Good info. Thanks.
It should be noted that none of these guys sold all of the shares that they did acquire. If they believed Nuance' prospects were in decline, then they would have probably dumped all acquired shares (some sold zero). Of course I'd like to see some real insider buying but this is a good sign, nevertheless.
Thanks. Not directly related to the CFO resigning, however, this new event has caused me to think even deeper about the company due diligence-wise.
I now actually worry about the two Founders being of Chinese dissent since I expect the cyber-theft backlash to gain tremendous momentum, and unfortunately, evolve from sensibility to paranoia. The downside is most of this problem emanates from China which raises the risk of Fortinet losing U.S. orders (especially Gov't related). The upside is that the greater the sales are overseas, the better since other Countries are less likely to provide favoritism to Fortinet competitors (e.g. Palo Alto & Checkpoint). The cyber security market is going to explode in a big way (I own Imperva in my 401K -- too thinly traded for my main account) so I want to feel confident that Fortinet will not be left behind for politically related reasons. The IT security space will likely soon reach a point where the big IT behemoths such as HP, IBM, etc. will feel that they have to buy the security companies with the best products. Valuations would then rise much greater than they already have.
Would you happen to know if the Xie brothers are U.S. citizens?
Hopefully they are since such status would go a long way towards fending off effective competitor FUD selling.
Either that or he had info that Fortinet didn't want released (unlikely since not smart to assume such a risk as a public company), or this is a planned pre-acquisition move, or??
Would you happen to know what % of the company's sales are overseas?
I just read through the 'Separation & Release' agreement. The CFO was compensated handsomely with a number of unqualified benefits being forgiven and thus issued. They must have really wanted his 90 days of outside assistance.
I get the feeling that the CFO was made an offer he couldn't refuse so it will be interesting to see where he ends up next. I suspect we will know shortly. There's always a chance the CFO became ill also.
Not saying this is going to happen but I've seen more than once where a CFO was purposely hired as a prelude to acquisitioning the company he/she came from. Takes a lot of execution risk out of the transition.
Looking forward to hearing further details.
Vast accumulation of patents alone may be worth the $4Bil market cap.
Further panic selling could take this as low as $10.90. A 10 P/E plus significant patent value plus a growing global market, equates to being a highly attractive stock.
I think the same thing that happened to Web MD will happen to Nuance -- that is get crushed not long after Icahn buys it, and then eventually rebounds for a tidy profit above what Icahn had originally paid. Another roller coaster but a big opportunity for the patient bottom feeders.
Nice overview. Thanks.
Another worthwhile mention is to keep your eyes on Aereo. If they continue to beat the media conglomerate lawsuits against them, this company will explode upwards and take IACI with them.
Barry Diller is a clever guy who's been around the block hence I have full confidence that he will soon figure out how to move towards and monetize within the mobile world.
Movement likely based on Dan Loeb disclosing a position in Soft Bank today followed by frenzied short covering.
...at the Robin Hood Investors Conference today.
Interesting. Better, bigger picture, analyst team than Credit Suise, etc.
Options activity does not point towards a lawsuit defeat for PAN.
Speaking of numbers, perhaps the past earnings analysis will assist those who may be frightened by the intentionally deceptive SA article, to see the big picture. PAN exceeded guidance and raised expectations for the current quarter. Also, very confident on their conference call.
According to my engineering team, Palo Alto has, by far, the most effective firewall technology available. Juniper hasn't competed well in the security space for years so the lawsuit is a desperation play on their end. From what we've seen/experienced, PA is killing it sales-wise. The lawsuit has not impacted customer demand at all.
PA shares will go much higher and volume will expand. If they lose the lawsuit (unlikely), that would be nothing more than a bump in the road. Big opportunity here based on very overblown fears.
