Obviously no cause for alarm here. A 16% drop on 7 times ordinary volume is merely a healthy correction for a NASDAQ-listed stock.
I'd stake my MBA on that. Got it from Port Royal University, Bobby McFerrin College of Economic Theory and Bar Tending Academy. Bring on another Mai Tai; don't worry, be happy!
Hard to tell the players without a program.
I've also seen the Dongguan facility called "Dongguan Amperex", etc., on ABAT's own site (notably on their ISO certificates)..
I know that there is another battery maker known as Amperex that has other facilities in Dongguan; makes me wonder whether ABAT bought one of their underutilized shops.
Well, if you're going to insist on playing around in the manure pile, you need to develop a tolerance for the flies.
"Bultaco is a direct competitor with ABAT, not a 'partner'!"
I suppose that's true in the sense that Porsche competes with Yugo.
Go to Bultaco's top-domain site (bultaco DOT es). (Both Spanish and English, by the way.)
They have a PDF of their press release (17 pages) available in English. They also have spec.'s for the two bikes they currently propose to build. These aren't scooters; they're 90MPH plus cafe racers. Batteries are modules integrating Li cells with ultracapacitors. Engineering is either in -house or in cooperation with University of Madrid.
This is very clearly an entirely European (if not entirely Spanish) venture, and they are taking great pains to advertise that.
FINRA's short interest figures published this afternoon for the period ended 15 May.
ABAT's short interest reportedly 34,298 shares, down 1,872 (close to 5.2%) from the previous reporting period. To all appearances, now an orderly, leisurely diminution of short interest down to some minor level (I'd guess there will ultimately be 2,000-3,000 that persist eventually).
The SEC today issued the final order revoking the registration of China Digital Animation Development, Inc. (CHDA). See SEC release 72745 (Item 34-74725 on the web page), dated 4 August 2014.
CHDA, of course, was headed by Foo Qiang, and at one time shared offices with ABAT. According to the filing, CHDA did not petition to defer or reverse the revocation.
BULTACO IS BACK ON THE MARKET WITH HIGH-PERFORMANCE MOTORCYCLES FEATURING THE TRACTION OF THE FUTURE
- Bultaco is back with a solid project and an international team with extensive technological, industrial and commercial experience.
- Bultaco's values today are the same as when it was founded: innovation, passion and competition.
- The first models will have an advanced electrical propulsion system.
- The product range was envisioned for people who appreciate the sensations of a motorcycle and for clients who are seeking a new kind of mobility.
- The project will create around 500 jobs, either directly or indirectly, in Madrid at its innovation centre and in Barcelona at its manufacturing plant.
London, 17 May 2014. Today, on the anniversary of the founding of the brand and the birth of its creator – Don Paco Bultó – Bultaco is announcing its return to the motorcycle market.
The four most noteworthy features of this project are:
- Advanced technology developed in-house. Just like in the 20t h century, in the 21s t century Bultaco will stand out for its advanced technological solutions. Bultaco is offering motorcycles with their own disruptive technology which will become a benchmark internationally, along with future developments in electrical and hybrid traction and ultra-light materials.
- A solid industrial project, with total control over the value chain: research and development, operations, finances, marketing and sales.
- A prestigious brand name. Bultaco is a legend in the world of motorcycles, a brand with numerous successes in competition, worldwide fame and a strong perceived image in the market.
- A highly professional team. The entrepreneurial team includes first-rate international professionals, executives and engineers with renowned technical prowess in the automotive sector worldwide.
As to your question regarding the time between settlement approval and payment-the last time (prior to this) I was involved with a company that was subject of a class action was back in the '80's (AT & T). That one was months (but it's been so long I can't remember just how many).
Assuming the settlement administrator is reasonably competent, though, I'd think they could have this (i.e., the class action settlement) finalized by December-January.
The derivative action, of course, is stil hanging out there,
if I ever decide to pump a stock, the first thing I'll do is hire Bill Ackman to do a three or four hour seminar to tell everyone how terrible it is. Seems to have done wonders for Herbalife.
Considering that the SEC just effectively barred ABAT's last auditor of record (EFP Rotenberg LLP) from practicing in China, I'd imagine the delay just got exponentially longer.
To this point, I have unequivocally identified 29 Chinese RTO's involved in c=shareholder class actions going back to 2006 (year suit was filed). On the basis of the Standford University's Class Action database, I'm sure this only represent about half or fewer of the total, but I haven't been able to collect enough about the remainder to satisfy myself that I can reasonably include them in my little study.
Of the 29 mentioned, I've found just 8 that have [proceeded through settlement stipulation to final order. They are as follow:
Ticker Sstip Final Order
RINO 04-09-12 12-19-12
SCEI 01-27-13 07-10-13
ONP 10-04-12 04-29-13
ZSTN 02-01-13 08-05-13
GURE 04-30-13 02-10-14
CEAI 10-03-12 03-11-13
HQSM 09-28-12 03-21-13
WATG 01-11-13 05-31-13
Note that "Sstip" indicates the date that the stipulation of settlement was filed.
