There is some vague reference to funding research and development of defense systems and this may apply to Rada but nothing specific. This is a long term hold if you are so inclined and the IR does not respond to emails. There seems to be a lot of interest in evaluating their systems but you never hear any really positive news about large contracts with clients. This could double from here on one decent contract with some detail in the announcement.
I would not be surprised. The way this went down indicated something else was going on here, as I mentioned before. If not Eastman then possible someone else.
The $34 is not my take it is the author of the article. You may have to hold a long time to see that. In the meantime let's say it only goes to $10 from here, it is still a great % play and gain. GL.
What is your time horizon? Look at the bigger picture. This stock is selling at a huge discount. What is your average price, then add to lower it and prepare for this to liftoff once the Court decision comes out. Current valuation should be around $34 according to article and comparison with peers. As always do your own due diligence and rely on your won knowledge. In the long term you will be fine.
Pumpers taking profits and general market down turn after initial rebound. I believe this stock will trade in a range until there is real news then we breakout.
Yes, this is what I thought based on the Company statement. It could be October, November too but in any case based on the article published today regarding real valuation around 34, I will consider adding to position. Thank you!
This is out of my realm. I was thinking within 30 days based on the fact the question is well defined and relates to specific wording in the contract. Thanks for your opinion!
Please, if you could reference just one time the SEC stepped in to stop a buyout by a Chinese management because of a low offer. I do not remember one instance of this happening. It is obvious the share price is being manipulated down by big players hoping to drive the offer price even lower. You do not think the SEC is actually looking out for the retail, long term investor do you?
Just my take: Big hedge funds, who research these opportunities to short, saw the Document filed by Eastman on August 4th. They studied the contract between the two and waited to see if it would be resolved. Then they prepared for the response by Rayonier to be filed and they planned this would be their entry point to short the stock. The Law firms involved always seem to come out with a shareholder lawsuit on the day of the huge shorting of the stock in order to provide additional downward momentum. The hedge funds have now made the bulk of their money and are covering or have covered. They may even be buying in now in preparation for this matter being resolved and the subsequent rise in share price.
We are being told the contract was signed in Georgia and therefore the Courts there have Jurisdiction in the matter. As to the probability of who wins, someone already won when the stock dropped 55%, but it wasn't either Company or the long term shareholders. As far as timing by the Courts my guess would be well within the 30 day period because the contract questions raised are fairly cut and dry.
Everything you say regarding Boynton may be correct, however this is regarding a contract not a personality conflict. Contracts can be renegotiated but this was a planned take down and it makes it much harder to resolve the original issue by the way Eastman went about it. No, there is more to this than meets the eye.
Are we comparing apples to oranges when comparing Dell's buyout to a Chinese ADR? Just saying, why would he have started this process when he would need such a large % to vote with him. Is there something we are missing here since technically we do not own the shares? I am not so confident that there are not loopholes we are not aware of.
It is not so easy and certainly will not happen the way you say. There will be lawsuits brought by Rayonier, the supply chain may be interrupted or at least impacted causing production problems etc. Then there is the reputation problem Eastman will have and with the overhang of litigation and other problems causing other suppliers to be wary. Then customers of Eastman will look at the way they do business and may decide to go elsewhere. One thing for certain neither side wins if it drags on.
My understanding is that the Court has been asked to review the prior agreements and to rule on them. If the contract stands as is, then Eastman has some choices, none of which appear good for either Company. When an action is filed that destroys more than half the value of your Company in a day then hard feelings will occur and an 85 year relationship can be seriously and permanently altered. I also spoke to IR and was given the same explanation you were. Some serious damage has been done here all over a possible minor disagreement or interpretation, but why did Eastman wait until now to raise the issue since the existing contract has been in place for a couple years? Is this part of some other coordinated effort to take Rayonier down for reasons that may become clear later on and does it involve more than just Eastman? Something is wrong here and it smells. Destroying 55% of one of your main suppliers does you no good in the long run and it leaves your remaining suppliers questioning everything. If Rayonier prevails in the short term, then why did the Law Firms file against Rayonier, why not Eastman for bringing the action that caused the damage? This is what tells me this was planned and coordinated involving Hedge Funds and possibly an activist investor. Of course this is speculation and it may all be resolved soon but the longer it goes the more I believe there is more to this than what can be seen on the surface.
They have asked the Court for an expedited review and expect to receive it according to RYAM this am. That could mean any day now this will be sorted out. Adding to position entered yesterday.
75 days to review a low ball offer tells me it is not a legitimate review. There should have been a decision otherwise by now. Just had great earnings and it appears they are waiting for better market conditions in China and the stall game is on, that is his ultimate goal to relist in China.
He's on the Forbes China rich list and is self made mostly in energy. My guess with energy down he was looking for growth and also to diversify some of his holdings. There is a lot of m&a in the China internet space and this could be a reason for him taking a position, although there is really no way of knowing.