I started nibbling buying some back - not near as much as I had before. Will buy more if it heads lower.
Somebody has a lot of shares they are trying to get rid of at $1.77.
If you like these perpetuals for investment purposes, more power to you, I hope you are very successful with them. I would like every Y! poster to be successful and make lots of money with all of their investments.
But tell me, if the company plans to be in business a very long time, and the insiders were purchasing shares this year at $2.50 and higher, what is the explanation that they're not loading up with the shares now at $1.50?
You are confused. What you point out is "a feature", not protection. There is no "protection" of the dividend whatsoever. You assume the company will be in business for a very long time and capable of paying the dividend. There is no "protection" that they even make the first dividend payment.
A lot of built-in protection? Be specific.
The only "built-in" protection is that the dividends are cumulative and for any hope of dividends or dividends in arrears being paid, the assumption is that they have sufficient cash flow and don't file for bankruptcy protection. Since these are not secured and the holders are not creditors, they get absolutely nothing in a bankruptcy filing. At this time, as at least one other person here mentioned, why would anyone purchase these for a lower return than the bonds and have less protections than the bonds?
I'm not arguing that these shares are a tremendous risk to whoever is purchasing - the market could very easily knock it down to $15 or $20/share right off the bat and peg the dividend rate at something more realistic for the risk.
However, you are incorrect in your statement that this is debt. Preferred shares are not debt - it is equity and dilutes shareholders. Preferred holders are not creditors and should the company file for bankruptcy, preferred holders have no recourse as bondholders do. The shares have no maturity and no obligation to be repurchased (as they are perpetual). The dividends are cumulative, and obviously depend on the company having cash flow sufficient to pay the dividend - and at this time it would appear that they don't even have the means to do that. Now, if they miss dividend payments, since it is cumulative, they would begin to rack up additional liabilities - but again, this is not debt as bonds are.
In any case, based on the previous shelf registration, this is really no surprise.
Or pre-arranged sales/purchase between fund managers. I saw the 3 big blocks yesterday which took the volume over 1 million for the day.
I took profits throughout November as a number of my holdings were pushed higher than they should have been. Now I am flush with cash and just watching for people unloading their losers for tax losses during December so I can buy them now and sell into the reverse rise in January.. You need to be doing the opposite of what everyone else is doing...doing it before they do.
I've been acquiring more ULBI as people have been selling. I'll happily take more if people are willing to sell for losses.
and again, if you are including accounts payable as a liability, then you include accounts receivable as an asset.
Or maybe they'll simply collect some of the $2.1 million accounts receivable - ya think?
"and jones has 2.5 million in liabilities and only 1.2 million in cash so jones does not have enough cash to pay their current liabilities...so your wrong again ..."
And you're wrong again as you have been in the past using this lopsided logic - again pointing out that you do not understand the current ratio.
If you're going to make a judgment based on "current liabilities" then you should likewise apply "current assets" for coverage - cash is not the only current asset.
Try again dumbo.
"So if they have and show no debt, how can they not pay their bills"
I'm not seeing the connection - what does one have to do with the other? What do you pay your bills with, regardless if there's any debt? You still need cash, and have to have positive cash flow. I'm looking at the cash flow statements for the past 4 quarters and they are mildly net negative. Their cash is running pretty low with only $1.1 million going in to the winter quarters. So basically, they need to get on top of their receivables and collect.
I don't think they will have a problem paying bills, but you shouldn't think that just because there isn't any debt automatically means they can pay their bills.
I don't believe the wash sale rule will come into play at all.
Individuals will sell right through the end of December to book their gains/losses and the extremely high majority aren't concerned with wash sale rules thinking they want to repurchase.
I sold on the last runup over $4 and will begin repurchasing soon as we get into mid/late December.
With the current loss and no real reason for near-term enthusiasm, I think there is a higher probability the shares trend lower through year-end rather than higher. It is possible that the shares go back to gatr55's $2.50 post-split price by Jan 1. We'll see.
Thanks - it does make me feel good and reassured seeing the ownership and support from Bass and knowing of other similar situations
If you can't take the heat, then get out of the kitchen is my motto. Leading edge technology always has a long ramp time. I can appreciate if management has previously given overly optimistic/aggressive outlook that didn't materialize and older investors are upset - it happens. Look at how close to the brink Elon Musk came with Solar City, Tesla, and SpaceX.
What I know is that at the current price, the shares are a bargain and I'll be buying more between now and year end while the tax loss selling takes place.
More importantly than filing being important for investor to read, is investor being able to comprehend what filing says and means.
Going concern statement has been in quarterly filings for over a year now.
The fact that the statement is there is because the auditors makes them put it there as a result of the current ratio being low. Nothing more than a technicality.
The company has satisfactory options available for additional funds from Bass. If you want to see the identical situation with another company, have a look at MBIS, and take particular note of how the shares have performed over the past few months. Financial situation is identical there. Hey, maybe you should start posting on that board?
Sorry, but although you may be able to read, you are unable to do anything more than take the words at face value as opposed to understanding the business and value.
I'm sorry, but you are very wrong in this situation. Once tax loss selling passes over the next several weeks, we'll see the shares move back to $1.50 to $1.75 range in January. You be sure to visit at that time with another new id.
Hey, thanks for creating your id yesterday just for making those two posts here.
Last Activity: 1 hour 40 minutes ago
Member since: Nov 25, 2013
I can show you hundreds of NASDAQ tech stocks with much worse fundamentals, have lots of reason to go down, and yet they have gone up - unjustifiably and unjustifiably too much.
No specific reason is necessary - it is all about perception and what people want to see. When they see it in the right light one day, then it will move lots higher.
Well, that explains a lot - as to why there has always been a big seller sitting on the ask for the past couple months.
stick around - don't go anywhere...my guess is that you'll get more opportunities to pick up shares again somewhere closer to $2. I'm guessing that the volume/move today was just going along with the NASDAQ move.