50+% short interest, 3 weeks to cover, and brokers begging to borrow stock so they can short more on a stock that's already been knocked in half. Do you even have to ask if there's a leak?
You sort of hit the nail on the head. The long term problem has been them being big on talk and spending, but real short on delivery. And if history repeats there's patient $ to be made buying in the 50 cent range and waiting for the next big announcement. Will buy at 50 and do a gtc sale at 80 cents waiting for the next pop..
Or at least my version. "Northwest secures financing of (? amount) at $4 per share". Or sells stock at $6 a share with options to purchase more at the same price for Y number of years. Saves company but dilutes common.
You should know better than to call someone's baby ugly. You notice the enlightened fanatics don't take it well.
And the mayor difference between now and 25 years ago ( other than the stock price) is they've spent $500+ mil of investors $ . The similarities are, they have the same number of approved products.
The rest is all noise.
Looks like they'll be blowing it thru the $16's early today, already down nearly a dollar premarket. Had predicted $16 for next Monday early in the week.
Any predictions on when it hits single digits? It's broken all support levels and I don't see orders building even in the low teens.
100 million shares outstanding, with all insiders combined holding 300,000, 1/3 of 1% if you can't handles the math. Marucci holds none, and the other executives hold maybe a few thousand. Can you show the buys you allege or the fantasy holdings?
Maybe they're secretly loading loading up, yes that has to be it.
Surely there's lots of room for disagreement buy I have to call you on Apple. Their current trailing PE is 13 and they are growing at many multiples of Vasco.
But that said another thing that I've always questioned here is what I think is Vascos claim they have 1400 customers. If that's accurate they're either going to have to add 300 new ones or get some whopper orders from their big ones. Is 1400 the advertised number, couldn't find it repeated.
And finally, the short position continues to grow. There's something amiss or one hell of a conspiracy
I'm holding my puts.
Err, if the SEC isn't watching that list and unusual trading what are they watching, ESPN? Vacos been at the top of the list for months, hasn't it?
And no one at SEC cares about anything beyond their current comp package and which firm they'll go to once they leave SEC. I'm shocked they answer the phone. Are you sure you called the right SEC? You may have bought a magazine subscription.
Look at who owns this company, 90% institutions. Marrucci doesn't own a share, nor do virtually any of the key people. They sell their options the minute they exercise them so none of them even have a dog in the fight.
Blame these brilliant institutional managers who could remove him and the others and don't, and yourself for buying the story.
Marrucci's simply making himself a nice living by spinning the yarn and taking the experts to the woodshed while they're out playing golf. Only people upset are the retail suckers who are losing their own money!
If Marucci owns no stock, ask yourself why you should?
Okay, use 20%, which i still consider very optimistic, or $10 mil off the bottom line for 2016. Roughly, that's take them to $30 or $40 mil net spread across 40 million outstanding shares. Keep it simple and call it a dollar a share or a PE of 18 at today's market price.
IMHO that's way too rich for a company performing and guiding as they now are. The 50/100% growth rates and wild PE's are history now that they've matured. They're no Apple, and for that matter Apple's selling at a PE of what 14/15? Whatever, I think you get the point. The stock price just got way ahead of realities.
Can't understand the analysts silence, but here's my calculation. For 2015 Vasco will gross $250 mil and get 20% of that to the bottom line, $50 mil
We know they're losing $50 mil of that for 2016, so the challenge is calculating the bottom line impact. Where they've made no comment on cutting expenses on account of or related to the downswing, the extreme view is the whole $50 mil loss of revenue will fall to the bottom. Disastrous and probably unreasonable.
The ultimate optimistic view though is that they'll only lose the 20% bottom line contribution from Robo, ie that they'll reduce expenses by $40 mil.That's as silly as the most pessimistic scenario
I don't know enough about their cost structure or business model, so all I'm doing is averaging these two extremes. My bet is a $30 mil hit to the bottom line, about half of their 2015 net income, If that's accurate, $10 a share is probably high.
Lousy analogy maybe, but it's sort of like APPL being banned from selling their products in the Asian markets.
And editorially, I very much disliked the way they dismissed the loss in the conference call. Sort of a "no big deal" attitude. And if you look at the minimal growth rate from their other customers this is a huge deal, as the longs are discovering!
I'm one of them and think $10 is way too high going forward. The PE of 9 you're using I believe is the trailing PE. What the shorts are looking at is their 2016 forward with no Rabo contract distorting the 15base. That $50 mil exploded the 2015 numbers.
Guess you have to do your own calculation of 16 without that huge bump, but you have to figure at least 60% of it will fall to the bottom. Take $30 mil out of 15"s bottom line and see what sort of a PE you get. Scary
I'll simply refer you to the charts for SYMX. Pick virtually any period, months or years and their progress is obvious. Denial is futile.
Don't you ever tire of making these stupid predictions? For a while they were funny, now they're just annoying.
I'm holding out for 50 cents. History dictates that when iy gets there there's usually some "announcement" or the like that bumps it back to the $1 range.
At present though. China's in meltdown mode so it's unlikely they'll be wasting time monkeying with these guys. I think 50 is about guaranteed but even there I'll go lightly. Conditions wouldn't be worse and there's the probability they'll need money. And if they get funding someones going to be buying in real cheap.
For those of you who wondered why they did this last offering when they clearly didn't need the money, now you know. They have a history of doing offerings seemingly prematurely and shortly after pocketing the cash dropping a bomb of one sort or another.
I guess we just watch for the next mystery offering and begin buying puts. Of course,after this one, it's unlikely the markets are going to be very receptive to another, but never underestimate the underwriters capacity to con their customers. There's a sucker born every minute.
If they could get as many new contracts as lawsuits they'd be in great shape. How many of these ambulance chasers are there out there?
With the short position as big as it is and growing, and the stock nearly halving itself almost overnight $17 is better than $18 to buy, but not enough to risk. Sooner or later the shoe will drop and that's when you buy....unless you're part of the group that knows what's coming down the pike.
You're right, it has all those and by the end of the month will have a single digit stock price that'll make it real attractive to a buyer, a 70% off sale.