Even if you do nothing and just accept the deal, i have seen cases where after completion of the deal and payout to shareholders, subsequent litigation on behalf of all shareholders results in the additional payment to them after the fact.
Not sure how the whole dissent thing works. It's one thing if you own a huge chunk like FA, plus they have already agreed to accept the deal. But this stock is otherwise held by mostly small investors. If you can state a cogent case, it seems like any company would consider throwing a little more money your way when so few shares would be involved just to avoid the cost of further litigation. Fairness opinions are like… well you know…. everybody has one and anybody can come up w/a competing one w/ a little work that you have probably already done--and yours could be just as good as someone hired by the company to render one. Most companies just figure investors won't purse the hassle of it, but they likewise probably don't want the hassle and costs of defensing the offer themselves. just my random thoughts.
The offer is really over 17% less than that if you subtract the cash on the Balance Sheet. The offer is actually less than $17 million net of cash held by the company. Suspect it was a number arrived at to satisfy FA's attempt to get out of a huge illiquid position they otherwise would be unable to exit w/o significant difficulty---a number that would cause them to agree and not pursue the issue further. But I would be surprised if litigation on behalf of all shareholders and/or a competing cash bid didn't get you another $1 per share plus or minus a bit, BWDIK. The acquirer is getting a monopoly position in a very attractive Florida location on the cheap. Otherwise you could probably hold your shares back in dissent and try to get a better offer outside of the formal proposal by the acquirer depending on which jurisdictional laws the acquisition falls under.
Have to wonder if Steris (Ticker STE) will step in w/ a better bid? VIFL is very small, but would give them a nice footprint in Florida and an easy tuck-in w/their current gamma irradiation business.
ever since the last earnings report. A constant purge taking place to keep it in single digits near the recent low for an entire month of trading. Ugggh. Hope they just turnover the entire float and start w/a new investor base.
think it was a bit of a random walk. would have been more convincing if it held above $10, but quickly retraced from that level and faded quickly into the close. nervous trading both ways ahead of year-end, I would not red too much into it. at least it went up though.
$8-$8.50 would fill that gap a lot of folks have been looking at. Plus the new CEO just got options on 100,000 shares exercisable at $9.91 per share, unless you figure he doesn't plan to make money on that position. But w/at least one large order slipping to the back half of the fiscal year and the upfront comment about fiscal 2014 being back-end loaded, that may serve as a bit of a caution or warning on the upcoming fiscal second quarter ending Dec. 31. Decent long term play but probably no big hurry.
threw in the towel. it's smells like something much more than a pennies per share disappointment in quarterly earnings w/the executive retirements surrounding the results.
"may remain weak", like "could be soft" is code speak. JMO, but I have seen enough of these to know it is a clear warning on 4Q, and a CYA by the CEO. That way no investor can come back and say something potentially negatively impactful on earnings was withheld. The share price action today I think leads one to the same conclusion. It's only near term stuff, but they would not go out of the way to put it in a release unless they thought it was potentially significant for all shareholders to be warned ahead of the results.There is always the danger of trying to rationalize a way a clear signal when you are long a stock. I have done it myself--to the detriment of my bank account. Wall St. always shoots first and asks questions later, Another way of saying they are risk averse, ie. when pointed to the risk.
the next positive news could come w/ the fiscal 3Q EPS report in early-mid May. They clearly downplayed the second fiscal quarter coming up ending in December 2013, citing slippage in a big order into the back half of the fiscal year. Going to need a lot of patience now, but it could pay off in mid-to-late 2014. It's definitely a risk to go sub $10 very soon. Institutions are still exiting IMO. It's broke below the key $100 million market cap barometer, and soon the $10 stock price level that some of them look for. You just can't have that kind of quarter-to-quarter variability in earnings and not take a hit. The new CFO will need to address/mitigate that issue. It's probably too volatile a stock for most individual investors.
about 1.2 million shares traded since the disappointing earnings release. Guessing you are a little over half way through the purge w/maybe one -quarter to one-third of the float likely to exit and find a new home. Should be good demand for the shares at $8-$9, where it could build a nice base for a run later next year.
If they can get through the current stretch of uncertainty, if you can look past the valley, yes--the table may be set for better times and decent operating leverage. That's a big "if", but there is risk in any equity investment as we all know. If i were running a company subject to all this agita at 70 years old, I'd rather be on the golf course. I'll give him credit for hanging in, or maybe more aptly, hanging on. I hope it works out as they still have a chance at a turnaround. You just hate to be reliant on the government for anything.
Such uncertainty may argue for another round of cost cuts and layoffs to get through, but at some point you just cannot cut anymore and remain anything other than a shell of a company in a "zombie state". Sequestration is here to stay for the long term.
Actually, the 3Q earnings (cash flow) are ok. But they did give a qualitative earnings warning for 4Q. They remain right on the edge. They need to be sold to another company who can weather the government spending uncertainty and delays, and carry losses for some period of time w/o any danger of being put in jeopardy, JMO.
So this issue is small potatoes. The big concern is that Sequestration is not budging and will likely be in effect for several more years. You can hope re: work at Los Alamos, but the new normal is going to be quarterly revenues at a run rate in the high Teens lows 20s ( the latter if we get lucky). The co. seems sized to survive but not necessarily thrive in that environment. Gatr's view of waiting 3-5 years for the big payoff is the right perspective i believe.
I think gatr made a simple math error the net effect of the combined income tax expenses and reversals is a hit of -$1.6 million which also foots to the reduction in retained earnings. (Instead of adding $3.3 million as the last figure in his string of numbers, he should have subtracted it as it was a reversal of or prior taxes paid).
So the tax revision here is a minor irritation rather than a big deal.It just goes to show most companies should simply refrain from acquisitions. 3 out of 4 end of being bad deals, are dilutive, result in complicated tax restatements, and are simply an excuse for not being smart enough to grow your own business organically. Just keep your head down, do the basic blocking and tackling of focusing on internal growth and you will be fine.To wit as an example---any of the several acquisitions this company has done. The company has been little more than a sandbox for the CEO for a very long time and he has made a mess of it.
Like I said before, as disclosed in the NT 10Q filing, the preliminary 3Q results look ok to me as far as cash flow is concerned and that's mainly what I personally care about.