Skullcandy, Inc. (SKUL) Message Board
-
PS... Wescoat and Darling bought at these levels and Darlings compensation is based at these levels... Doh! Not Rocket Science now.
-
They have there own gaming line up established now with SLYR, PLYR 1 and 2. That group is the "Rock Stars" as Alden called them. They generate only a small portion of net sales (they won't break it out). They bought it for 5 million . That would generate some serious cash to the bottom line if say they sold it for 25 million plus as well as streamline G&A. Just another possibility. There WILL be news going forward this year early next of some major sort. Buyback?, purchase a company or 2?, go private? Buy out? New product launch? All would spike the share price. First thing is getting the company back profitable which will be q3 latest (November earnings call).
Good to be long at these devaluated stock prices. Good for those of you who bought or are buying at these levels! -
If they do buy a company or 2 then they most certainly wouldn't want to acquire debt at this point in time.
-
It would be a lifestyle products company or the like. It could also be that SKUL may buy a small company or 2 (like they did with Astro).
-
Good news is I think they have figured out that selling shares (They being Alden, Andrus and the board) has indicated poor market sentiment towards the company (and visa versa). Maybe I'm wrong....
-
Relative... That is priced as WS wants it. There are Billion dollar market cap companies out there that are loaded with debt and losing money hand over fist.
-
So you are in favor of them acquiring long term debt? They have 50 million in working capital. To me this is an indication that they are entertaining a buy out offer(s). If they start buying back shares (with a very few holding over a third of the company), a buyback would indicate going private. I don't see any advantage for Alden to take this company private as he accumulated great wealth at IPO? IMO. They are setting up to get get the company back to growth / profitability and sell it. It's everyone who is involved (Hoby, Wescoat, Alden, Kearl etc. specialty). IMO. I would expect the company sold beginning of next year at IPO price + a premium. Shares should rise into this period once the next Q is announced and forward guidance. IMO.
-
SKUL is making its run back into he teens this year. Damage is done and management is buying shares and revamped with positive new blood. Just saying...
-
I may add that traditionally short squeezes happen in companies with a SI number of 20% + of the float. SKUL falls at 17% (as of 4/30 report) my gut is that this number will decrease next report. Of course market factors such as days to cover, availability of shares to cover, market volume, shares outstanding etc. play into this. But this "squeeze" if it happens, will be a short term trade opportunity. IMO
- Reply to
A history lesson on SKUL insider stock ownership,
by michaelsistowicz •May 15, 2013 11:49 AMI may add that Director Warnock got 1.15 million shares at IPO and has proceeded to sell all but 300,000 (I'm not sure if those have not vested?). He is another on the board that has not bought direct shares (other Chairman Kearl). Both have no vested interest in the company. Olivet and Collier got very small grants (less then 10,000 shares) neither ave sold. Olivet purchased 7,500 shares at IPO at 20 bucks on his own. Again though they have no real vested interest in the company besides their positions on the board / benefits and retainers / options. I'm not clear on their tie in with the IPO / initial involvement with Alden in the early years at start-up.
-
The short interest is hovering at 3,000,000 shares or ~ 15% of the float now. Stock is at 5.50 a share. The short interest was 12,000,000 shares or 75% of the float back when the stock was at 16 a share. Although I can see a possible share price increase as the supply/demand shifts, the possibility of a dramatic squeeze seems unlikely to me.
Having said that, the combination of heavy buying from overall market sentiment coupled with some share buyback (which has not ever been announced, questioned by analyst or discussed in a open forum by the company), perhaps could squeeze some shorts out en mass.
I however, believe the filing for the restructuring of finances (I.e. the share buyback possibility), was facilitated by the company as they had knowledge that the company was going to have a "reset" financially and to make available another option in case the share price dropped. I have no clue if they would entertain a buyback now as the stock rises, and I would suspect they will be coming profitable sooner then later.
Of course I am long here, not a trader... So play your cards as you see fit in your financial investment strategy.
IMO -
Should be finalized and listed on the Nasdaq web site by tomorrow morning. There should be a SEC filing or 2 as well for major owners (is the norm).
So far Institutional ownership has dropped about 5% vs 12/31, final numbers not included to 42% total. This of course does not included any new activity pre/post Hoby's hiring and the Q1 earnings call/announcement (which I guess IMO would have drawn some new blood in).
FYI -
Having followed this stock since the IPO and being heavily leveraged in this name, I have done extensive research in the SKUL name. I am going to relay some thoughts, info I have gathered regarding it's stock ownership.
Disclaimer: these are thoughts off the top of my head, I may be off some in my numbers and time frames etc. but in general it is a good picture of what occurred.
I'll try to explain by individual with a little history on them:
Alden - Started one of his first company's with a ski binding system he patented. Sold it, bought it back and sold it again. Then came up with a switching device (phone to music and back) while skiing. This then led to the formation of SKUL. Alden has about 7,000,000 shares or 25% of the company.
Kearl - Chairman of the Board. Gave Alden seed money for Skullcandy in its early years (back in 2002/2003). In return was granted shares. When the company went public, Kearl converted his shares and sold them after the lock up. He (in my opinion) should not be on the board as he has no vested interest in the company. He is a venture capitalist and this and his retainer is part of his MO.
Andrus (Former CEO). Worked for the company with NO PAY and lived in his parents house for 3 years. In return he was granted stock in the company. He still holds 1.3 million shares or 5 % of the company.
Rest of the board - Various guys that are in the active lifestyle product's arena and on other boards. They hold token sums of stock (mostly grants and options).
Wescoat / Darling - CFO/CEO these guys are starting from scratch. They have been awarded small grants and options and HAVE PURCHASED direct shares on their own. There is NO requirement for them to do so.
This is a great thing as they are not part of the original "clan". They have a vested interest to build the company as their pay / wealth was not created via the IPO.
My quick summary.... -
I agree... The salary is higher then Andrus's BUT Andrus was HIGHLY compensated in stock!
- Reply to
If I'm not mistaken, outstanding shares will increase 1.7%
by redzombie85 •May 12, 2013 7:30 PM3 is say on pay which is in theory ALLOWING shareholders to vote on executive pay increases. Whether it is an effective procedure or not is a topic of much differing opinions.
-
Nasdaq web site under SKUL short interest...
-
1 and 4 are the ones I have problems with based on share price depreciation of 75% since IPO. No reason to vote for either of those 2. 3 is BS anyways as we as shareholders did not get the opportunity to vote on Hoby's pay package or the restricted shares / options jut granted him (SEC filing today) ratified by the board.
-
Also any vote to reinstate board members. I think it's number 2?
-
4/30/2013 3,162,168 314,379 average daily volume 10.058458 days to cover
11% decrease from last reported numbers
Info only -
Thanks.... :)