I guess that anything that impairs the liquidity of the BABA shares held by YHOO -- has the effect of increasing demand on the non-YHOO BABA shares.
Moreover, the surge at the close may have been a desperate attempt of larger YHOO holders to move their stakes to a more predictable holding in BABA directly. Shoot now and ask questions later?
This is actually a good development. It gets the stock out of weak hands. Anyone selling on this "news" should never have been here in the first place. Gucci has plenty of IP lawyers trying that need to prove to their bosses that they are worth keeping. Dinosaurs.
Loeb's timing on purchase was lousy -- and it looks like his timing on sale was lousy too. He was looking for a disappointing Q1 -- and he was wrong. I am trying to figure out why I should care with Dan Leob thinks about the stock.
You have to remember that over $30 billion of that debt is Sprint debt, which is non-recourse to SFTBY. SFTBY shows it due to consolidation principles. If S were to give S away fro free -- it would have a much better looking balance sheet. I wish they would do a cap raise at S that would shrink their ownership to below 50%. This could improve the prospects for S and improve the SFTBY balance sheet significantly.
Agreed. I have no idea where Twitter is going -- and neither does Gartman. I have very little respect of the Fast Money production team for giving that guy such a stage.
I seriously doubt there are many naked shorts in this thing -- how can risk/reward make sense? My sense is that the stock is bogged down by having to move though a pile of weak holders -- selling anything that looks like a rally.
It's OK -- BABA provides diversification to my portfolio. It goes down when everything else goes up.
Are they really anti-American? They really just need money and Google has a bunch of it. I own both GOOG and FB -- and I am a little worried they will shake down other tech companies once they are done with GOOG. Just another tax so their citizens can retire early and drink espresso -- nothin' personal.
The holders of the stock are manipulating themselves! Seems that the weak holders had stop looses piled up at 82.
Instead of speculating -- why don't you check his Section 16 filings.
You obviously don't have a clue about the company and its websites. You definitely should not be investing -- long or short -- and might be better doing something else.
My sense is that too many people are doing the same thing. I'm sure that you realize that you are dealing with an unexploded bomb. You will either OWN IT when it tanks or NOT OWN IT when it soars. It looks easy -- but it is not.
"Don't close your short position until after the market closes on Friday that's when the lockup really starts HAHAHAHA"
So that when the "lockup starts"? -- brilliant.
It is very simple -- anything that is KNOWN TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE is ALWAYS priced into the stock. Sometimes it may over-discounted and sometimes it may be under-discounted -- but it is always priced in. Thinking that the expiration of a lockup is going to definitely move the stock up or down just demonstrates a lack of understanding of the market. Of course, you are not alone, because even the dummies on CNBC don't understand this.
All fine and good -- but it just seems that there a a bunch of sellers that show up every time the stock sticks its nose above 84.