Hey Blue. You said pretty much what I was about to write, although you said it better and with more facts. To me, since AOD has become less of a dividend recapture alchemist, it is settling down. The dividend is no longer a driver. The discount to NAV is still large. I have a feeling that management is quietly backing away from the recapture nonsense and may be trying to save face. The dividend is still not justified, but not outrageous.
It is now just a stock to play, keeping an eye on NAV. I've bot and sold for a 40c and a 25c profit recently, and am currently long at $3.91 and am looking to sell again at $4.20 unless the NAV starts dropping big, in which case I'll get out at market. I'm not risking a lot on this stock and I never will again.
Goldman..: Thanks. It's been driving me nuts thinking I got left out. Appreciate your efforts. If I find out anything I'll let you know.
Goldmanthieves: I appreciate your reply. I do not believe my question pertains to the the recent lawsuits regarding insider trading. It's about the lie Elan's CEO told on or about July 1, 2008 about the success of their Alzheimers drug performing well in trials. I bot maybe 400 shares immediately. A few weeks or maybe a month or so later, I'm googing Elan and a law firm with, I think, "@cssgr" in its email address was asking for people to sign up for their class-action suit regarding this lie. I sent in my application. Got a Confirmation number (now missplaced). Never heard a word. My concern is, since I signed on with one firm and maybe they didn't pursue the suit, was I eliminated from consideration by other firms who maybe did pursue it. I'd really like to find out if a CA was done that I did not hear about.
On July 1, 2008, I bot shares of ELN based on the CEO's comments on their Alzheimers drug. He apparently lied about the drugs success in trials and ELN dropped like a rock. Now I am seeing Class actions for trades between July 21 thru July 29, 2008. I'm wondering why July 1st thru July 20th trades are not included.
I was just going to say what you said. This may be a signal that AOD management has decided to quietly stop the ridiculous Dividend Recapture thing. Maybe they are just going to operate like a normal fund. If so, the dividend is realistic and attractive now.
Actually, I was in this thing for the "long term". I bought in 2006 at about $90 (taking into account splits) and held on. I sold after most of the damage was done. I bought back in 2 years ago. You can understandhow I might be a little spooked with a 15% overnight drop. I'm not so sure staying in for "long term growth or the dividend" is always the way to go.
Thanks to the four of you who answered me quickly. I think I understood most of it. I myself did not like this dilution. Anyone know how many shares/how many times they can do this with in the future?
Sorry guys, been away for awhile. I'm sure I missed the answer to my question. Have all the 9 million shares already sold, or can we look at $5.75 as a ceiling for RAS for some time?
Did you go back and look at the NAV at its IPO? It owned specific stocks with ascertainable value. Maybe $20 was close to a good price.
I was responding to filabrazilia's post. Yahoo makes it look like I was responding to someone else and made my comment appear nonsensical. I really can't handle this new system. Can't tell who is responding to whom.Wonder where this comment will end up.
Agreed. But they are leveraged 28%. They (I think) use the value of their holdings as collateral to borrow money cheap and increase the number of bonds they own. So, using your numbers, aren't they really tying up more than $71 worth of bonds? Maybe not $100 worth, but close?
Mugblum: I tried to thank you yesterday, but Yahoo made me sign in with my pword, so I did. Stayed in that loop for awhile, with Yahoo continuing to ask and me continuing to answer, and finally gave up. Anyway, I'm assuming you were responding to my question about locating posters ...hard to tell with new format...so thanks.
My original method, involving an Edit/Find was cleaner, since the new method of finding a name requires that you find it first. Anyway, thanks again, and lets see how easy it will be for everyone to figure out what message I'm responding to!!