I had a different interpretation of this - no surprise. I read it and heard it as: yes we have been stockpiling in anticipation of the P.O. but what we had stockpiled at that time was not enough to complete the P.O and therefore we need to produce more. We will continue to test semi automatically until the fully automatic testers are in place and we can complete the order using the semi automatic testers. To me it said the P.O. was bigger than what they had stockpiled, which I saw as a good thing.
Again, you're reading it one way because you distrust them and I interpret it differently because I have some faith they are telling the truth.
I didn't hear him say they had stockpiled enough to complete the order, nor did I hear the caller indicate that. In fact the caller said "Now that you do have that purchase order, are you going to start dedicating more alignments to that or you are still going to stay at the same pace and leave the remaining lines more for testing and getting those yields up?" which indicated to me he recognized they needed more tested product to complete the P.O. I'm not sure how you got that they had 100% fulfillment with their stocked inventory out of that question, or the answer.
I swore I wouldn't answer but I can't help myself. I get that 6MM shares was the majority of the float at the time. Your comment was "that the majority of those who profited on that rise are insiders of the company" and I don't see how you can make that claim when 40+MM shares traded hand above that price. I get that a portion of that was probably churn and once again, I don't have a breakdown of how much of the 40MM shares was churn versus longer term buy and holds, short covering and institutional buys. So I can't refute the point with data but to say they were the majority of those who profited is non-sense. Perhaps the better thing to say is that they individually and collectively profited more than any other individual or maybe even MM. But 40MM shares (and yes I know that is buys and sells so that's actually only 20MM trades - that's why I said 22%...6.6MM shares divided by 30MM - note: not 60MM - is 22%, so I'm not an idiot - I did the math) still constitutes $180,000,000 (approximately, using $9 profit X 20MM shares as the average) of profit made by someone, or a number of someones, after they left the scene. Add that to the other 7MM someones that traded outside of the insider trading between $10 and $23 (March 1 price) and it still seems to be there were lots and lots of people that profited off that rise, undoubtedly not to the extent they did.
On the NDA, as you say, we'll see what the SEC says.
Yeah if you look at the runup from Jan 1 to March 1 of $10. What about the other 40+MM shares that traded from March 1 to April 29 where it ran up another $18. The total they traded versus the total over the entire period was less than 22%. And, in terms of percentage of total dollars of increase traded it was far less than half of that. We're done. You, like all of your kind, tell half the story, rely on the past to cast doubt on the future, rely on the knowledge that the threat of lawsuits for poor forecasting and NDA agreements in place will preclude companies from legally providing information to refute whatever claims you shorts decide to pin against them. It's a no win situation. You know their hands are largely tied so you throw whatever you can out there, knowing there's no da%^ed way anyone can really refute it until it can legally come out. And in the meantime, the stock goes lower and lower and you profit. Quite the game you have there. It sickens me. We're done here. You are hereby ignored. We'll see what happens in the next 6 weeks.
Roger do you even read your own posts before you send them?
YOU said "I speculate that that UNXL is incapable of producing a viable profitable product, ever." I didn't say "I speculate", YOU did. Then you jumped from I speculate to "They haven't because they cannot." A statement of fact? Prove it. Prove they cannot. You have not see that they CURRENTLY cannot, any more than I have seen the P.O. But you believe they cannot, and I believe they have a P.O.
There were a lot of people who profited from the run up. I was one of them, and have done quite well off UNXL thank you very much. I will do so again.
" I have not forgotten that the majority of those who profited on that rise are insiders of the company " Really? Insiders sold 6,692,910 shares during the run-up. Most of those were on March 1 when the price was $23, only about half of what it got to. During the Jan 1 to April 29 run-up, 62,655,900 shares traded hands. Half of those were sells obviously so less than 22% of the shares were from insiders, meaning 78% were from retail and institutions. Majority? Not even close. 44 million of the 62.6MM shares traded after the insiders got out. That means they missed out on the real action ($18 per share increase) that others did. From 4/17, when the secondary was offered, to May 16, when the stock tanked, 19.2MM shares traded hands. The secondary was offered at $32 and 19.2MM shares traded higher than that in the next 30 days. The MMs got their money out of it. And anything left they shorted all the way down.
