Oh, really. I thought they just destroyed lots of good companies by making equity financing too expensive. GIG had to sell a lot more real shares because the share price devalued as a result of shorts selling counterfeit shares. That hurt my share price appreciation big time. Finally, share holder votes are often less than 1 per share because the brokerage house often holds less shares than are voted. Shorts should be able to deal in options only.
Shorts are covering now that the demand is down. Retails are so easy to play. Casinos are far more honest than the stock market. I suspect that the Market Makers are behind this game. It's like they have this little formula where the decide what a stock will be valued at, start selling like crazy once it hits a certain price, kill the demand, get the retails to give up and start selling, and then cover. That being said, I would not expect it to fall much further. After all, they are GAP positive now. Just have to watch out for Avi. On the other hand, if the market CAP were to fall too far, some funds would likely have to exit. Still the down side should not be that far from where we are at present. GIG should easily do $.10 this year. With the cash on hand and the growth, a P/E of 25 should be easy to maintain. Now that the shorts are likely covered, there is a greater risk of missing the boat if we get a surprise PR.
Wow. And I was thinking that if GIG did 50 cents a share next year with a P/E of 20. GIG would be at $10 a share. Considering that BrPhotonics starts real production in a few months, that is not out of the question.
Happy to see today's movement. Let's make the shorts cover.
Do you even know what short sells are? A legal short sell is when a broker borrows the shares from a margin account, so someone else can sell the shares. The party selling the borrowed shares does so hoping that the shares price will drop and can be repurchased at a lower price. In this case, 500,000 shares(1.25% of the outstanding shares) more than likely substantially exceeds the number of shares held on margin. That means that the shares don't exist and will Fail to Deliver (That is ILLEGAL). Since 500,000 shares equaled about half of the shares purchased yesterday, that means the counterfeit shares would have had a substantial impact on curtailing the rise in the share price (That is also ILLEGAL).
In spite of the fact that there are 10 million new shares, someone shorted 500,000 yesterday. Hard to go up too much with that kind of manipulation.
Hehe. My mistake, I was thinking of the Frank Dodd Act.
Look, I think this company has enormous potential. However, to date, Avi has continued to make huge and costly mistakes in regard to the issuance of new equities. To make matter worst, in the past he has always felt the need to issue himself additional shares to maintain his ownership percentage, which has proven very costly to the shareholders to date.
Now as far as your Graham & Dodd theories on stock valuations,
that has little to do with reality. Wall Street is far closer to a casino with a rigged roulette wheel. Look at GIG for example, it is quite undervalued when one considers it future growth. Your Graham and Dodd theories would indicate a significantly higher value. However, that new issue was very poorly timed. My issue is GIG had a line of credit in place that appeared to be sufficient. So, there was no apparent reason for the rush on the new offering. What you are missing is Avi has a reputation for being greedy at the expense of the shareholders. This opinion is shared by many shareholders, and is reflected in the price.
Also outstanding share counts matter, as I recall back in 2009, there were only 6 million shares outstanding. Now there is about 40 million. As a result, the PPS value of this company has gone nowhere.
The issuance of new shares needs to stop. Loan financing is quite inexpensive at the moment and makes far more sense than equity financing as far as long term share value. GIG now has a fairly dependable positive cash flow; therefore, loan financing is not as risky as it once was for GIG. I am far more interested in long term growth. Those new shares maybe a safe form of financing and inexpensive in the short run. But they don't go away, and they only dilute the future share values.
Last quarter, GIG did 3 cents a share and shot up to well over $2.70 a share on heavy volume. This time GIG does 4 cents, and the market values GIG at only $2.20.
So, does Graham and Dodd prevent a company stopping a new issue prior to it's public announcement? Not.
So, what does capital structure mean if say the company has a million in income and 40 million shares as opposed to 10 million in income and 400 million shares? It means that unless Avi gets a little smarter capital structure (equity financing), then the Gross value and net performance of this company won't mean jack to the common shareholders, because the individual shares will not appreciate in value.
As far as dwelling on the past, it was only two months ago that Avi made his most recent screw the shareholders move. Too date, he has been very consistent with screwing the shareholders on a regular basis.
Didn't I state that the SEC is castrated. Heck, if Madoff had not confessed, he would still by free. Who has gone to prison over this https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-08-09/s70809-4564.htm
As far as emotional, and losing sleep over this you have the wrong guy. I had other obligations yesterday haven't even had a chance to listen to the CC. However, today's price action is speaking volumes.
