Thu, Sep 18, 2014, 10:23 AM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 5 hrs 37 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Tennessee Valley Authority Message Board

foreverwhiteroses 25 posts  |  Last Activity: 16 hours ago Member since: Jul 16, 2004
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Carl Fredrick also acquired 600,000 on Sept 14th.

    by biigargo Sep 17, 2014 8:29 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses 16 hours ago Flag

    OK, NOW we have a REAL PURCASE FROM GEISLER. New Form 4 has him actually buying 40k shares a $4.99 today

  • Reply to

    What exactly is an Executive Chairman?

    by creedster_99 Sep 16, 2014 12:29 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Sep 16, 2014 8:10 PM Flag

    What I wonder is if there's a change in pay considerations..... Does hiring Geisler and keeping SB in his new capacity add to management overhead in direct correlation to Geisler's compensation?

  • foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Sep 16, 2014 8:00 PM Flag

    I think you better re-read the Form 4. I believe it says he "acquired" the 600k at a cost of ZERO. Being given the shares must have been a part of his contract.

  • Reply to

    Today's events in perspective

    by chessmaster6752 Sep 15, 2014 9:42 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Sep 16, 2014 5:41 PM Flag

    CORRECTION: The options issued to each director was for only 100,000 each, not 1 mil. That's better........

  • Reply to

    Today's events in perspective

    by chessmaster6752 Sep 15, 2014 9:42 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Sep 16, 2014 5:20 PM Flag

    Did anybody notice the Form 4s that came out today? Did I read these properly? Options granted to 3 directors for 1 mil each at the post announcement price of 4.90 and 1.5 Mil issued to CG at the pre-announcement price of 4.35. And then another 600k given to CG at zero cost? Do all these shares amount to new shares when the options are exercised? IF so, then isn't the good day for MILL shares somewhat tempered by the giveaway/dilution of over 10% of the outstanding shares???? I'm not saying this is what happens. I'm asking if anyone knows if this is an accurate conclusion.....

  • Reply to

    Decline last few days?

    by murray_ben Sep 11, 2014 12:21 PM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Sep 11, 2014 5:19 PM Flag

    Well, iron ore prices continue to hit new 5 year lows and Alderon new 52 week lows, so certainly their largeownership position in AXX is hurting them enough to be a major contributor to the downslide.... Could be famous last words, but I'm not concerned.... A lot of ATUSF's future is perceived to be located in China, so theirperceived relative stagnancy right now is also not helping...

  • Reply to

    Entercom oil and gas conference(read news)

    by olejos Sep 11, 2014 1:36 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Sep 11, 2014 9:08 AM Flag

    You're right, V............. my bad....

  • Reply to

    Entercom oil and gas conference(read news)

    by olejos Sep 11, 2014 1:36 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Sep 11, 2014 8:30 AM Flag

    "Currently i am in Poland evaluating Bkx.to.For Mill" - Say what? If you are doing this FOR MILL, why are you reporting it here???? And what is MILL doing "evaluating" a company of roughly equal size with assets in Poland, Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama and NY?????? At least BKX.TO appears to have virtually no debt. Maybe MILL is evaluating for purposes of learning how to not make your stock price go anywhere while managing a company frugally.

  • Reply to

    $25M Rev. and $14M adjusted EBITDA in Q1

    by siestafiesta99 Sep 9, 2014 5:31 PM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Sep 10, 2014 9:50 AM Flag

    So in other words, everything good is coming, everything bad is happening now. Trust us..... yeah, right...

  • Reply to

    New Quarterly Letter To Shareholders

    by foreverwhiteroses Aug 19, 2014 10:13 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Aug 22, 2014 4:57 PM Flag

    Hmmmmmm, makes sense that you're right, marlowe - but that makes what sf writes even scarier, with his points referring to the company's letter to shareholders rather than to my letter to Board cruisers...

  • Reply to

    New Quarterly Letter To Shareholders

    by foreverwhiteroses Aug 19, 2014 10:13 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Aug 22, 2014 8:26 AM Flag

    My bias was spelled out right up front but I apologies for the ungrammatical rambling.. I didn't realize I was submitting my paper to my English perfesser...

  • Reply to

    New Quarterly Letter To Shareholders

    by foreverwhiteroses Aug 19, 2014 10:13 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Aug 21, 2014 10:41 AM Flag

    I guess my second part actually didn't post. Trying to reconstruct, I think my only other point had to do with their investment in Accelerator Corp, "an investment vehicle for emerging biotechnology companies." Hey, isn't that what TINY is supposed to be in the first place? That implies to me that they believe they've found somebody better than they are at their own job so rather than using their (shareholder) monies to fund companies at the venture capital level as TINY shareholders would expect, they're now going to invest in companies investing in companies that fund companies at the venture capital level. So, in other words, they're saying our management structure is not bloated enough, so we want to impose another layer of management fees (the costs of Accelerator Corp management) before TINY shareholders see any positive results from TINY investments. So TINY leans toward being a fund of funds now with yet added overhead..... Nice....
    No need for anyone to refute my opinion for my sake but I encourage anyone interested in doing so to enter the fray for hopefully the benefit either existing or potentially future shareholders as I will remain on the sidelines..

