so that is the action they took to lesson the blow on the stock and pacman didnt see that coming at all.
Pacman Im surprised that you missed that.
When the x date comes the stock will be reduced 30c from what the closing price was the prior day so with the stock continuing do decline they can buy back even more shares at a cheaper price. They now have 2.5 million between 5 and 6 they could easily buy back 5 million shares. These are the very same shares they they sold at 12 to 13 to get 300m capital to invest?
investing in MCC so far has been a nightmare. almost two years ago in March of 2014 the stock was selling at ~$15.5 and I now around 6. a 9 dollar drop. Like a lot of investors I keep thinking they are smart managers and will get their act together sooner or later so far they never have. Each Q they keep making excuses like it's ok to make mistakes when we are using your money. Pacman even you can do better underwriting then they do and they get paid big bucks for that.
I thought The Taube brothers were expert underwriters well educated but they have demonstrated so far like they are amateurs.
looks like our management company taking a nosedive just like MCC
the biggest loser being ESSEX. It would seem like they are a little careless in picking the right companies on their underwriting. The analysts asked questions about 1st lien loans to get some clarity. The best question is why they charged high fees in the 4th Q when they knew the quality of loans were deteriorating so the investors could benefit. Brooke did not give a very good answer to that question.
listening to the CC and I love one of the questions of the analysts who ask Brooke if they were taking notice of the way they underwrite their loans considering the erosion of the stock and the discount to NAV. In other words you guys need to do a better job of underwriting to have less non'accurals.
you mean like buying it back at 2 dollars a share? Looks like MCC is headed down just like PSEC
I mean you got the same guys managing both companies. So why do you trust them with MDLY when they have screwed up with MCC.? MCC does well the make more money so it is in their best interest that MCC does well just like MDLY. MDLY now will be higher than MCC.
Next week I am going to be make a call to this Anderson guy and leaving a nice message for Brooke. I thought they were goo managers but so far they have not demonstrated this at all.
Then why don't you get on the Q@A of the CC this morning and ask some questions since you are an analyst.
and those who put in their hard earned money wind investing I a losing position. So now you believe everything they say about MDLY?
The problem is they knew this months ago when they were reporting the last earnings and hid that fact so the balance sheet would look better than it actually was. This is why the stock was declining. All who knew this to begin with stayed away or shorted. This is why MCC had double top to 8 before tanking to 6 something.
Anyone could see the oil business was tanking a year ago but these idiots cant seem to take business conditions into consideration when investing. They should have salvaged what they could get from that company months ago.. Why don't you get on as an analyst and ask some questons on the upcoming CC
Essex rental? How did hey #$%$ on that one? the rental business is normally good.
They supposedly have 1st lien loans. What good does it do to have 1st lien if the company goes bankrupt? When it comes to investing these guys keep buying companies that go bankrupt and we are paying them for their expertise. If they screw up on MCC what makes you think they won't do the same with MDLY?
I understand the risk. All the BDC's have risk like when I invested in ACAS and they could not meet their 1:1 . But the problem here is that your projections were way off. You acted like you knew and you didn't so what happened. Where did you go wrong./
How does one get in the question group on the CC this morning. I would love to ask Brooke why they cannot get a handle on managing this company. If this continues they stock will become almost worthless not good to own.
Like we are paying the management for losing us 20%. I wonde if someone will ask this question at the CC this morning.
100k shares at 9.5 = 10,526 shares x 1.2 dividend = $12,631 equals 80k so you would still be losing 20k after adding in the dividends. Now trying to make sense out of all this. The management is making millions while the investors are losing 20%. Makes a lot of sense to me
and 32% in the last 12 months.