Found an interesting piece on Bloomberg News dated Thursday last.
Using the following as a search parameter:
"How to Make 43% Profit in China With No Idea What You Bought"
should get you to the article.
A couple of highlights:
"The perception that IPOs are riskless has encouraged some investors to use borrowed money, exposing them to deeper losses once prices stop climbing, according to Lin Jin, a senior analyst at Shenyin & Wanguo Securities Co. in Shanghai.
China’s benchmark money-market rate rose the most in three weeks on July 23 as orders for five IPOs spurred an increase in demand for borrowed funds. The central bank said yesterday that the deals helped fuel a record drop in local-currency bank deposits last month as customers shifted funds to their brokerage accounts."
Sounds reminiscent of the climate in the U.S. circa late-1920's.
"Investors’ rush into Chinese IPOs, which have rallied an average 94 percent from their issue price this year, or seven times more than the global average, contrasts with lackluster demand among local investors to participate in the broader stock market. Traders have liquidated about 1.3 million mainland equity accounts since the end of March, leaving the number of funded accounts at a four-year low of 52.55 million."
China Integrated Energy (CBEH) was the subject of an OIP issued yesterday by the SEC, seeking to revoke the registration of CBEH and four other foreign-domiciled firms (see SEC release 34-72456).
CBEH, you will recall, did file their delinquent 10-K for 2011 earlier this year, but in that document acknowledged that it "owed" the SEC a number of other delinquent filings, and expressed some uncertainty as to whether they might be forthcoming.
Also of interest-this is the first occasion of which I'm aware that the SEC issued the OIP with a simultaneous Chinese translation. Purely speculation on my part, but might indicate that someone has offered as a defense imperfect service by virtue of absence of a native language version of one of these Orders.
EFP Rotenberg was appointed as ABAT's auditor in November of 2011, replacing Friedman. (See 8K filed 29 November 2011 regarding the results of the Annual General Meeting). From that point forward, Rotenberg became ABAT's auditor of record.
Those intimately familiar with ABAT should also be aware of China Digital Animation Development (CHDA), a firm once headed by Foo Qiang, with Foo Zhiguo (and John McFadden) serving on its BoD.
The SEC today issued a OIP against CHDA for filing delinquencies.
On 24 June, tyhe SEC issued an Order Instituting Proceedings against, inter alia, China Integrated Energy (CBEH) to determine whether the registration should be revoked:
"China Integrated Energy, Inc. (CIK No. 1070045) is a delinquent Delaware corporation located in Xi’an, China with a class of securities registered with the Commission pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12(b). China Integrated Energy, Inc. is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2011. As of June
12, 2014, the company’s stock (symbol “CBEH) was quoted on the over-the-counter markets on an unsolicited basis only and was not eligible for the “piggyback” exception of Exchange Act Rule 15c2-11(f)(3)."
Refer to SEC Release 72456 (34-72456) of 24 June 2014 for further details.
Good to see you're still kickin'. I trust you and yours are well.
I can't speak to Fidelity's policies. I do recall, though, that Scottrade issued similar restrictions on individual securities several years ago (notably back in the 2009-2011 time frame). They went so far as to publish a list of "sell only" securities, in addition to their usual listing of securities with increased margin maintenance requirements.
I haven't seen any "sell only" restrictions from them lately, though, and suspect they may have elected instead to adopt some broader policies aimed at steering clients away from this particular segment of the equities market. For example, they now consider any stock with a PPS less than $1.00 to be unmarginable (100% maintenance required in all cases). One consequence of that policy is a prohibition on adding to a short position once a stock goes below a buck. Can't open a short position on stocks under $3.00.
The above-styled action (which, for convenience, I'll just call "Thumb" henceforth) was evidently decided in the PRC's Supreme People's Court on 11 June 2014.
Such English--language documentation as I've been able to find regarding the matter is woefully lacking in detail, but as I currently understand the matter:
"Thumb" is a VIE operated by the defendant "Sino", an offshore (Singaporean) holding company. Thumb had sued Sino in the Fijian People's Court over prior capitalization commitments, whereas Sino had exercised what it believed to be its authority to replace the Thumb management and withdraw the suit.
The local court had ruled in favor of Thumb (thereby effectively voiding the VIE contract). The Supreme Court reversed this, ruling that the offshore holding company's rights under the VIE were, in fact, enforceable under PRC law.
Now, as I said earlier, I'm not satisfied with the detail I have right now, but it certainly merits some further inquiry. If it proves correct, it MAY add a margin of safety for offshore holders of these VIE's.
The SEC today revoked the registration of China Electric Motor (CELM), together with another PRC-domiciled issuer, Westergaard (WSYS).
Neither was particularly remarkable, except that there are STILL posters on the CELM board who seemingly think they'll be saved by a buyout. Optimism is a fine thing, but when the last train is long gone, and they've pulled up the tracks and ties, there's not utility in hanging around the depot hoping for a ride.