I bet Don Bailey or any other QCOR executive would have standing personally (they have enough shares, LOL), and QCOR would foot their bill. Not that I think they should go that route - let the NanoVirocides of the world do that instead of concentrating on business.
I heard that too. Those who think there will be a merger between Mitek and TIS because it makes strategic sense aren't considering that there are real people involved with a real history together.
CC said unspecified "significant" one-time charges in R&D and G&A. For G&A, I'd guess they had to spend some money to get the secondary stock offering off the ground.
No 2014 guidance, they have certainly gone conservative on that front.
Looks like they're catching MITK disease - skyrocketing options expenses, skyrocketing R&D, skyrocketing other G&A expenses. Who knows, maybe that is good for valuation these days. Will be interesting to hear what guidance the CC brings, if any. Before this year, guidance was in the Q4 press releases.
Investing is tough, sometimes you lose. Investing in new products is also tough, sometimes you lose. When your investment loses, you shut it down and move on. That's what happened to Guardius. That's also what happened with other hot new PERI products over the years, like HiYo, Magentic, IncrediGames, Junk Filter Plus, PhotoJoy, and Fixie. I don't see Guardius as any different.
PERI has a business model based on trying new things, adapting, and emphasizing the most effective and profitable, not a business model based on Guardius. You seem to expect a well defined, static business model like Proctor & Gamble, and you're right, you won't find it here.
Even so, I suspect a short will yield results similar to your last short of PERI.
I noticed an earlier post of your from November 12, 2013 where you said you covered a previous short for a loss. What makes you more confident your analysis is right this time?
year over year revenues +29%, EBITDA +11%. EBITDA increase limited due to high customer acquisition spend in December, to power 2014 results.
Now that's a good answer!
I'm sure you're right about the tough questions coming about the Conduit weakness. I also expect that Mandelbaum has already thought about the answers to those questions, and used the experience of the first two months of 2014 to shape his answers and his guidance.
App development might be easy, but the business model is not. IMHO $500/month is actually a significant investment in an app by a developer (though not for a corporate developer, especially if a single license covers multiple apps).
I'm not saying this business model won't work and isn't good diversification, but be aware of the following salient facts (from a Perion Networks presentation of December 2013 on their website):
* Vast majority of apps remain largely undiscovered
* 1 in 4 mobile apps never (NEVER) get downloaded
* Free software dominant business model
* 76% of consumers find free version good enough
* Only 10% of all apps downloaded in 2013 were paid apps
* 80% of developers don’t generate enough revenue to sustain a standalone business (especially if they're paying licensing fees)
I read the Citron report, which carefully avoided stating the name of the lab, the source of the vials, or the pre-testing handling of the vials.
How can you VIs not have figured this out? Some posters come to this board to pump their website and disguise themselves by copying prior posts verbatim, so it looks like they are legitimate contributors: farreltnn394 today, innaoqk516 yesterday, janithjdq948 before that, the woman you thought was canterbury because they said the same thing, etc etc etc.
If you can't tell spammers from real people, that's when you know you're a VI ! Kind of like if you can't spot the sucker at the poker game...
Somebody short millions of shares of stock would happily spend $28K/vial to test those vials if they knew what they could make the outcome be. As, for instance, baking those vials before testing them to degrade the polypeptides first.