Actually, on predicting when to short I am not very good. The other day when I sold was probably a good time to short, but I did not, since I am not confident in my ability to short. Sometimes when I sell, the stock continues to go up, but I set myself a target and take my profit. Oftentimes, it turns out that that would be a good time to short, but sometimes I sell into a rally, and it continues up. Since I do not have the confidence to short reliably, I mostly go long, buying into turnaround situations or situations with a strong trend in place based on a fundamental catalyst or strong movement that might cause a short squeeze. Recently I did this with UBNT last week, SYNA the past couple of days, INVN over the past month or so, GTAT, GMCR earlier. AFSI, KERX and ARIA were big for me around the beginning of the year. I've have some stinkers too, and missed opportunities. I've been slowly looking to build a position in EPAM, which is affected strongly by the crisis in Ukraine. I should have shorted there, but instead I am looking for the bottom to go long and make money on the rebound when/if the Ukraine crisis resolves.
A good short on the Yahoo boards that I have seen do well is holywallst. We had some conversations on the PXLW board, where I made a good play the other week. There were a lot of pumpers there, and I knocked them down for pumping (e.g. saying at 9 that it would go to 15, claiming that shorts were desperate when the numbers showed that there were virtually no shorts prior to the big move, which is the same situation with SKUL. Both places you mostly have new longs vs. new shorts. I sold out of PXLW as well, much below the top, but I made about 5K on a small position.) holywallst was doing some of the pumping, but I was aware of his modus operandi, and I was aware that he was exclusively a short based on his posts elsewhere and that his pumps were deliberate misdirection.
It is possible to be civil and have posts with actual content
In order to allow the market to absorb such a large amount of stock, it is necessary to price below the current market price. Every company prices that way when doing an offering, large buyers would not participate otherwise.
You're one to speak. Your posts largely consist of personal attacks on "baggies", of you which you considered me to be one.
I challenged your claims, and in every case on the movement of the stock over the past several days, I was right, and you were wrong. I sold on the basis of my reading of the stock movement.
The most recent post you made is the first one that I've seen where you actually talk about the company, and not desperate baggies and how you are the coolest short there ever was.
And you still have not answered the question whether your short is underwater, though you had NO reluctance to accuse me of being a baggie, when I was not.
Who's starting the attacks? I only ever responded to your attacks on myself and others, and your misguided prognostications about price movement, which still have not come true.
If you had said something the other day, like "it will fall from over 10 to the low 9s", that would have been a reasonable claim, but your claims in the other thread that I referenced in my reply above were about gapping down to 8 and going back to 5, and other complete nonsense.
Make a reasonable prediction, and no one will have a reason to say that it is unreasonable. Give it a try.
The price is down because they did an offering today. The recent sales of all insiders were well above the price of the offering and have no impact on today's price.
Well, you keep changing your story. The other day, your response (now apparently deleted) was that you were an "old" short and had been short for a long time on this stock. When I pointed out that if this were so, you were either underwater or had missed an opportunity to cover, your response mysteriously disappeared, something that has happened again and again with your responses on this board.
If you were really so confident in your ability, you would leave your responses in place so that others could see what you had said, and how others responded to you. How soon will the message that I am responding to here disappear? Your messages of several days ago called for this to gap down to 8, and then trail off to 5 quickly, but those messages are gone. Look at the thread marked "The revenge of Skullcandy !!!!!!!!! 14 $" which shows on the main board as having 18 replies, but if one should go in there, one will see only 4 replies to the original post showing. All of your many responses that were in that thread are gone (though some are still accessible, if someone clicks on your Yahoo id), after I and others called you out on your BS. Many of your responses from this thread are gone as well.
You may have been here a while. Who cares? You keep responding to days-old messages of mine when I am not even in the stock anymore. You saw fit to try to mock me for making and taking a profit, as if that was somehow a BAD thing. Are you still sitting on an underwater short? I've asked that before, and you've never answered the question. Instead, when I call you on your BS, you remove the message, make a new reply as if nothing happened, and the cycle starts over.
It takes time to consolidate. Right now this could go either way at this point.
I know when to get in and when to get out. This had a big move, and there were not enough pre-existing shorts to cause a good squeeze, beyond what had already happened.
