Having agreed with you below on the SEC part of your post I'd like to disagree on your basic premise that the shorts are causing this stock to go no where.
Step back and look at the big picture in terms of stock price appreciation. Forget about the big run-ups and just look at where solid support has gone over the last few years. In Apr 2010 it was around $7.75. By the end of 2012 (a couple months after the first huge attack) it was ~$25. In April 2013 it got slapped down but support was at $27, by June support had risen to $33 and by Jan of this year it rose to $48. That's looking at "support" (from just eyeballing a monthly chart so you TA gurus don't jump on me for exactness).
Its headed in the right direction despite these attacks and at a pretty decent clip.
could not agree more, especially about the SEC. In 25 years of investing in small companies, many heavily shorted and slandered, I've never seen the SEC come down on manipulative short sellers.
"But one thing regulators love doing is going after a notorious "player" like Citron especially when they have a pretty easy case to prove thanks to Citron."
In all my years of investing I have NEVER seen that to be true. They go after figure heads like Martha Stewart to try to impress the media they are doing something important. They occasionally nail a corrupt money manager like Madoff (for his management of client money, NOT any trading violations). I don't recall them EVER investigating a short selling firm for launching coordinated PR and short selling attacks regardless of how sketchy / unfair / or untruthful the PR campaign is. Their attitude seems to be that slander, and any monetary damage stemming from it is a matter to be settled in the courts (just like it is for individuals).
I wonder how many energy related stocks (etf's) he has recommended that were tied to highly volotile commodity prices? A BUNCH. Those etf's and stocks have been just as volotile as QCOR if not more so and he has had NO problem recommending those. Huge forces behind the scenes moving those stocks around and he had no problem with them, especially disastrous coal and nat gas stocks/etfs. All Cramer is doing is avoiding screwing his pals with a buy rec even though if he applied his investing criteria fairly to QCOR it would be a strong buy.
LOL! I wonder if Mikey heard a someone saying... "If you post it, they will come".
What do you think the chances of SA accepting your research for posting? One can hope can't one? ;)
Well, by looking at their previous remarks and recs on this stock they were not long and probably short at least some (or either they were trying to help out a short buddy by talking it down).
Someone was saying earlier that Goldman Sachs would not be hurt by a big short position here. Not so.
Their net last qtr was $2.25 billion. If they were the major or only short in QCOR, a move from $50 to say $80 would be a $600 million loss on just one position. If QCOR ends up running to $100 (and they haven't covered any) the loss would be $1 Billion. That's not just a drop in their profit bucket.
I think the underlying thesis that there is no covering was proven false with the last short report. Just look at the stock this morning. Yes it could be new longs but I bet a lot of it is aggressive covering. New BIG investors usually don't bid stocks way up during "amateur" hour.
Ditto this admin's idiotic support for Morsi and all the death and destruction that caused particularly to coptic Christians (Specifically the support that continued AFTER Morsi placed himself above the highest court, abolished their constitution, and dissolved their Parliament.) I guess that was ok because he's with the Muslim Bro'hood ehhhh? Ditto this amin's refusal to side the the freedom fighters and protester in Iran when they had the chance to defeat the greatest instigator and supporter of terror around the world. I don't hear anyone suggesting the president should be shouted down wherever he speaks because of those failures.
Yes I do actually. I see no need for profanity laced insults. However, if someone is obviously deliberately trying to "miss" the main point of someone's post I don't see referring to them as being "obtuse" as an insult, just a statement of fact about something that damages valuable exchange of ideas. I think the thumbs up and down flags in yahoo are silly and just a way saying "I'm too ill informed to respond but I'm on that guys team or NOT on that guys team" as if politics and governance was nothing more than a football game or season of American Idol.
He does not repeat himself at all as you suggest. You apparently have never listened to the show, only the MSNBC spin of the show. Each panelist is only given a minute or two to make a point and then they move on to the next person or topic. Nice try.
Geeeez, I wasn't citing the first amendment as a defense of my posting here. Try a Reading for Context class at your local community college.
Having political speech at a taxpayer funded university approved venue, at a university approved time shouted down before the speaker even has a chance to open his mouth **IS** a first amendment issue. The first amendment was SPECIFICALLY created to protect political speech. I'm sure if the president were shouted down at some Heritage Foundation event, you'd be all over that with ire and disgust "lets round up those evil tea-baggers and throw them out of the event, don't they know the president is speaking??"
Why not do it here. Nothing else is going on. Nobody has posted anything on QCOR this weekend worthy of discussion. Besides, you can ignore me. But you dont. Again and again, you don't. Don't blame me for wasting your time. I'm not writing your posts or forcing you to read mine.
well, I see someone either doesn't like another non-QCOR post, or is in favor of shout downs of invited speakers engaging in their first amendment right.