  • Reply to

    New Quarterly Letter To Shareholders

    by foreverwhiteroses Aug 19, 2014 10:13 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Aug 20, 2014 6:40 PM Flag

    Did the second part of my reply not come thru? I'm not seeing it....

  • Reply to

    New Quarterly Letter To Shareholders

    by foreverwhiteroses Aug 19, 2014 10:13 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Aug 20, 2014 12:06 PM Flag

    OK, here's what struck me, but again, I caution, my slant is definitely biased by TINY's 5 year performance of being down 50% in a market that's been up 100%. It is also only that of an observer nowadays, not an investor.
    To me, even the good news comes out wrong and the best news was their statement that "one of the messages we heard loudly and clearly at our Meet the Portfolio Day in April of this year was that our shareholders are interested in gaining access to investment opportunities in our portfolio companies when available." Really? You're only hearing that now as if it's not been something of expressed interest by shareholders for years? TINY used to do that in the glory days and it was always well received strategically. So couching this statement as being responsive to shareholders is a bit of a stretch imho.
    Now going from top to bottom in the letter pointing out what irked me: First, regarding Molecular Imprints, noting that "Harris & Harris Group was the only investor group to have a realized gain at the close of this transaction," after reading the details, is another way of saying most of our investment tranches into MI were losers, it took way too long to monetize and we lucked out when the other early investors said enough is enough and elected not to continue funding.
    Re: Kovio, well where to start??? Blaming the problems on "1) traditional venture investor syndicates being in total disarray, 2) the investment taking too long for the fund life of the typical venture investor, 3) a hubris from top tier investors on the types of liquidity events they were willing to undertake and 4) us having too small an ownership, too little capital to affect a different outcome" and then going on to admit that "Kovio had a tier one group of venture investors" seems to be contradictory at the very least as well as an admission by TINY management of a poor investment strategy by placing themselves voluntarily in a position where they had an inability

  • foreverwhiteroses by foreverwhiteroses Aug 19, 2014 10:13 AM Flag

    I admit to having a negative bias to TINY and, having exited two years ago, I shouldn't even be still be here, but I am. With that in mind, I can't help but be struck by bad things written in the Letter to Shareholders out today trying to be explained as good .... I'll not go into details immediately because I'm not really out to bash, but man, to me there are spin masters at work here, but they're coming across more like spin rookies....

  • Reply to

    $5 is cheap, cheap, cheap

    by ex_gs_guy Aug 5, 2014 3:18 PM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Aug 5, 2014 5:25 PM Flag

    I'm thinking there are a whole lot of shareholders out there who hope it IS Shabtai!

  • foreverwhiteroses by foreverwhiteroses Jul 29, 2014 6:22 PM Flag

    Does anyone have any idea how to get ANY information about Special Opportunities Fund???? It's a fascinating operation, but it sure seems impossible to find out what or how they're doing.... A semi annual letter to investors, an annual report and not much more than that in between it seems....oh let;s not forget the weekly update on the website for NAV. Talk about a leap of faith investment.... not disappointing, mind you, but surely one you have to believe in to invest because you're not going to be able to invest on due diligence........

  • Reply to

    A question?

    by bigbear.2010 Jul 24, 2014 10:34 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Jul 24, 2014 11:51 AM Flag

    I tried posting before but it apparently didn't take... IRB - why would there be new offering to cover the cost of purchase when the acquisition is 100% shares? Yes, there'll be shares issued to QRE shareholders, but I don't think that will be "dilution." bigbear - one definite reason for the selloff is the arbitrage effect.... Arbitrageurs typically sell the acquirer and buy the acquired to take advantage of the spread between what will eventually be identical equities. I think (I could be wrong) arbitrageurs are even more likely to take this traditional stance when a deal is all shares, no cash, as this one is. For example, as I write, BBEP is at 22.31 and QRE is at 20.55, BUT, under the terms of the agreement, 1 share of QRE will be worth .9856% of a share of BBEP or 21.99. Arbitrageurs will try to lock in that spread of 32 cents by selling BBEP and buying QRE, locking in riskless profit over time assuming the deal goes thru. It's the arbitrageur's job to then have a good read on the likelihood of the deal to go through and the timing of it to figure out whether or not the yield spread is sufficient for them to jump on the trade.

  • foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Jul 24, 2014 10:51 AM Flag

    I do wonder the same thing, but having said that, they say in the merger announcement they are recommending an INCREASE in the dividend to 2.08 annualized based on it, so I guess mngmt's feeling OK with it.... Coverage ratio for QRE was something like 1.1x going in.

  • Reply to

    Can the Dividend go to $.25 per Quarter?

    by honestaccts Jul 23, 2014 7:58 AM
    foreverwhiteroses foreverwhiteroses Jul 23, 2014 9:24 AM Flag

    I wonder why TMO hasn't had a stock split since 1996? Based on historical prices it would seem to be way overdue....

TVC
23.76+0.02(+0.09%)9:43 AMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.