But at $2.70 they had the silver lining of the huge MSA backlog and the hope that they were done with these "unexpected" charges or cost overruns continuing. I'll agree that the stock looks compelling (still hold a portion of my GV shares), but as mentioned previously, they need to eliminate the "recurring" - non-recurring expenses that seem to wipe out most of the profits they generate from the MSA work.
Dalton, "when they have a clean qtr." That's a BIG IF! I've followed their quarterly reports for the last 3 years, and there is always some sort of "non-recurring" expense that comes thru. Until they can show two or three back to back reports of "clean" numbers, there will always be a black cloud overhanging this stock.
"non repeatable" in the sense that it may not be TX project related, but they do seem to have a lot of "repeatable'' "non-repeatable" charges.
"substantially completed our unprofitable Texas Projects". Does this mean there may still be more charge offs in Q3?
Looking at the SEC Filings, I'd say they are shares acquired thru a payroll/compensation plan. Note the dates are about every two weeks (end/first of month and middle of month). The reason there is not price paid, is probably because the shares are from ones previously bought by the company.
I doubt having a higher dividend will have much impact on Institutional investments in CLRO. The reason is that with such a low share Float, II's cannot trade enough shares without causing the share price to fluctuate widely.
Listened to CC. One of the main reason revenues were flat was due to a delay in shipping a "major overseas project". According to Zee, if it had been shipped prior to the end of the quarter, then revenues would have been "well above" Q2 of 2014. This project has now shipped, and revenues will be reported in Q3. No specific dollar amount was given for this project, but stated as "significantly" larger than their average project.
Also, business was slow in the month of May (industry, not just CLRO), but picked up in June and July getting back on track.
"The Houston company also said it hasn't won as many transmission project contracts as expected this year. Competition from regional companies has been tough. Some large projects that were expected to start construction this year are being delayed into 2016."
I actually think you are correct. There are a lot of people that are too lazy to do the simplest research. That's why I believe the company should consider changing their name to PCA or something more aligned with their business.
The Bagman and his lawyer. Hardly new blood. This is just preparation for a buyout. Bagman can't be on the board because of his "history". So his man is there to represent him to get the most $$ for his shares.
As I've suspected for quite some time, I believe ClearOne will be acquired. Them putting a Bagley rep on the Board is a way of getting his 30% approval when a deal is announced.