Shares Short (as of Feb 14, 2014)3: 565.45K
Short Ratio (as of Feb 14, 2014)3: 3.00
Short % of Float (as of Feb 14, 2014)3: 2.80%
Shares Short (prior month)3: 483.22K
Other stocks that I have been involved in lately got powered by short squeezes on big moves, like GMCR, UA, INVN, GTAT, etc
That was not going to happen here.
I'm not responsible for anything that anyone else does. I made my money. As far as I can tell based on your responses to me elsewhere, you claim to be an old short, which means you may be one of those few listed above. Unless you are short from 2012, you are probably underwater, and if you were short from 2012 should have covered in early-to-mid 2013 and put the profits to good use elsewhere.
I'm sorry that you don't know how to close a position. There are books that can help you with that.
It takes a company that takes its business responsibility seriously not to waste time on what shorts or anyone else is spouting, in supposed jest or not.
Instead of releasing PRs, they should be calling Samsung about what impact the fire at their supplier will have. They should be talking to AAPL about the iPhone 6. They should be securing their own supply chains and ensuring that they have multiple vendors to supply them.
They should not be wasting their time for PRs on stock dweebs.
The shorts are here from a time when the litigation was a serious threat. Now that is gone. Look at GTAT. They were heavily shorted like INVN, and still are, but all those shorts are underwater, which has been powering a meteoric rise.
Execute the business plan and everything else takes care of itself.
It's been a crazy day. I was up a lot at the open, and closed some in-the-money positions.
But then it gave everything back and more, then came back up again.
It's hard to tell what the story is. Market data was strong, but tension in Ukraine and elsewhere seems to be taking a toll. One Ukraine play is EPAM. It's been down a lot on the tension, and may rebound as things resolve themselves.
I much more than covered my commissions. And, considering that the sock has fallen since I made my trade at 10.32, I made a good decision.
Based on your previous message to me elsewhere, I would guess that you are still deep underwater on your short. So, good luck with hoping to be able to cover someday. I made my money, and reduced my risk. That is how to play the game, not posting constantly in desperation, as you have been doing for a long time.
You must not be very experienced if you think that the stock price has an effect on the actual business. Plausible reasons for the drop have been discussed widely on the board.
Look at UBNT over the past couple of weeks. Then look where it is today.
I did the same thing there that I am doing here.
I sold out because I had better opportunities. I bought into INVN on the recent drop, and got in one the rise in UBNT.
You can see my posts on both of those boards.
I'm here to make money, not be married to a stock.
If you are an old short, you must be in sad shape, unless you are short from 2012 or so, in which case, why didn't you cover in early 2013, and put your money to work elsewhere?
In either scenario, you don't look very bright. You're either underwater, or you missed a golden opportunity to cover prior to this recent rise.
For funeral home stocks and cemeteries, try SCI (funeral homes and cemeteries) or STON (a cemetery L.P.). Do your own DD.
I had not heard any chatter about a deal, other than idle speculation.
This is mostly due to the fire at the Samsung supplier, and consolidation in price.
Similar action due to consolidation after a high happened with UBNT recently, and it popped back up today. I made good money on the buys that I made when it was down.
I expect the same to happen here.
A good question. I listened to the conference call. What a dreadful presentation. They were totally incompetent in responding to the questions on share buybacks and treatment of minority shareholders.
The book value might be worth something only if someone buys them out and unlocks the value.
I have seen hordes of spam bots from Underground Alerts copying people's messages on other boards, so I thought at first that it was possible that it was something like this. But one of the messages where I noticed this problem is one to which I received replies and reply notifications from Yahoo via email.
I have run virus scans and Malwarebytes on my system, as well as being fully up-to-date on all Microsoft and third-party product updates.
I will continue to observe things, and I might report a problem to Yahoo. Believe it or not, I have actually gotten good responses from Yahoo on problems that I reported, which did not use to be the case.
Your comment is intriguing. I checked the data, and you are correct about the cash position (at least, as it was last reported).
Book value is close to 6, and that is mostly accounted for by the aforementioned cash.
This could be a value play on that basis alone.
What do you think about their operational prospects, or is it purely a value play?