Mon, Jan 26, 2015, 12:21 AM EST - U.S. Markets open in 9 hrs 9 mins


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Beazer Homes USA Inc. Message Board

simplestevelsu 13 posts  |  Last Activity: Jan 23, 2015 1:39 PM Member since: Sep 20, 2012
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Jan 23, 2015 1:39 PM Flag

    Then it's just one guy, who has a louder voice than most because he can use his power and influence via publications, who is taking advantage of his position just to make money. He's not doing any investors a service. He's simply trying to make money....and likely has made a bundle. I'm sure he has covered by now.

  • simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Jan 23, 2015 11:53 AM Flag

    What I would be very interested in knowing is if Pearson made a short bet at the time his article was published. What a great position to be in, being able to publish an article trashing a company whose stock price had recently quadrupled. Having the ability to throw a scare like that, surely there was money to be made. Seems like a scam to me. But I suppose it's legal as long as Pearson doesn't put any false truths into his article. But if he misstated the facts then he is liable.

  • The lawsuit says that Advaxis misrepresented the tumor response data for its ADXS-HPV compound, thereby overstating the effectiveness of the compound in shrinking tumors. The article also alleges that the Company has misled investors concerning the design of its planned Phase 3 trial. Anyone know what Advaxis said that was incorrect and/or misleading? Does their drug not work? TIA

  • Reply to


    by felicciardi Dec 17, 2014 6:03 PM
    simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Dec 18, 2014 9:27 AM Flag

    How can you be sure shorts will lose all the money they made? It's all how you time it. ALL stocks go up and down. When a stock becomes overpriced then you can make money. Some people seem to think that shorts are ALWAYS short but they're not. After a big drop in price the smart shorts cover and even buy some of the stock.

  • Reply to

    New report on ONVO

    by primoman37 Dec 16, 2014 4:11 PM
    simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Dec 17, 2014 1:59 PM Flag

    Just read the report. It makes a compelling argument that ONVO is nothing special and is not much more than a gamble.....

  • simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Dec 17, 2014 11:36 AM Flag

    This guy has an excellent question which none of you has been able to answer. Comparing real estate of Buffalo to New York or saying that the competition's prices don't matter or simply saying "Don't worry" are just #$%$ answers. The fact is competition does matter. If you're looking to buy a product and you see one company is selling it at a MUCH lower price, all else being equal, you're gonna buy the cheaper product. That's just common sense and if you want to argue with that then fine, go ahead and look like an idiot. It is quite possible that one of these products is different than the other, and that's the reason for the extreme price differential. And if that's the case, then go ahead and make that argument including your supporting evidence. Question is to all of you out. And if you DON'T care about having an answer to this question then all you are is a gambler.

  • Reply to

    New report on ONVO

    by primoman37 Dec 16, 2014 4:11 PM
    simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Dec 16, 2014 10:27 PM Flag

    What did White Diamond say? Looks like u have to sign up on their website to read the report.

  • Reply to

    Liver and kidney assays. what is the maximum rev?

    by sa134551 Dec 14, 2014 11:21 AM
    simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Dec 15, 2014 1:51 AM Flag

    Expenses are NOT negligible. First off this company probably has debt to begin with. They didn't get to this point without spending a pretty penny. And since they've had no revenue they've had to borrow. Second....whether they own or renting they must pay for their equipment, property and buildings. Plus they will need to expand their operations to allow expected growth. Then they will also need to hire more people to keep up with increased demand and exposure. They will likely have a lawyer or at least have one on their records. They will spend money on marketing. They will have to pay the gov't their share of taxes ie property and business profits. And of course to keep ahead of the competition they must continue to do research. They're not just going to sit on their hands. They will definitely have expenses.

  • Reply to

    Disney will now step-in to buy DWA. MARK THIS POST

    by storm77712 Nov 16, 2014 10:23 AM
    simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Nov 17, 2014 9:26 AM Flag

    Ridiculous. If Disney, or any company, wanted to buy DWA, then why didn't they do it when DWA stock price was $16 less than 2 years ago? If they didn't buy at $16 they certainly won't buy at $30.

  • simplestevelsu by simplestevelsu Nov 17, 2014 9:21 AM Flag

    Rich Greenfield, BTIG media & tech analyst, noted that DWA has shopped themselves all over the world and no one is interested at a price over $30. This makes me wonder about the rumored offers of $32 and $35 by Softbank and Hasbro. Were those really "offers" by those companies or were they the price that DWA wanted? I still think these rumors are fishy.

  • Reply to

    So why is info being leaked?

    by leapdaywilliam2012 Nov 15, 2014 12:03 AM
    simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Nov 15, 2014 11:27 AM Flag

    It is odd that this has happened two times in a month. The first time DWA CEO sold most of his stock at the peak price of $28, the day before the stock tanked. I wonder if he bought again down near the bottom and sold again this time near the top? I wonder if someone in the company aren't leaking on purpose to manipulate the stock to make some money. Very fishy to me. The SEC should look into it and uncover who is leaking. Is it the same person? Did this person, or their friends/family, buy and sell stock and make money?

  • Reply to

    Deal Done at $35 share.

    by storm77712 Nov 14, 2014 9:19 PM
    simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Nov 15, 2014 11:22 AM Flag

    What planet are you living on?

  • Reply to

    Why isn't this trading over $30?

    by buybackerer Nov 13, 2014 5:35 PM
    simplestevelsu simplestevelsu Nov 14, 2014 11:20 AM Flag

    Because it's just a rumor, that's why not over $30. AND, we DON'T know that Katzenberg turned down $32 from Softbank. But we do know he sold his shares at $28 a share. Why would he do that if they thought they were getting $32 a share? He wouldn't of course. Follow the money. Is he selling again? If so then bail. If he's buying then buy.

16.63-0.2000(-1.19%)Jan 23 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.