UP ABOUT $5.00 IN PAST WEEK OR SO also on a generally nasty market.
Maybe shorts that drove it down realized that they were going to get eviscerated !!!
Putting the McCallan bet aside, I couldn't agree with you more about "Q NEVER BETTER" as a long term investment. While my $1.65 EPS target for Q3 remains solid (firing on all 8 cylanders) it is possible that Q3 could be 9-10 cylanders and Q4 an in-line 12 cylanders!!!
Given my original model's projection for Q3 (developed after Q2) and every bit of updated info we've seen (especially script data), I'm going to stick by my $1.65 for Q3 (non-gaap) EPS projection. $1.95 for Q4 and $5.73 for 2013 total (all non-gaap)...
Both their EPS and P/E targets are WAY TOO LOW...But we already know how conservative these guys are...expect an UPGRADE from Lazard to over $100 after earnings!!!
Again, agree. In Enron's case the shorts didn't kill the company, management did and in the most egregious ways.
I'm not sure I'm liking agreeing with you quite this much, but when someone is right on a point, I'll stand behind them even if we have massively different views on the overall matter at hand.
Once again, I agree with your principles here, though FRAUD cuts both ways. I have called out what I either believe OR KNOW to be FRAUD (or it's younger sibling, manipulation of information) and lies and deceit are wrong on both sides of the debate over a company and its future prospects. I've nailed both LONGS and SHORTS here for deceptive practices and have admitted on a few occasions when I got something dead wrong. There is a huge difference between opinions (we all have them and should express them) and lying about facts (or even intentionally taking them out of context to deceive). So I have no problem with your pointing out legitimate and intentional lies on either side of the Affy equation as long as you are doing it honestly, which in this particular case I believe you are.
Shred, we have certainly had our differences viz. Affymax, but on your points re. shorts I am in total agreement. We can disagree with their tactics (particularly the bashing or pumping from your point of view) without disregarding the importance of shorts in the marketplace. I'm not sure where Tom.Mirabit0 is coming from but his points of view on shorting is just dead wrong.
Nomad, you seem to be missing my point...I'm NOT making a tax point. I'm making an activity point. Most of the assets in my portfolio have been held for well over 5 years on average and some more than a decade. I will on occasion (rarely) "trade" around a core position, but typically the time element even there is measured in months and certainly not days or hours.
Mike's probably right...These nuisance suits (when they don't disappear entirely, which is the majority of the time) usually get settled out by D&O Insurance companies for less money than they'd spend litigating to a successful conclusion (which is why the British system makes so much more sense as plaintiffs pick up the entire tab if they lose, which dramatically reduces frivolous nuisance suits).
But in answer to his question
Should this impact current PPS? Totally max nix. The only possible impact on Q is as a distraction factor...as management has their plates more than full with substantive opportunities and I'm sure they resent the hell out of even having to hear about these things much less deal with them. But they're big boys and they know that these things come with the territory for many companies.
My last rant point...Most of these cases disappear or are settled for next to nothing. But even when settled the only ones that wind up making any money are the lawyers. Only once did I participate in such a claim, mostly out of curiosity. I believe I got a check for something like $3.79 even though I had a much more substantial position than that should ever reflect. So here, I probably lean to the right and think that tort reform is long overdue.
Shorting Q would be a fool's errand largely because it pretty much requires either great timing or being in cahoots with those who have found moments of non-substantive weakness to take advantage of (as we've seen the past couple of weeks). Questcor will yield the most (in 98% of the cases) to those who buy, especially on dips like we've seen recently, AND HOLD LONG TERM!!! I know a lot of people here trade it (perhaps both ways), but if you've dug as deep into this company as I have you'd know that they are a strategic MACHINE barely in the Third Inning of rolling out their strategic initiatives. There's a DOUBLE DOUBLE in the next 12-18 months and most likely another DOUBLE or more right behind that (for those who need a calculator, that's 8X from here some time in 2015/16). BUY IT, PARK IT and go into a long hibernation. When you wake up you'll astound yourself with how well you did while you were asleep :-)
Too many measure Q by their watch...I measure it by Stonehenge Time !!!
Based on my personal/professional experience no more than 1-2% of these claims ever wind up resulting in a material judgment. These are "ambulance chaser" class actions and are generally regarded as legal blackmail with the attorney's for the plaintiff's hoping to get a small NUISANCE settlement (to avoid any litigation costs) and plaintiffs getting virtually NOTHING when (IF) that even should occur. The fact that the judge has already thrown out several of the claims and allowed in all evidence proposed by Questcor pretty much tells the whole story (Oh, OTHER THAN THERE IS NO CASE!!!) of how this will ultimately play out!!!
MY FAVORITE BY FAR...Maybe CliMaxxy ??? Will definitely use that next time I get hacked :-)
Most of my position is straight up shares (now at 100k) with 15k (share equivalents) of Jan 14 Leaps...If that makes me a "trader" then POOF---I'm a trader :-) A technicality at most!!!