There's no point continuing this conversation. As always, you will have the last word because really, you can't argue with someone who hypothesizes and calls it fact. And I've got other things to do than to argue with someone who's argument is basically "They haven't done it yet, and no one can prove they are doing it currently, so therefore they aren't" I have no answer for that, it's so illogical.
Your statements are binary. The events you are predicting have not come to pass. They are opinions of the future, and the price action you are predicting is based on those opinions coming to fruition. That is an "if-then" situation. If what you say is going to happen happens, then shorts will further profit. If it does not, they will not. It's that simple.
"I speculate that that UNXL is incapable of producing a viable profitable product, ever."
Ahh, speculation. If only speculation were truth, huh?
"They haven't because they cannot." I would guess if they cannot, then they wouldn't have gotten a P.O. but of course, you don't believe that either and since your belief makes things true, therefore it is, right?
"Shorts have already profited." Yes, and so have longs back earlier this year, or have you conveniently forgotten that? The stock rose $30+, and then fell $30. IF you are right, then it will fall further. IF you are not, then it won't.
"We could freeze the situation here and ,I suspect, it will be longs who cry the loudest. " Ah yes, if we could freeze time when it's convenient and in our favor. Sadly, we cannot, as you will find out.
You can deny your binary statements. Since your speculation has not at all resolved itself, it is still an if. Plain and simple. Your being sure of an event in the future based on events from the past, doesn't make it so. Sorry if life hasn't taught you that yet.
I don't disagree. UNXL has to produce. I believe they will. I know you disagree. That's you prerogative.
"For shorts to profit further UNXL only has to continue in its current manner."
That's just semantics Roger. That's still and "if-then" binary statement, just with different words. The same meaning is conveyed by "Shorts will profit if UNXL continues in its current manner" (which by the way, is arguable as well. You don't know what they are doing today or tomorrow, and neither do I. You speculate that because they haven't shipped parts yet, that we know of, that they never will. That's an absurd statement to me. Nothing that has ever happened in history, wasn't at one point, something that hadn't been done yet. The light bulb, the cure for polio, the microwave oven. By your logic, we should all be eating mammoth with stone knives. And before that you'd have said "you have previously failed to produce a cutting device, Thog, therefore you never will. ")
Your statement is just a reworded version of "If UNXL doesn't produce, then shorts will profit"
The corollary then would be "For longs to profit, UNXL has only to do what they said they were going to do".
Both are true statements, and both are in a binary if-then format as well.
And so do the bashers...If if if if if if...If they don't, if they don't if they don't...
And whenever they do, it's...yeah but they haven't...yet, and they haven't...yet and they haven't...yet.
Then when they do again, it's yeah but...and if they don't.... and on and on. When they get into production, then it will be "Yeah but it's not as much as it should be" or "Yeah but the margins are going to go lower" or "yeah but other technologies are getting better" or...whatever. The reasons are endless.
If, if, if, if, if. Works the same way on either side. And the reason it's used is because no one can see the future. If they could, they wouldn't be spending time yakking futilely at others on Yahoo MBs.
May not happen now before end of the year. If it does get to the 10's, it won't be for another week or more now, and only if nothing is discussed by Dell on Dec 11. And with the possible tension of a PR on shipping later in the month, if you're not buying now, or didn't earlier today, you're probably going to miss this next little wave up. My gut says low 10's is a very, very long shot at this point until after Jan 1. And at that point, if it goes down to 10's, it will likely go lower because that will have meant that nothing positive happened. I'd get in if it drops back to $11.75 or so and ride it up for the next week or two.
Agreed, which is why I suspect they are doing everything they can to undermine UNXL in any way, shape and form.
