Yes to both questions, it is a real service, and it is BS.
First, this author is not "SA Pro's Igor Novgorodtsev", but instead Igor Novgorodtsev is a guy paid by SA Pro $100 plus a penny a click for the article. Second, this author seems to be going down the list of Israeli stocks to find something to write about, so his analyses should hardly inspire enough confidence to pay four figures for SeekingAlpha Pro.
From today (Sept 19):
Shares of Perion Network (PERI +3.3%) continue to rebound and are kissing price levels before the stock plunged on news of its reverse merger with Conduit's toolbar unit. Earlier today, SA Pro's Igor Novgorodtsev penned a bullish article (embargoed until 9:45 ET tomorrow) on how the market misunderstood the synergies of the merger and the low valuation paid for Conduit's growing business. He believes PERI trades at a 45% discount to peers.
Rhetoric unsupported by facts, why am I not surprised?
Cruz and his cronies remind me of toddlers threatening to hold their breath until they turn blue if Mommy makes them eat their vegetables. Waaaah!!! The result would be worse than what they're trying to avoid, and the result would be worse on them than anyone else, but trying to use logic with them is just futile.
The only time there are SEC-enforced customer disclosure requirements is when a customer is at least 10% of sales. Otherwise, the existence or change in a relationship doesn't have to be disclosed, even if the relationship has previously been disclosed. Any other disclosures are at the discretion of the company. Unless privacy provisions in the contract prevent the disclosure of such a relationship, so they couldn't disclose it even if they wanted to.
My question - any ideas how to estimate revenues from the Fiserv contract?
And just today those tea-tards seem to have realized the result would be worse than what they're trying to avoid, and the result has been worse on them than anyone else. With a 24% approval rating for the Republicans, that means that even half the people who voted for Romney think they are idiots, er, wrong.
I am not an expert in the field, and it is nice to see FISV's vote of confidence as they certainly are, but after researching the issue it seemed obvious to me just from reading the differing descriptions of how the TISA and MITK technologies work that TISA is not infringing on MITK's patent. Even the MITK supporters could only make a case of the simplicity of "MITK patented mobile deposit first".
So I don't understand why people assume MITK has a legitimate case just because MITK filed a lawsuit. But people do assume that if they aren't willing to look into it, like most people, which is why filing a lawuit against TISA has been such a successful marketing technique for MITK.
Don't know anything about max and lord ambro, but I do know that cluttering a board with meaningless posts is a time-tested way to limit the sharing of information by those who don't want it shared.
Would be a home run if the 24% sequential revenue growth wasn't off such a low base. It will be interesting to hear in the call if the Q3 revenue includes the several $ million upfront payment by Fiserv. If that payment is included in the quarter, everything else in the quarter looks a lot like last quarter. If that payment slides to Q4, then Q3 was a real rebound and Q4 might be a monster.
If in the call if sounds like TISA can at least hold the eps at $0.08/share in Q4 and beyond, those growth rates suggest this could finally rocket higher. Finally!
Yes. I didn't explain myself too well. I think of Fiserv as a non-repeatable event. After all you can't sign up the 800-pound gorilla of the industry every quarter. So if I look at Q3 without Fiserv, are the market conditions dramatically improving from a base of $6M in revenue and eps losses (if Fiserv is part of what they reported in Q3 revenue), or $8M in revenue and profits (if for accounting reasons Fiserv will show up in Q4). If it is the second, TISA goes up like a rocket.
Pathetic spam. I've seen this exact same message on a couple other boards just today, SYK & SBS at least.
Anyone dumb enough to buy the POS ADSU deserves what they get (Stevie, go right ahead!)
CEO again proves himself right and hedgies/shorties again prove themselves wrong. Now we know why the hedge fund industry has such pathetic industry returns for the last 1, 3 and 5 years.
Better cover fast suckers, because your buddies are trying to beat you to it!
Everything gets to fair value eventually. When, I have no idea.
Seems like a jump just back to where it was in the middle of last week isn'y enough though.
seeking alpha is hardly going to seek recourse. They publish anything on their website that will increase their clicks and ad revenue, until someone mentions legal action against them.
Well, the stocks shorts attacked last year sure are doing well. Take a look at a 2-year chart for QCOR, up 130+% in 2013 after getting attacked last fall.
I can't see what other reason it could be. Or at least to give them the ammunition for an acquisition if they want. It isn't like they need to sell stock to pay off debt.
I don't follow the industry closely enough to know who that might be. There must be dozens of firms including startups who could contribute useful technology.
"Are you short on the stock or something?" Are you kidding? Muddy Waters aka muddyinsights aka Carson Block is known for "short and distort" techniques.
I don't know anything about management personally. I do know that the company would not have been able to attract as CEO the well-regarded former head of American Greetings' internet subsidiary if he hadn't been convinced about the long term strength and relevance of the business model. And I know both PERI and Conduit would have avoided the merger deal like the plague if either had thought the other was shady. And I can understand the business model as described my management and believe it could be both profitable and fast-growing.
If one bad actor in a business space (Babylon) meant all competitors were doomed, well we wouldn't have had any telecom companies after WorldCom imploded, would we?
So the choice seems to be to believe that either both sets of management are in cahoots to play games with shareholders in pursuit of short-term profits, or to believe that Muddy Waters is playing games with shareholders in pursuit of short-term profits. Since I thought Muddy Waters research had about the same value as a used coffee cup even before they appeared on the scene here, it isn't really hard for me to make my choice.