This is why some think the price is too low
From recent press: at least one analyst set a target price of $43.00 per share, or $7.00 above the offer price. Additionally, the Company's shares traded above the offer price as recently as December 8, 2015 when CVT shares sold for $37.25. Further, CVT recently announced positive financial results for fiscal year 2015. It reported revenue of $187.7 million, representing an increase of 32% year-over-year. Finally, in its forward looking statements, the Company reported that it expected revenue in the first quarter of 2016 to be in the range of $51- $51.5 million, representing growth of 24%- 25% year-over-year.
I'd like to see it raised to at least $40 per share in order to take most of the above into account.
Nearly 10% / Over 11 Million Shares Shorted... When / if a short squeeze comes along you will see INFN do what you expect it to. Until then, the shorts here are strong and smart and all crawling all over this stock like a bad case of ants... Several companies are shopping and buying other companies right now, and in some cases their offers are being rejected or contested. Infinera has the products that make streaming and eventually online VR a possibility so, at 2 billion, it would be a great purchase for any of the big cloud companies.
You know that CVent would be a great fit for any of the above and the current offer is way too low...
How are these related... Travel is often business related... When business men/women travel they are often attending a corporate event... The crossover and the connection is much bigger than many realize... This is why any of the above would be smart to add CVent to their offerings
Sentiment: Strong Buy
If it were ever to happen, who would be a likely buyer for a company like Infinera?
Just prior to 1pm EST? Shares purchased between $41.09 and $41.70... Seems like someone needed/wanted up to three million dollars worth of stock and were ready to pay up for it.
FYI, the secondary occurred in November of 2014. None of the proceeds were received by Zoe's Kitchen. It was setup as a way for insiders to take a little off the table (after their 6mo lockup period) without tanking the stock price. Folks who sold into that secondary were likely early funders of the company and a few insiders. They ended up getting $32 per share which was pretty good for the time but below market (in order to move millions of shares). This is a fairly common practice today but not the original intent of secondary offerings. Zoe's will only go after a true secondary if they are heading into a period of hyper growth or if they need the funds to continue growth. Regardless, it won't be a bad sign when/if it ever happens.
I copied a numbers from an Rueters article dated April 10, 2014 covering the Zoe's Kitchen IPO... I found the same number at TheStreet but it explains the difference: Proceeds from Zoe's IPO will be used to pay off the company's credit facility ($41 million as of the end of 2013), and support the company's expansion plans.
Did they raise only 40 million or was it more like: $87.5 million after its initial public offering of 5.83 million shares of common stock?
I think that many are seeing the writing on the wall at Chipotle and moving to a similar (but safer) class investment with better long term potential. The movement of big dollars (and big profits) from long term investors in Chipotle is not likely to end any time soon. Many saw 10x to 20x returns from their Chipotle investment and see similar potential here. What's funny is, both companies started at roughly the same time but Zoe's didn't really begin it's growth phase until the last couple of years. Perhaps some of the long term investors here could explain why Zoe's finally has the long term growth potential that they are looking for... And what changed to make that potential possible... Thanks for whatever you can share :)
Oops, sorry bout the typos...
Re: Now if an investor sold ten shares they could be 100 of Zoe's
Now if an investor sold ten shares they could buy over 100 of Zoe's
That was the last time I recall seeing them at this price
Now if an investor sold ten shares they could be 100 of Zoe's
Who am I talking about?
And why might a few investors be doing exactly that?
Volume was stagnant until 12:50
IMHO, the jump after that point looks like a bunch of fools piling on
Not saying that they are fools, just that's what it looks like when their newsletters recommend a stock
The conference call was only miserable because they aren't a tech company... Their microphones picked up a horrible broken static, the CEO is a terrible public speaker (more monotone than I am and that's pretty bad)... It was painful to listen too only because it was difficult to listen to him drone on as the microphone hissed and popped. The company has real prospects but they need to find a new spokes person (and better equipment). Most company let their CEO do it, but in this case they should hire someone. Maybe the CFO, maybe the head of sales... Anyone other than the man who spoke yesterday.
Food is good, lines are long but manageable, price is fair, this is a go to place for families looking for this type of food but wanting higher quality than fast food restaurants. The will be a winner in the long run but right now they have to prove themselves (just like many great companies did). Advertising isn't necessary as their locations often provide all the business they can handle. As they get bigger they'll probably do more advertising but please note: Almost no restaurants are advertising at this time. The current low fuel prices are the only excuse families need to eat out. An expensive advertising campaign isn't going to help.
rumors, whispers, speculation or leaked insider information.. you decide
all I know for sure is it is a nice trend to see; especially if you're long
regarding the V bottom question; it's starting to look more like a 'U'
anyone burying her is still buying close to lifetime lows
insiders have paid more over and over again
investors have paid more " " "
shorts have sold higher " " "
all need some news