1) The seeking alpha article provided false data regarding work compensation issues of BBSI. Comparing the last 10-Q data to the article data revealed malicious disinformation provided by the SA article author. The same author wrote article bashing Facebook when it was trading $18 in 2013
2) BBSI Net revenues was up 18% to $175M and Gross revenues up 18% to $920M. Net loss was $37M due to the ONE-TIME charge of $80M.
3) BBSI expects gross revenues for the next 12 month period to increase approximately 19%.
4) Based on ONE -TIME charge of $80M , the typical Wall Street games and manipulations are being played to screw the retail investors for 60% meltdown
5) BSI increased its both gross revenues and net revenues by 18%. Yet Wall Street manages to portray this as a disaster, as they always do.
6) Wall Street likes to screw as many people as they can to sell their shares in cheap so the Street can scoop up the cheap shares and resell them at a huge profit once they decide to reverse course and push the stock up to its average target price of $77.5. ( see yahoo)
7) BBSI has strong growth, almost 920M annual sales , increased number of clients by 180 in Q2 and has plenty of cash while trading at tiny $120M market cap.
8) BBSI has low float of 4M shares , has no debt , $920M annual sales and guided for continued growth during 2014 and 2015. All fundamentals point to the fact that 60% meltdown in a single day is unsatisfied.
* 72% of California clients already transferred to ACE program
* BBSI is increasing clients fees to accommodate for ACE program cost with little objection from clients
* Since the first $5M risk of worker comp is retained by BBSI , ACE surly will renew agreement on April 2015
* ACE implied to initiate a $80M charge for work comp as part of renewing terms for its agreement
* BBSI increased it market share by 1.25% in Q3
* BBSI added 180 more clients in Q3
* Analysts were happy with its performance during the Q3 call
1) Raly had loss of 22 cents versus analyst estimate of 35 cents loss. A much better results for Q4. But typical Wall Street games is being played to screw the retail investors and crashing the stock by 16%
2) RALY posted revenue of $22M in Q4, falling short of Street forecasts by 0.4M. Analysts expected $22.4M revenues. Does a tiny 0.4M miss justify additional 16% crash after RALY stock price already crashed 60% in Q3 ?
3) RALY forecast for 2015 was Total revenue in the range of $24.0 to $24.6M , or 22% to 25% growth over the prior year's fourth quarter. But the Street manages to portray this as a disaster, as they always do.
4) Wall Street likes to screw as many people as they can to sell their shares in cheap so the Street can scoop up the cheap shares and resell them at a huge profit once they decide to reverse course and push the stock up.
5) During Q4 RALY Total paid seats increased to over 240,000, a 21% increase over the total paid seats in the same period one year ago. But the Street manages to portray this as a disaster and crash the stock another 17%
6) RALY has strong growth, excellent prospects and plenty of cash while trading at all time lows now.
7) All fundamental metrics indicate a strong buy at tiny cap of $210M.
Stupid Investors don't know what they are doing!
This is From transcript of Q3. If you recall the infamous bashing SA article claimed that BBSI transferred only 32% of Ca clients to ACE.
"BBSI implemented this strategy as a means of continuing operations in California. Under California Senate Bill 863, BBSI will no longer have the ability to be a self-insured employer for workers compensation in California as of January 1, 2015. BBSI’s arrangement addresses the requirements of SB863 and allows us to remain in compliance in California. Today we have transferred coverage of approximately 72% of clients to the new program and we are on track to have most clients converted by mid-December.
With about 170 milion dollars in cash and equity and with only 7 million outstanding shares ,bbsi alone is worth $24 plus a share now
mm want it back to $45
In our opinion, the Company did not maintain, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) because material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting related to (i) the application of consolidation accounting to variable interest entities, (ii) the assessment of the completeness and accuracy of student loan data underlying estimates made in the valuation of the PEAKS Trust student loan receivables, (iii) controls over the estimation and review of contingent loss estimates related to the guarantee obligation under the 2009 RSA , and (iv) the timely identification and communication of information relevant to the private student loan programs to those members of management responsible for the Company’s financial reporting processes existed as of that date. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. The material weaknesses referred to above are described in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. We considered these material weaknesses in determining the nature, timing, and extent of audit tests applied in our audit of the December 31, 2013 consolidated financial statements, and our opinion regarding the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting does not affect our opinion on those consolidated financial statements. The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the ef
I am part of MM of this stock through a capital house in Ca . We will show you shorts soon that thorough analysis does not work in this ws environment. This thing will close the gape to $45 soon
PWC is leaving = BK soon for ESI
From Q3 transcript: BBSI increases clients fees to accommodate for ACE program costs
CEO: "We’ve been going through a process of making fee adjustments (increases) where its appropriate with our clients in the most recent quarters and that’s to accommodate the ACE transition and because of the value proposition that we are offering, we’ve not seen headwind.
In fact I don’t know that we’ve – there’s a few clients that you are going to loose and that’s okay. That means you are at least getting closer to the market and you are stressing it a little bit that that number is not accelerating, the number of clients that we loosing, and we are capturing that and then in fact we are not seeing headwinds as it relates to increasing pricing recently. Right now our target is to pick up another 20 to 30 basis points over the next year."
Google it. This is a good thing for EBAY shareholders?
Perma bears maniacs take a high growth , no debt company like LQDT and present it as a failed biz model !
Perma bears maniacs only exist to pray on the weak brain investors
The canceled agreement with Wal-mart is one out of multiple agreement with Wal-Mart. So canceling one agreement does not decrease revenues of ALL 12 agreements. This is the reason that LQDT believes that WMT cancellation will not change its guidance for 2015. See last 10-K from Nov 2013.
"In connection with our acquisition of Jacobs Trading, LLC ("Jacobs") on October 1, 2011, we assumed the rights and obligations under a Master Merchandise Salvage Contract (the "Wal-Mart Agreement"). We have the exclusive right to purchase certain consumer products from Wal-Mart that have been removed from the sales stream of its retail operations and we believe this agreement will be the source of portion of our revenue and GMV during its term, which expires on May 16, 2016 and thereafter continues on a month to month basis. In addition, we have other contracts / programs with Wal-Mart."
" For the year ended September 30, 2012, portion of our GMV was generated from Wal-Mart under multiple contracts / programs."
WMY terminated ONLY ONE contract out of 12 contracts. DO NOT say wrongly WMT terminated more than one contracts.
Where is the real reason for 25% crash. Can anybody explain that rationally? Please help.
Please read the 5 point objections of PriceWaterhouse to correctness of ESI 2013 financial statement in pafe F2 and F3 of the 10K
10K was not certified by PriceWaterhouse. Page F2 is only a letter from Pricewaterhouce to the board