he is, and currently outstanding bonds will, in all likelihood, convert into about 45 million shares (28M at 2017, the rest at 2020). short interest is currently around 56M.
I thought the tax code was changed so that shorting against the box is considered equivalent to selling your long shares...a change from like from late 90s or something, no?
I suppose you could manipulate the SI up in this manner, though at some small cost - there's interest on shares borrowed. It's a good observation; In such case the shorts are never really in any danger and the SI is just a fake number intended to scare retail away from the stock.
wow, these guys are trapped something fierce. Between 7/31 and 8/15, price was $14s-$16s. such an increase in SI and we rallied so much. Also there are only enough CBs to hedge 45M in SI. We were already past that number before the increase.
and if they had say a 20% royalties agreement, then you could say "Sanofi will just sit on it without really trying to sell, intentionally, until stock crashes completely, and they can buy it out for peanuts so the don't have to pay royalties, and only then begin to really market it"
No business partnership can ever possibly succeed if the other party is hell bent on screwing you. Same with this one.
Apple did no such thing. GTAT have restructured early in 2013 and were lean enough to survive until equipment orders pick up again, which they did, and faster than expected schedule by the way. Solar recovered faster than GTAT was expecting. In 2015 their equipment sales will be far better than this year. Bankruptcy? what a clown.
when GTAT broke out of the $3's and $4's it wasn't even trading heavily. Supply just dried out. An increasing number of holders decided to sit tight rather than sell/flip and new buyers were slowly realizing it simply won't get back to those past levels. Shorts were getting discouraged by the fact that no matter how much the short interest was increasing, it didn't push the price back down. It kept steadily increasing on low volume. The process took months, look at the charts from 2013.
Perhaps volume is useful to understand the impact news have on the market for a stock, short term, not so much for validating or invalidating the long term trends in it. I've seen plenty of 52wk tops and bottoms made on "monster" volume. GTAT's top, specifically, wasn't; the $20 to $13 selloff on the other hand, was on monster volume. Most of it was within the $17 to $14.xx range.
I've started reading the TCI GTAT thread through. Will take some time... interesting stuff. Shame it's all crammed into a single thread.
oh yes, GTAT management is certainly the only one to claim PV capex returns in 2015. Please don't look at e.g. TSL/YGEs 10-k's to see that they are in fact allocating a bunch of funds to capex in 2015 to upgrade their equipment. I'm sure none of that has anything to do with GTAT, never has never will, cause it's a one trick pony cause you said so.
Frankly, you have not the faintest clue what the stock will do if I told you ahead of time what Apple will say at the 9/9. Not anymore than I do. Can't say I personally even care that much which way it trades that day.
Fine so Corning lost some bsns to another company why do you have to be so butthurt about it
the mkt cap is not important. Look at their books for what they are capable of financially right now. Then look at the books of SNY. Not to mention a sales network like the one SNY has in place is not something you can set up in a month. It just doesn't work that way.
usually the 15-25% figure is for "royalties" which are a % cut from revenue IIRC. considering the typical margin in the pharma industry, a 25% royalty is comparable to a 35% profit share. Anyway, analysts seem to view it as a generally favorable rate though it seems there were some crazy high expectations that made it look like a disappointment...we did sell off 35%+ from the pship announcement.
It's true that there are quite a few posters here with a hostile attitude. The bashers like to act like "troll" personas, longs come across as just plain angry most of the time. Anyway, decision of whether or not to take a long position should not be influenced by things like the friendliness of the YMB...
yes. If Afrezza is successful, we need to wait more than a year to see an improvement in the stock, but it should appreciate nicely year over year afterwards. If it's a complete flop, MNKD will get sold off to liquidation value...like $2 at best. Shorts have no reason to worry. The stock will not run much ahead of results, and news are always sold to some degree. Even if results come in against them they will hardly lose any money.
care to tell us how do you figure the company should be valued less than $2B mkt cap? I can just say "going above $4 billion market cap, do the math" doesn't mean it will, and it isn't much of a convincing argument.