there are a lot of posts on this thread that are correct IMO, they are not in the business nor do they have the funds to buy back stock, They sell stock to create funds to make new loans and that is the business they are in. To sell part of the company to buy back stock accomplishes very little and in my mind is a negative. All profits and more are paid out as distributions so there is no net income to the stock, In fact that is why NAV has been dropping they arent making enough to pay distributions other wise it would be increasing Unlike other stocks that dont pay out all income that have more cash to do business this is more like a CD or high yield bond. Once you realize that then the best you can hope for is NAV for a stock price as you are recieveing all the income from distributions There is no funds to buy back stock except to sell off assets and reduce size of company but that model doesnt work for the executives because there salaries are geared to get commissions from doing new and more loans not calling in loans or selling them to buy back stock. This is rhetoric to appease or try to boost stock price not something that will happen to any degree or at all. It tells me those that state this dont really understand how BDCs work and the model of this company. But once you understand that you probably would sell this and move on
Sentiment: Strong Sell
it is a BDC it pays out all its earnings what is it going to do sell stock so they can buy stock back?? Where will it get the money? call in loans. stop being a BDC, serious answer would be appreciated so you can show me or educate me that you know how this company is run.
way to turn what I said, read it again, the problem is not their making loans it is not keeping their word where are the spinoffs and why the rhetoric about buybacks on the stock that is antithema to their business model because then they cant do the loans. It is a statement that is not believable by anyone that knows how this company is run. If you believe that you are stupid. They are in the business of making high risk business loans, semi loan sharking, they pay out all profits as distributions so the only way they can make new loans is 1) have loan prinicile paid back and 2) sell stock not buy it back. Now since the incentive is to get paid commissions as it was in the subprime mortgage business they will sell stock not buy it back. Be that good or bad is your decision but sooner or later that will stop since you cant dilute forever. NAV has dropped for over a year now steadily and will continue to do so YOU have a depreciating high risk bond. I got out at 11.50 and very thankful that I did and that I figured out what and how this company operates, I am really surprised the spin offs have taken so long and may not happen but the stock buyback is pure rhetoric to appease stockhoders with little chance of ever happening. I dont even know why you would want it to if you understand this business.
they sure need to do something as a lot of them are getting eaten up in this pharma binge.
if OPK had just 43m shares it too would be $170 pps while I believe OPK will appreciate greatly you are not making a good comparison based on anything comparable.
no i dont think so DEPO s BOD is convinced not to do so and it would take more money than TW is willing to pay, he will go elsewhere if this cant be taken to a vote in next 4 months. He will not sit still that long or spend that much effort, his hostile offer is hitting a brick wall. It is sad for the depo stockholders as this would have made them a lot of money both short and long term. Even if they grow as rapidly as HZNP they do not have the tax savings or synergies they would have had partnering with us.
I understand but they recieve a salary to work on behalf of stockholder also and I am talking about executives. NO I didnt work free but as a doctor I didnt do a kidney operation on you when you didnt have anything wrong either although I am sure some do and that is why I am complaining about management here, they have been caught in my untruths. Where are those spinoffs promised many many months ago and then an exec saying they were considering buying back stock (which is a load of #$%$ just as working for free is a load of #$%$) Their whole company and salaries are based on selling stock not buying it back. It is like a bank saying we are not going to open more accounts or take any deposits, in fact we are goiing to stop doing business as our stock price is too low. They will continue to sell stock and do more deals until they no longer can either because there are no more loans to make, they cant sell anymore stock or they go broke but buy back is a dream of the fool and for them to even say it shows their disrespect for the stockholder as a fool.
yes that is true also, and you have definitely made me decide the deal will take a year or so to be accomplised but the initial poster is absolutely using voodoo for his analysis. The breakup fees are substantial for both parties but the fact there is a breakup fee for AET even if the DOJ denies the merger really surprised me. The numbers above you quote are for both parites as well. IN fact the one billion is the least penalty. If anyone on either BOD publicly comes out against merger severe penalties arise. it is an interesting read
they keep doing deals because that is where the management fees come from, they havent done the spinoffs and it has been months and pumping. They say they are considering buybacks but that is only for fools to believe.
well ifit doesnt happen then HUM will be $7 more per share in cash and AET $3 less per share in cash as that is what Aet will have to pay HUM if the deal is not consumated regardless of the reason.except the failure of HUM stockholders to approve.
It will be announced as soon as the proxy document they sent to the SEC is approved which should be after the first of august. There have been a lot of good estimates layed out to time frames on when things happen check out iceman's dates and they should be pretty close to that IMO. The govt approval process is moving fairly rapidly on this one they could be a lot slower. but there are no antitrust problems here.so moving rapidly as the govt can move.
there are option strategies that are better than owning stocks but they are complicated and what peso says is true for most traders. I would study them but forget them until you understand spreads, deep in the money option premium decay and how to make it work for you instead of against you. etc.
yes I really dont know how that figure can be accurate, but regardless of how you figure float if is the stock that is available for sale and that would include all stock that is not restricted, yeck you have been here for 8 yrs i would say you are floating less than some directors. It is a figure I look at but daily volume averages is as key IMO then you really know how much is being traded each day and available over a week or two and how easy it is to liquidate a position if it is large.