live and play another day, he has to know that... heck, maybe even go short and throw more dirt on the company, he was an insider and got a good glimpse of what was going on. Why not make back the money going the other way.
this is not the territory of value investors, this is a distress investment idea now for speculators. That much leverage on the books isn't considered value.
so much debt? how are they going to repay if their business model is completely turned upside down? seriously. They have to do a firesale of assets and then what? what remains is equity, probably nothing much. That is why you see so much panicking right now.
don't let this Ackman vote of confidence fool you. No CEO that isn't on top of relationship with dodgy specialist companies that impact the stock price like this is going to last. Ackman already questioned Pearson leadership during crisis, saying he is probably not the right man for the moment. Gone, gone gone...
what is significant about Dec 9th? the roll-a-deck strategy to find new funds use to work on smaller names and in less mature companies where you can still pitch a good story to tell and hope the other investors are still in the dark. Here this is a tall order - this is splattered all over the news already, how is Ackman going to find mega funds to pay higher price than he did for this? they know he f'd up, and Hillary factor is real, it can really increase regulatory risk to impact valuation for a long time if she ends up in the WH. I had this stock in the high 170s, got caught in the first downdraft, took my lumps and moved on. I would look into it again if it hit $50, a white knight is a possibility in this space. AGN got a bid, so who knows.
OMG, you can't be serious. A hedge fund doesn't mean the fund is HEDGED! goodness gracious, that is just some catchy phrase although sure, he can hedge, but by definition, it doesn't mean he was automatically hedged from day 1. Maybe you are thinking of Long-short fund??? Why don't you read the WSJ article and then come back here and post a response. In fact, most hedge funds take the most risk as possible. #$%$ would I pay you massive amount of fees just to be hedged and smooth out the risk and returns??? lol...c'mon, Ackman got his butt kicked here, he is a big boy, he can probabaly handle his losses. Don't try to minimize it with word play.
good post. I was thinking the same - Ackman thesis in VRX was its M&A growth, corporate leverage and probably pricing strategy although Ackman won't admit to knowing that angle of the business? without these two growth drivers, the valuation is easily cut in half. Add to it, all the other risk like headline risk, regulatory risk, etc.. and it is just very little upside visibility at all. Sure, at some point the stock price can be low enough that it can bounce quite a bit, but the frothy days of growth are stalled for awhile. And Pearson doesn't look like he is going to survive this. And a white knight? maybe at $50, someone will say we will buy it for $75?
average price of initial position at 196 then 2 million shares at 108. I estimate 20 million shares was at 196? so that is overall average of 188 on 22 million shares? that is a lot of money to be down. Wow, and that article stated Ackman was either going to sell everything or buy more. To me that sounds like he can hit the sell button anytime still. He doesn't believe Pearson is a good communicator in front of congress, that is no vote of confidence. This is going to blow up soon, Pearson looks like a goner. And the inside information shared with Ackman by Valeant should raise some eyebrows. I mean yeah, he is a big investor, but can he just pick up the phone and ask questions without Valeant providing all investors with same info? looks like Valeant is really treading the line with SEC guidelines on everything.
insider? that is a form 3 of an investor holding of Valeant shares, namely Valueact. Why you try to lie?. LOL...not like fooling people here will drive the stock higher, you do know that right? You got to fool the big boys into buying.
yeah, maybe 1 to 2% I think...and if it always reporting after these other big boys, does it mean the stock reaction is always muted up or down?
this stock come down so fast, there are bunch of sellers waiting to sell on rallies to recoup I bet. So even a hardcore long like Ackman got to think of the time horizon needed to regain losses, and that is in a very optimistic scenario. There is a good chance of a few more flush outs and this thing could see $50 and for sure, even Ackman has to get out. Me thinks he is pounding doors at other big pharmas to see who like to buy VRX out, making calls on behalf of Pearson. The market is doing well too, so he is losing on opportunity cost as well so it is double whammy.
i thought Left did a good job personally, but your recommendations seem pretty solid as well. Don't know why Wapner tried so hard for VRX, almost like he had skin in the game and maybe some big investors go on his show so they ask Wapner to do them a favor? Very unprofessional interview and made CNBC and Wapner look bad in my opinion. Apparently Wapner had to block his twitter feed afterwards because he felt the heat.
is it because it is negative? not paid to say bad things on VRX? only good news will be reported?
who knows, looks like NFLX got this wrapped up with so much bullishness, but hard to believe company like Disney would give up a market like that - where there is money to be made, these guys got to eventually go in and play the game. I mean, is NFLX business model that hard to replicate??? and Disney already has the content.