"An investment strategy based on IF,MIGHT,MAYBE and HOPE is a poor plan indeed"
Which is exactly what you are doing. "If they are lying, if they don't ship, if the size of the shipment does no meet expectations, if they can't reproduce reliably, if the stock price gains downward momentum, if, if, if..."
Same coin, different side Roger. In your mind, the probability of your "ifs" is higher than mine. In my mind, it's the opposite. You won't convince me, and I won't convince you. We'll see who is right within the next 6-7 weeks. But $4.5 won't happen until at least mid-March and on IF...everything goes wrong, which is what you're hanging your hat on.
A bystander? Don't be naive Roger. There are no bystanders in business and on Wall Street and there are no accidents.
95% of the basher articles and comments here are related to Carclo subterfuge, in my opinion. The letters to the SEC, the lawsuit initiation, the in depth knowledge of production methods, the constant attacks that UNXL can't do what they say they can, even though they're quick to flaunt other competitor's forward looking projections as gospel, infallible truths (the "Anyone other than UNXL/Kodak can make 5-6micron mesh with 100% yields" theory)...it all smells of Carclo trying to destroy UNXL before they can get into production. They know their suit is dicey at best, so the only other way to get back at UNXL is to undermine their market cap by driving the price down. Thus, never ending basher articles, SEC investigations, lawsuits = FUD on a mass scale, designed to scare away investors and potential new clients. The "you seem like good guys, and your product seems fine, but with all this noise around you, getting into bed with you is more trouble than it's worth, so sorry...we're going with Brand Y" approach.
They've been good at it. It stinks but all is fair in the world of business I guess.
Just saw this and had to laugh. $4.50? Well, yes, I suspect if it gets to $4.50 then $4.75 will look pretty good. But if you're waiting for $4.50, you're in for a long wait. The ONLY way that will happen is if they deliver nothing through 1st quarter. Now based on your past messages I am sure that's exactly what you expect. So be it.
Here's what will happen:
-PR about shipment by 12/31 - price goes up to between $17-20, until then price is $10-13
- No PR by 12/31 - price goes down to $8-11 after Jan 1
-PR by Q4 call - price goes up to $17-20
-No PR by Q4 call - price slips to $7-9
-Positive information about shipment on Q4 CC - price goes to $18+, and probably into the $20's within next 3-5 days
- Negative information with no concrete forward looking date on C4 CC, price drops to $5-7
- Negative information but new postponed date discussed (i.e., "we haven't shipped because of blah, blah, blah, but we will be shipping in next 30 days"), price still drops, probably in the $6's.
So your only scenario for $4.5 is no shipment, no reasonable new date. The probability of that happening is almost zero. Not because the probability they won't ship is zero, but because the probability that Reed won't string out a new date is zero. That would be suicide. So there will always be a group of people that will take that information and hang in there, which will prevent the stock from sinking to the levels you think. Just common logic.
The probability of no shipment by early Feb and a revised date is probably around 20%. Still highly unlikely.
I guess we'll all just have to wait and see. I still say the probability of positive new on or before the Q4 CC is higher than negative news. That's where my bet is. As an aside, it's too bad shorts don't have to put up real money when they borrow shares. They'd be a lot more cautious about placing a bet on a low probability, lowball price target if they actually had real skin in the game.
Anyone that bought against bashers advice over the past 3 weeks has made significant money. I am guessing your fervent continued bashing is because you shorted around this price and need it to go down to less than a dollar very badly.
The fact that this dropped 70% (a few weeks ago) from when I first bought it due to the dilution, manipulation and incessant short bashing, or the fact that those newbies and shorts-turned-longs have made over 50% in a few weeks (probably think NAVB is the greatest stock ever for them) or the fact that daytraders are probably making 5-10% a day trading this up and down.
Lots of people making big bank on this as it see-saws back up. Probably a lot of the same folks that made big bucks knocking it down. Wish I was one of them. It's a long climb back up to where I'll be making cash...but it's getting there.
