Stan, your comprehension skills appear to be lacking...
If you knew anything about how the Street works, you would understand why target prices are always high and why the vast majority of investment recommendations are "Buys" of one sort or another, how the worst recommendation is "Hold" and why you rarely see "Sell."
You should ask yourself how you get to a $2.50 target. The two towers or intellect that follow this toad professionally for Wall Street firms peg it at $1.90-$2.00, and most of us know that they are simply pandering to the hopes and desires or their investment bankers.
Yes, stan, and the last time I hit the button for Loco's website, my screen was filled with great deals offered by local stores....1,300 miles from my address!
I doubt that there will be any lawsuits directed towards posters on these boards. They are exactly what they are described to be: chat boards. Anyone that "falls for a scheme" posted on these boards, or anyone at all that makes any kind of investment decision based on comments posted here, deserves to be taken to the cleaners. One might indeed find clues that can be followed up, but only from legitimate research sources. I can offer data points taken from the latest balance sheet, but in order to understand them you must do the work and read the entire regulatory filing, and follow that with mining other data and reviewing other sources. It is the old story: do your own due-dilly.
Yes, stann, they generated $6.7m in operating cash for 9 months. They also have $24m of CURRENT liabilities on the balance sheet, including $9m of the revolver and the senior notes, plus $11m of accounts payable. Against this they have a total of less than $13m of current assets ($4m cash, $8m accounts receivable). What are they going to use to pay off the most current liabilities? Goodwill and good looks, maybe?
"Due to our lower revenue #$%$nd corresponding lower borrowing b#$%$se of eligible receiv#$%$bles #$%$s of September 30, we h#$%$d no #$%$v#$%$il#$%$bility under the line of credit..."
...but I did get #$%$ credit c#$%$rd in the m#$%$il this morning, so we're gonn#$%$ be ok#$%$y...
How many times are you going to cut & paste this same passage, stannguru? Do you not recognize that the operative phrase is ",,,was below our expectations..."? What this tells the street is that Freddy and what is left of his staff have not the faintest clue as to what the forecast going forward should be, and that, at the very least, investors must ratchet down forward expectations. This has a double-whammy impact on the stock valuation. First, if forward earnings expectations are cut, the the price paid for lower earnings results in a lower price per share. But if forward expectations are being lowered, then by definition one must lower the growth rate used to determine the P/E multiple. So if the P/E multiple is lowered and applied to a lower earnings outlook, guess what that means for the stock price?
You are a dunce, stannguru! The difference between Vanguard's total of 636k shares and the 608K shown for the index funds you cited consists of smaller amounts outside of the top ten held by a couple of other index funds plus a very small number of shares held by the Vanguard brokerage in "street name" (that is, shares purchased by individuals through Vanguard, which is a broker, you know, and held by the brokerage firm in their accounts).
You clearly know nothing. Do you bother to read and think about the stuff you keep copying & pasting into these boards?
Fred can't buy the shares -- his wife won't let him. Would yours?
Vanguard probably has it in its index fund, where they have to own everything whether they like it or not
"Now [sic] other company around the internet worldwide has more experience in such acitivites [sic] like Local Corp."
And no other activities on the Internet are so inconsequential as Local Corp's...
#3.1 million in Q3. All of it and then some coming from the collection of a bloated accounts receivable.
What a business model! Suing for patent infringement. Can they capitalize lawyers?