I wonder, are you working on Monday (on this board?)... seems like your trolling of Pud for the weekend is quite enough now...
Check your charts. It will be oversold when it is less than 2.
The mind boggles.
Please stop saying that "The FED does not use tax payer dollars." That's simply not true. When the Fed creates dollars LITERALLY out of thin air, they LITERALLY devalue the value of everyone else's dollars, including taxpayer dollars.
First, they are selling to the high-end consumer, and the high-end is buying. The low-end consumer is trapped in this horrible economy (great economy for stock owners though!) and will never be able to afford such a car unless the price drastically falls to the 15-25K level. At that point, though, you would assume the major automakers would do everything they can to compete.
Second, Elon Musk is a genius with a lot of money. Business and technical savvy. I still think this company was rescued by the "Great Short Squeeze Scam of 2013" (where almost all heavily shorted companies doubled, tripled, etc.), however, and I think Musk would have bought out the company or it would have been in deep debt (or bankrupt) if the price didn't get squeezed up.
Third, while technically this company produces physical product, the stock price is unquestionably momo-driven. LinkedIn stock also was, and it took several quarters of downside surprises to reverse its momentum. There are no potential downside surprises here... except for the lack of an upside surprise. If I recall correctly, even Musk stated several months ago that the stock price was too high.
I can think of one upside surprise that will totally destroy shorts though (in the short run), and that is new plans for more factories. The stock could jump 20% on the ER even if that factory would be two years away from being operational.
1) Retail is doing terrible in general .. no one has money.
2) Their current offerings are worse than e.g. Samsung's, and they have much slower release dates.
3) Margins shrinking in the industry.
4) Wireless companies now competing on price (somewhat), rather than telling you what a great Apple smartphone you will have if you switch to them.
They will miss, but earnings outlook will be incredibly rosy (and naive), so the stock will probably fall only 3-4%.
.. at some point, this has to happen. They are getting more and more competitors every day. They will never make any money, and if all they have is secondaries to fuel their operation, they will go bust once the Federal Reserve stops printing billions every day.
Here are my portfolio picks.
Aeropostale (ARO)- long
ARO is 9 cents away from a low set over 10 years ago. Yes, they are losing money, but management is competent. Various large investors want a buyout done, perhaps by Sycamore. Going by the Target buyout (incompetent management and very expensive management golden parachutes), a deal will be made at a 30-50% premium from the current price of 7.71.
Men's Warehouse (MW) and Joseph A. Bank (JOSB)- strong short
Both companies, but especially MW, started losing stock price value in the middle of last year. MW's board comes off as greedy and incompetent. Now both companies are way up recently because both companies want to buy each other! It is not logical. I expect that they will not buy each other. The first shoe (..) to fall will be JOSB buying a smaller company, providing proof that they have dropped their ambitions to merge with Men's Warehouse.
Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG)- short
Ask yourself how a price run from $16 in late 2012 to ~$46 now is sustainable, if natural gas prices have not risen 3x, and the company is losing money? One comparable is CHK at 25.45, which has recovered nicely from its 2012 CEO brouahaha and low of 13.50 by selling off its excess assets and inventory. CHK, at 25.45, is profitable, and is little changed from its 2012 pre-scandal high price of 25.58... LNG is set for an earnings warning or two.
SUPERVALU (SVU)- short
A flailing chain, with an amazing run in 2013 due to various asset sales and management overhaul: a tripling in price from its average of $2 in late-2012. The company has lost $2.20 (33%) since its high of 8.40 in October 2013. Even with a successful turnaround strategy, the negative stockholder's equity and general competitiveness in the grocery business doesn't justify even a $6.21 valuation. $5 is more appropriate, within the next 6 months.
DDD- strong short
Competition increasing. Makerbot Industries rapidly expanding organically. DDD not worth the extravagant P/E.
Considering that a lot of that revenue is immediately discounted due to licensing fees, and there isn't any evidence that Pandora can ever be profitable, this multiple is not as significant.
According to NPR, (blogs/therecord/2013/06/15/191703769/songwriters-group-calls-pandoras-radio-station-buy-a-stunt) "Back when rates were established, playing a song on the radio was considered a free advertisement for a record."
It seems to be that the clear distinction is that a radio station plays a select list to a captive audience, while a record is something a person buys directly. Traditional radio stations still, in general, play to a captive audience (someone channel surfing in their car, for example). A company that simply provides a play list where the music selection is known, to a technologically sophisticated audience (not just people in cars) cannot be said to be a captive audience, in my opinion.
There are at least three concerns here imo:
* Whether the list to be played is a simple random genre list or not. If you're listening to a selection of hand-picked popular artists, it's no longer advertisement.
* What constitutes advertisement and consumption. I don't think that the distinction exists anymore -- the playlists cannot be a random genre list or no one will watch.
* Just like copyright and patent law, radio licensing fees were created to provide a public good while balancing the ability of content producers to earn a living. This has to be in balance.
This judge is I believe 67 years old and apparently a highly regarded professor and judge. She couldn't have made it this far without considering such aspects. I read her ruling from a previous case a few years ago. It was extremely thorough and was out I believe 2 weeks after the closing arguments. I think that all of the concerns side with ASCAP. I also think that other hybrid radio companies will have to pay a higher rate as a side-effect of the ruling.
I saw it. A few things I noted.
* Upcoming results are "late April / early May"
* Athersys's secondary a little while ago set it up for a couple years of funding (and more trials), before large pharma partners coming in. Cash burn is only about 14-15MM a year according to Yahoo. That indicates they are keeping their costs manageable.