To those that played this right - congratulations. To those still bashing - give it a rest. Do yourself a mid-term favor and go long for a bit, ride this up and then bash it if you like once it gets too high again.
Personally, based on what I heard and read from the CC, I'm not expecting anything until the next quarterly call. That is based on Reed's answers to timing questions regarding P.O. size and OEM. He basically indicated we'd know how big the revenues were when they reported earnings and he couldn't say who the OEM was until the product was on the shelves. He also indicated it was up to the OEM when they'd put the product on the shelves, so in effect he had no comment as to when the product would in fact be on the shelves, and therefore no timing as to when they could announce the OEM. The only real thing we have to cling to is his firm statement that they will be shipping this quarter. Given his past history of barely making deadlines, or missing by a week or two, I would not expect them to suddenly ship much before the very end of the month.
Like everyone else, this is only my opinion. Some think that the Dell conference will produce something. I hope so. I would love that. But I'm not counting on that.
I am planning on not hearing much before the end of the month, and not hearing financial details and OEM names until early February. I suspect the price of the stock will stay between $10 and $13 until the end of the month. If a PR comes out of some sort indicating a shipment against the P.O., it will likely go up considerably. If we hear nothing by 12/31, it will definitely track towards $10 or lower in the New Year. This $12 price range doesn't surprise me at all right now, in fact it's been running a little higher than I expected given the barrage of negative articles recently. That might be a good thing and signals that remaining longs and MMs are holding firm on their price, so the shorts can't get shares to cover lower. It would be nice if they stay relatively pinned and holding out for some lower price range, and then get shafted once a shipment is announced.
Nicee catch Reb. I read that but it didn't sink in. I wonder if it's that guy that was P.O'd (forget who it was) during the quarterly CC and had 200K shares? He didn't sound happy with the share price and I'm guessing he wasn't thrilled with Reed's responses or the IR responses he wasn't getting. Maybe he's leading them being sued.
Class period: 12/7/12-5/31/13
Price on 12/7: $8.63-9.84
Key SEC 8-Ks released by UNXL during class period:
- December 20, 2012, announcing that it is vigorously denying allegations contained in litigation filed in the United Kingdom by UK-based Carclo PLC through its subsidiary.
- April 8, 2013, engaged a touch-screen ecosystem partner to facilitate the development, introduction and production of products that feature next-generation touch screens based on our UniBoss pro-cap, multi-touch sensor film.
- April 16, 2013, entered into a manufacturing and supply agreement with Eastman Kodak Company to produce next-generation touch sensors based on our UniBoss� multi-touch sensor film. Under the agreement, we expect to open a new manufacturing facility with Eastman Kodak prior to the end of 2013.
- April 23, 2013, closed its previously-announced underwritten public offering of 1,195,000 common shares at a price to the public of $32.00 per share for gross proceeds to the company of $44.0 million.
Now here's the key. In every forward looking statement it says: "These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause our results to be materially different than those expressed or implied in such statements. These factors include less than expected growth in the films and touch screen industries; lack of acceptance of our solutions; an inability to continue increasing our number of customers or the revenues we derive from our customers; an inability to develop our technology and meet customer demands. etc. etc.
The terms of the contracts with the various partners are covered by NDAs. As such. they didn't give out the terms, therefore the terms could not be reasonably misconstrued. If they were, it was due to third party articles and investor speculation, not because of what they said. Finally, the forward looking statement identifies possible risks.
In short, they have their butts covered. These suits have no merit.
Yes, because there's no provision in ISO14001 for a P.O. process, or a contract process. Oh wait. Yes there is. Well I'm sure Dell and Kodak and Intel wouldn't follow that themselves, and only enforce those requirements on their suppliers. Oh wait, that would be Unipixel. Damn. This circular logic just keeps going around and around.
Well, you know these schlock companies like Intel and Dell - just a bunch of straw-chewing hicks standin' around the old gas lamp, writin' IOU's on the backs of bar napkins. Cam't trust any of 'em.