Is it reasonable to assume we might drift lower over the next couple of days due to MS downgrade (and perhaps others); investors who were surprised at the news when they got home from work last night, etc. Will Icahn and others be buying more stock? How much does he need to get the changes he wants from the board? How much profit does he expect from his holdings? Given the negative sentiment among shareholders, I suspect he has enough shares already to force change. I don't expect any news until next week.
I see the $500 million repurchase as a negative. Worst case scenario would have been for Icahn to sell and for us (Nuance's owners) to use the repurchase to buy his stock. Now that he's bought more (I also wonder who else bought today - but hope it wasn't us) it would seem that we've avoided the worst. Still the $500 million will make the company less attractive to a suitor if used to buy stock as opposed to sitting in cash.
I am only responding to someone else's post. Frankly, it sounds too good to be true. But, if it is...
Carl Icahn meeting with the board would seem to be great news. If true, I could assume that his shares are intact and he has not been selling. Coincidentally, 32 million shares at $19/share is $600 million, or 10% 0f the current market cap. Icahn owns just about that amount doesn't he? Let's hope he is not selling. If he is, the announcement will crater the stock further. If I was wildly optimistic, I could assume he's been buying.
From my perspective; the good news may be that this (amateurish?) quarterly report will accelerate change at Nuance. I cannot imagine that Mr Ricci and the board are not in very near term jeopardy.
I'm in favor of giving management the latitude to increase the shares, and have voted my shares accordingly. If I was in their position I would be seeking alternatives to funding future trials; if for no other reason, to improve my bargaining power with potential lenders. I would also think that there is an advantage to increasing the authorized number of shares now, when the stock is $.57, that when it is higher.
I thought it was interesting that the author questioned why the report was not trumpeting the absence of the side effects that the competitive drugs cause. He equates the positive comment concerning the drugs safety profile with reduced side effects. Does anyone know if that's true?
Good info. Thanks.
I assume price estimate is for 1mt at the mine. If so, Cliffs would seem to have some advantage in terms of low transportation cost to US mills?
Does someone know why Cliffs costs (per recent SA article) are so high? High quality ore inaccessible? Labor?
If there is any basis to buyout rumors; buyer would have to see some advantage that is being discounted by the market or a problem they can fix.
What a coincidence! Just when Wunderlich seems to be saying to all the law firms pursuing class action settlements against TNGO that they don't have a case; along comes SA author who thinks all this growth etc looks fishy. In particular Wunderlich had postive expectations for organic growth, as I recall. This person doesn't. How helpful (to the attornies). I know the law firms couldn't commission a hit piece. It's against the rules isn't it? I especcially like the end of the SA article ... something about fair value of $15-16 being LESS than todays price ($13.17). In my experience people who don't believe what they are saying often make factual/obvious errors.