I did listen to the last CC. Boy was I pumped. Then Avi went off and issued 10,000,000 for the heck of it at a crap price. He did so after someone had clearly brought down the share price via illegal naked shorting and did not have an immediate need for the cash. So it really doesn't matter what's said in the CC if they are going to dilute every time there is a bump in profits. As far as I am concerned there is only one metric for success in this investment and it is the share price. So, genius would you mind telling me what the share price has done since 2008? Today this would be a $4 stock, if Avi had not done that new issue.
BTW I do have a BBA in Finance. I have also discussed this with a friend, who is a CFO at a similarly sized company. So, I'm not clueless. Sorry, if someone with a sells/PR back ground doesn't understand the issue.
You are a trip. I can safely say there are not 1.5 million shares being held in margin accounts; therefore, a short position of 1.5 million shares was illegal. It was either done to illegally manipulate the share price or so someone could illegally make maybe $700,000 by shorting at $2.65 and covering at $1.70. Either way they stole from me via illegal activity when Avi did the new issue. Now I doubt that the castrated SEC would have done its job, but Avi had the job to take care of it. Porsche took care of it when they acquired VW. I still smile when I remember the #$%$ billionaire who step in front of a train after he lost everything by Naked Shorting VW. Now I don't have a problem with people making a lot of money, but I do have a problem when they illegally steal it from me.
On technology, this company has become a success. However, that is not reflected in the share price at all. The reason it is not reflected in the share price is because Avi has made numerous mistakes on the financial side of the house. The absolute best that any long term investor has done here is to have bought in at the $.95 range. That is not success, much less a history of success. So, yes I have the right to point out the stupidity of timing the issue of 10 million shares in the middle of a short attack, when the company clearly did not need the cash, and when the company was on track to earn $.05 in the following quarter (before they diluted it with 10 million shares.). If he had waited, we would be looking at a $4 stock right now.
So, in summary, future revenues mean nothing if stupid decisions to dilute the stock or over compensate management, impede the rise of the per share earnings. The problem is Avi has a long history of screwing the shareholders with stupid financial decisions.
Wow. Is your name Avi? Because you are clueless when it comes to finance. The tech here is excellent and full of potential. However, the financial sense lacking. Just under three months ago, someone sold 1,500,000 counterfeit shares. Due to the laws of Supply and Demand, that caused GIG share value to be depressed when the value for the new issue was determined. Furthermore, GIG did not have an immediate need for the cash. Since they did not have a immediate need, they could have waited until this quarter. Another profitable quarter, and probably some growth in earnings as well means we could have been looking at $4 a share tomorrow. But noooo. Somebody decided to do a new issue prematurely and left his partners totally unsatisfied. So, this evening whatever earnings is report has to be divided by about 40 million rather than 30 million. That means a lower share price. Furthermore, by burning the dirty Naked Shorter, he would have lost at least a million dollars and maybe a lot more when he was forced to cover. So, instead of selling 10,000,000 shares for at least $30,000,000 we have to settle for a mere $17,000,000. So yeah smarty pants, Avi's failure to use his brain cost this company $10,000,000 + over the last 2 months.
Would have been great news if Avi has not prematurely released the new shares. Because Avi failed to control himself for the sake of his partners, we are now burdened with a bunch of baby share which can't take of themselves. Therefore, the older shares will suffer as a result of Avi failing to think with his brain. Yep, if Avi had just waited another Quarter the older shares would been somewhat more valuable and would not have burdened with as many less valuable little siblings.
My question would be why Avi did not address the 1.5 million share that were Naked Shorted based on insider information prior to the new issue being publicly announced. Better yet, why didn't Avi think with his brain and delay the new issue for another quarter in order to burn the insiders that Naked Shorted. We could be looking at $5 a share right now as those jerks were forced to cover.
Yep. I think you hit the nail on the head. Oh perhaps I should put a stop loss in at $1.80. Insiders know something. Just like when they shorted a million and a half shares after the last earnings. Must have been nice knowing that GFIG was about to do an offering at $1.7 0 while they were shorting at $2.65.
Do you really think that there are 1.58 million shares being held in margin accounts? Can't legally short shares unless they are being held in a margin account. Not that any any laws apply to the Banksters.
Typical naked short sales. Per shortstockvolume , there was about 90,000 shares sold short yesterday. That was 41%. It is odd that everyday, at least 25% of the volume is short sales. With all of those short sales this company can not go anywhere. Every time it starts to move up, it is meet with a huge short sale.
And yet there were 91,000 shares traded short yesterday. Something reeks in the market.