 20%+ premium. If you buy the shares through the warrants,
you venture to make the premium on the shares you buy...and break even
in the short run on the shares you own...but in the long run, be a recipient
of the newly invested monies and the associated returns...So, if you buy the
shares in the short run, you technically make out on the purchase and stay
neutral on your PSEC shares..
One variable however, you can make money selling the warrants if you
decide not to participate in the share purchase...So, in effect, you as
a bystander may make some money on the warrants.....one caveat is
there is no sure thing...but we are dealing here with probabilities and risk
MGMT SAYS THE SPLIT WILL BE NAV NEUTRAL...IN THE SHORT RUN...
So let me know why you think it will erode value? Why would they want to
erode value in the shares they own???? Makes no sense....
The splits are extremely confusing for most investors and this is why there is fear.
And when there is fear, there are shorts...like vultures feeding.... I don't think it is about reputation; it is
about perceiving risk...and most out there cannot perceive risk accurately...I will
give some of the long term holders a bit of empathy because they may have locked
in at a much higher rate and have to wait for this stock to play out relative to NAV...
Some may not have the time to wait for the change in value...Their frustration is evident
on this board...
In a market correction, the money flows to safe and secure assets (hedged businesses) paying a dividend.
This is the one of several reasons I have been buying...The market will correct and I will be collecting 13.5%....A no brainer for a longer term investor...Thanks shorts for providing me the opportunity to buy on
I just read the article...and came back with a few thoughts...
First, the author mentions that external management bears no risk. Really?
Hey, how about Barry's 5 million shares? Doesn't he risk money here? A two
dollar swing to the share price is a10 Million $$ won or lost for him...
He has even a huge interest in juicing the price of the stock up...Mind you,
he has bought at prices continuously over the current market yield..
Secondly, I believe that Grier said by spinning this investment now held at a
super discount to the market will provide a huge upside at market value.
He also said, the company will not spin off if the opportunity is not there,
So, technically, there are three scenario's of which two are probable but one
(premium to book value) is the most probably and positive...
So, It is all about the probabilities.
Management through their purchases over the years has already determined
the direction they think the stock is going to go in the long run.....I guess I am on
the side of management's thinking.
Again, another article leaving out extremely important pieces of information if you
ask me...My opinion only.....
Also, lets add to your post beyond the 13% near term part to the way over 13% if the price appreciates closer to NAV. Lets just be fair.....
I agree with you except for the "before it's all gone part" You are kidding about that comment right?
Perhaps before further erosion...but this is a well managed co. that
makes decisions to reduce risk....They are in the business of steady
as she goes.....