hilarious, liza, you really aren't in over your head.... really, you're not...
WHX? that's your example?
it has a forward annual dividend rate of 37% and yoy revenue growth of -30% and a microcap market cap of a whopping 99 million bucks and you have to wonder why it has a significant short interest (do ya think that just maybe that 37% dividend rate may not actually happen??). and that is your comparison to CLMT and your argument for a sizeable stable company with a stable dividend of more than 5% that has a significant short interest?? bonehead!!!
seriously, you embarass yourself. after all your research you can only come up with an obviously distressed company that pays a 2% trailing yield, with a 35% forward annual yield AND -30% yoy revenue growth and a market cap of 90 million dollars (my brothers restaurant has a market cap of 5 million...). THIS is your example to refute my argument? I TOLD YOU: sizeable, non-distressed, stable company paying CURRENTLY 5% or more dividend with a significant short interest. you won't find it.
like i said liza, you are full of gas, but very light on substance
you are on ignore from now on here with me. i just don't have the patience...
liza, you really are potzer. every post you make reveals just how little you really know about investing.
the two examples you gave (what, you couldn't find more?) show a short percentage of 3% and 4%, hardly a "significant short position" not to mention that both those companies have trailing dividend yields of 2%.
you were supposed to find examples of MLPs with "significant" short positions in companies which pay, currently, 7% or more. good luck finding it. we'll all still be waiting patiently. don't bother wasting your gas however, since you won't find it. companies that pay those kind of dividends don't have substantial short positions. your broker can explain the details to you...
error in logic? seriously, you're kidding right? you must be the only person in this market, except for a complete newby, who doesn't know that it is more expensive for shorts to short companies that pay sizeable dividends and therefore the short ratio of dividend paying stocks is much lower. there is no arguing it.
let me rephrase that: please give us the tickers of a few of the plenty MLPs that have a "high" short interest and pay a dividend 7% or northword. I'll take a look back later to see your results. good luck.
not to mention that this stock could never have a significant enough short position necessary to create a squeeze since it pays a distribution of 7%.
as usual liza, you miss the point and get everything all mixed up and confused. at least you are consistent though, i'll give you that. the point is that we all ask for information to save ourselves time (hence the weather analogy). the point WASN'T whether the guy who asked for the information could've saved himself more time by pursuing a different means of getting the information.
once again liza, you show that you get only half the story right, but always have a full tank of gas....
who cares how large it is? its a sign of defeat, and rightly deserved. ask SIRI...
trust me, i've seen this all before my friend, many times. btw, i was a HUGE apple fan for many years. i sold at $700 and i'm not lying, after riding it up from $320. i'm telling you, the cheese is stinking. the stock may go up from here because of the buyback, but i don't invest my money on such reasons. i bought apple in the past because apple ROCKED. they don't ROCK anymore. that's the truth.
yeah, that's right. you heard it right. insiders can sell while they have you buying back shares with corporate cash. sun microsystems (back in the day) made an art of it.
for the past 20 years, it never occured to them.