$2.6bil in Cash = $5/share (valid number since $500mil cash burn replaced by $500mil tax rebate)
$1.1Bil Real Estate = $2/sh (calculated at the price BBRY paid as long as 20 years ago)
$1.1Bil in Patents = $2/sh (Rockstar lawsuit against Google may increase this low-ball estimate by 3x)
$1bil for BES = $2/sh (this values the newly loved BBM and their O/S at $0)
Total absolute worst case = $11/share in real liquidation value for BBRY.
The Fairfax $9 bid is the floor and will highly likely go through if higher bids do not take BBRY out.
The FBR analyst is an idiot -- or a paid shill. Take your pick.
The absolute worse case scenario (short-term though) is that Fairfax, etc. may ask for another month or so since the analysis of all the parts may require more time (not because Fairfax can't get the $9/sh financing). Such news of course may take the stock down to a panic low in the lower 6's. If so, I will gladly double my position.
Is it not true that Son can register his shares in such a manner that they cannot be borrowed? It is my understanding that any shareholder has this option. If this is correct then it should not be assumed that Son did not register his shares accordingly. If I were him, I would absolutely lock my shares away from the shorts.
What I'm not sure about is if there is some type of SEC rule that prevents a shareholder from locking-down their shares if they were to buy over a certain percentage of the company, etc.
The shorts being right may not make much/any money if everyone knows what they know and thus is already built into the stock price. I have a 1/2 position as to what I am willing to own just in case the stock spikes down or gradually drops into the mid to upper 5's. If I just end up with a 1/2 position, then that's okay too.
Sprint is one of best investments available for the mid to long-term and is also a great place to park some $$ should we get blind-sided by a multi-year recession (examining historical stats, 90+% chance within the next 1-3 years). Son, in leveraging his other properties -- both current and future, will continuously add creative value that VZ & T haven't even thought of.
These shorts are pesky but I do believe that Son will break them in a manner that Musk did with Tesla. Shorts are correct more often than not, but far from always.
You have to wonder which of their (used-to-be) loyal clients they sold those tainted shares to??
Also wonder the same about City Bank concerning which (used-to-be) clients they sold Vornado's shares to for near $13/share just days beforehand.
Just unbelievable and rotten that the SEC doesn't dissect this fiasco -- including the false twitter rumor feeds (people were put in jail during the dotcom bust for making false claims via the Internet).
Canadian Government will definitely not allow the sale of BBRY's security business to a Chinese-owned company in particular.
The below article is a year old but I thought it was relevant based on GS' actions against Sprint yesterday:
October 15, 2012, 6:48 PM.Why Goldman Isn’t on the Sprint Deal.
Article Comments Deal Journal HOME PAGE ».
smaller Larger .facebook twitter google plus linked in inShare.0EmailPrint
smaller Larger facebooktwittergoogle pluslinked ininShare.0EmailPrint
By Sharon Terlep and Anupreeta Das
Goldman SachsGS -0.34% had a brush with the year’s third biggest announced deal – Softbank9984.TO +0.14%’s $20 billion purchase Sprint. But the bank ended up on the sidelines thanks in part to the return of a former employee, people familiar with the situation said.
Getty ImagesThe bank was advising Sprint earlier this year. But in June, a Softbank director and ex-Goldman banker, Mark Schwartz, returned to the bank as chairman of Asia Pacific. Even though he recused himself, it was deemed best to leave Goldman out, the people said.
Mr. Schwartz, who played a central role in building Goldman’s business in Asia Pacific, rejoined the firm after more than a decade away. In that time, he served as chief executive officer of Soros Fund Management LLC and co-founded MissionPoint Capital Partners, an investment firm focused on accelerating the transition to a less carbon-intensive economy.
None of 2012’s top three investment banks for M&A are on the Sprint deal. J.P Morgan and Morgan StanleyMS +0.82% are absent from the list as well as Goldman. But those firms are working on the year’s other big telecom deal, T-Mobile’s attempt to purchase MetroPCS. Goldman’s absence was more mysterious.