jtsc....what a moronic set of statements! So if shorts are "covering b/c they think its bottom" then deduction would cause one to conclude that they think it is going up. In other words, contrary to your first statement, they would be buying precisely because they think it is going up.
jtsc.....you would be right if the losses were all cash losses.....but they are not, so your analysis is meaningless.
bigjoke20: You've "hardly been on here lately" because you had to pull away to write your unidimensional, slanted hit piece on NQ for SA. I think your schtick is well known be everyone in these here parts.
I've not invested at prices that would have me down 75%. Your repeating it to me and everyone on this board ad nauseum does not make it true. Please give up the tired refrain.
Joe A. Williams / Bigjoke:
1. You throw the word "lie" around very casually. Lie suggests intent to deceive. Yes, it appears NQ could have done some of that, but it is not incontrovertible that they have. Their 360 then 360 again about the buy back was very frustrating, even maddening, but I have no evidence they lied about it. It could well be they had counsel in one direction then got conflicting counsel. I've sat on 3 public boards and many of the rules governing public company actions are very arcane and board members and management are somewhat dependent upon legal counsel, which can be subjective.
2. Believe what you want on the SBC. I suppose your short position is advanced by repeating the mantra about SBC and acting as though the GAAP treatment thereof is the same as cash expense. I for one am accustomed to SBC in fast growing companies. The issue for me is not SBC in absolute terms but the exercise price, term of option and lockup periods. Your taking the GAAP treatment as face value is sophomoric and as nuanced as a brick.
3. N-Sky deal suggests management is akin to the gang that couldn't shoot straight. It is clear to me that they're not experienced in dealing with short attacks and so MW's attacks caught them off guard. They floundered about and did the N-Sky deal to try to do some window dressing on the valuation. It didn't work. Embarrassing? yes. But do I throw out the whole baby with the bathwater given NQ's growth rates, engaged users and huge market potential for a botched window dressing exercise? No, I don't. You treat it as a nail in their coffin. Fine. Its a free country. Do as you please, or short as you please, and I'll do as I please.
4. Your asking me why I'm bitter at you is a tad ironic, don't you think? You come on here with your ad hominem arguments, calling people idiots, morons etc. and then you act like a wounded duck when someone has the gall to return fire? Puuleasse.....take your faux victimology elsewhere.
bigjoke/Joe Williams, why do you persist in assuming I invested in double digit pps and have ridden the price down all the way? I guess by your assuming that you can claim I'm an idiot and your a genious. Fact is you haven't the slightest clue what my investment history has been with NQ. I can tell you this, my average cost has me in the money and I've yet to realize a loss on any shares. But go on with your narcissistic, unfounded, self-hero-worship. Remind us again, did you call this a sell in the teens? I can't quite remember? Oh, yes, you've only told us that 10,000 times!
Oh, Bigjoke/Joe Williams, the past few days have been so nice without your continual harping on the past with the same tired arguments.
Here's a tip for you, businesses and investors look forward through the windshield as they move into the future, not the rearview mirror.
By your logic, b/c NQ is up 10% over the last three days, it will go up 10% every three days in the future! C'mon, repeat your 4,000% figure right on cue.
@ bigjoke/Joe Williams: He didn't call the "dead cat bounce of a quarter a 'catalyst'". He called the report by Zhang on Chinese gaming stocks a catalyst. If you're going to smear someone endlessly, at least get your facts straight and learn how to read English.
Yes bigjoke/joe williams, because we know that every stock that reports a horrible quarter made up mostly of non-cash charges is doomed to report horrible quarters forevermore. Stocks never turn the corner. Look at FB, GOOG, AMZN.......all losers. They lost money years ago and have never made any money since. :-)
@jtsc_re: "nationsky, no one using it". Care to give any real data to back up that claim rather than just bloviate negativity?
@Joe A. Williams/bigjoke: "You've just got to quit dissecting my posts". Isn't that what you do all day long to others? Yet you are on here calling everyone else a hypocrite? Get a life.
I've made no excuse whatsoever for them on the NQsky deal. I'm still scratching my head over it. It strikes me as pretty amateurish what they've done there. You'll find no post of mine making any excuse for them on that stunt.
I'de love to talk about the stock Joe Williams and where it is going and what its prospects are. But I get so sick of your bullying any basic commenter and using ad hominem attacks on total strangers rather than sticking to the facts and the prospects of the business that I thought I'd give you a taste of your immature, imbecilic medicine. And you have the gall to call ME a hypocrite!?!? What an #$%$
Here's an idea. How about you get it through your thick skull that stock based compensation is a non-cash charge and every analyst on the street uses earnings before SBC. How about you give up your 4000% increase in losses rant because it is history! How about you discuss the components of the company's model that will drive an income figure going forward, be it good or bad?
We understand you hate the company. Rather than repeat it 50 different ways reciting historical data ad nauseum, offer up some real analysis on the prospects of the company.
Now you'll come back and say I'm "making excuses for the company". I'm not making excuses at all. I'm exploring with others the prospects of the company, be they good or be they bad. But endlessly repeating your same old tripe of the past is not helping anyone and certainly is not adding to any serious analysis of the company's prospects.
Joe Williams aka Bigjoke: It's been a full year since April 2014. Why are you STILL hanging around beating the same tired old drum? You have far too little to do in life, otherwise you wouldn't be spending endless hours on this board. Oh, I forgot, you get paid a penny a post by the shorts. LOL I don't believe you!
Krill66: I like your philosophy and your actions. You sound like a very rational investor.
I have so many name in my portfolio b/c I spend a huge amount of time investing. I probably spend 60% - 70% of my business day on my public portfolio. I have a number of investing cohorts that give great advice and that we've made money off of each other. I also like certain trends but don't want the diluted result of a large ETF and would rather pick the three best stocks or so in that segment.
I'm rationalizing to some extent, I know, but it's worked well for me and I'm darn close to a full time private investor, so I think it makes sense for my situation.
As to NQ, I'm a believer in their market segment, their geographies and what I discern to be their strategy. Frustrated as one can be with management's communication or lack thereof with its US investors (70% of their investing base according to Matt M). But I think in the long run we'll have a winner here. I'm fortunate that I didn't get into this stock until the damage was done, but doesn't mean it is without risk.
@bisbis: 35% in one stock, unless you're on the board or have unusually good information, is just not wise. In the long run the averages will kill you. Many studies have shown that more than 10 stocks is too much to dutifully follow and less than 7 is insufficient diversification.
Now I violate those norms as I have about 45 names in my portfolio. But I'm also many years older than you and dealing with a portfolio orders of magnitude larger than yours. In any case, 35% in one stock tells me you are not putting enough effort in due diligence to find another high conviction stock.
A strong dollar, on balance, is better for US stocks than not. Yes, it means weak sales/earnings abroad, but in and of itself it indicates a strong US economy relative to the world. Strong or solid US economy = strong or stable US stock market. Don't let the strong dollar tail wag the strong US economy dog.
Like I said, I've yet to lose a cent on NQ. I don't care one bit if you don't believe me, you moron! BTW, why is it OK for you to order others to not comment on your trades or positions yet that is all you do to others. Joe Williams, you are one sick puppy.
I'm on the west coast, so it's not 11pm, its 8 pm and I'm working on a project while turning to this board for entertainment value now and then. You have a serious fetish or fixation with NQ Joe Williams. You need counseling.