That hate in your heart gives you joy? You've already paid too high a price, sir, if flame warring is all you have left. Riddle me this...how does "PIP quadrupling" in any way equal "teebrane's self destruction"? Riddle #2 - if "posting too much on Yahoo is for self immolating bozos", ain't you and I the proverbial pot calling the kettle?
Oops...phone slipped and accidentally posted. "k" should read "the most sure-fire 2016 double in the current market". If you don't believe me, keep an eye on the options if you don't want to take state supreme court rulings at face value. I'm not going to sell my PIP for less than I'm going to get in a distribution, drod - no matter how much you or the actual despicable people molesting the price want that to happen. The fact that "how much" can be objectively measured by "harassing post counts" should give you bozos pause. It didn't work. It will never work. What's worse, your lord and master Ronno could be perp-walked and/or sued for his role in this at any time.
As the ticks tock, the tics here certainly talk. True that 2.8M is about 1M more than the last SI we had, but until SI is real time (Demand it from Congress! And a pony!), we will be a bit in the dark about that figure's current actual value. Since the verdict upholding the award, there's been a lot of short--to-short patty-cake for purposes of price suppression. Certainly not 100%, but easily could be 50%. 736500 shares traded since the last SI into the close for the next SI. Another 294800 traded from then until now; Feb 9 is the last trade date for the current SI period, and report day for Jan 13-26 SI. At least some of that 2.8M trade today is a new long position. If the seller was long (Nantahala or Hudson Bay maybe?), they were probably scrounging for cash. Otherwise a short seller's Gandalf-ask/catcher's-mitt-cover-play horribly backfired when somebody else Balrogged it - if Balrog was short, Balrog is now long. If a long got longer, they may be over the 5% filing requirement. A vote here as to what people think happened would obviously break down along party lines, but won't re-write history. The value is obvious (if not monstrous), but the shorts are equally obviously going to be oblivious until someone forces them to cover. If someone is making their move now, shorty is in big trouble - the L2 has some bluff-volume near the action, but that pulls up to about $2.25-2.50 the minute someone with the means looks like they really want a higher price. Probably puts the handle on the cup about there, and then all PIP has to do is get paid, and give the money to themselves-as-shareholders. Any remaining shorts are on the hook for their per-share of the distribution, and then the circus comes to town.
Not fun for me, drod, watching you pump SIGA, so sure that the PIP case was vapor, then lose a bunch of money, get stopped out, go bitter on Rose, post on the SIGA board like you were to-the-Pariah-Manor-born, but not ever have the faintest clue that it was your certainty that the PIP case was vapor that did you in. Not Rose. Not even Perelman. YOU. And then you didn't ever have the 4-balls it would have taken to buy PIP in the buck-n-change zone to make your money back. Nope...you're just bitter and sad. You think the current PIP price proves your point? Pffft. It today proves my point that short morons bumble about here recklessly, arrogantly, foolishly. Soon, it will prove another point, one that markets love reproving - "pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered". The shorts here now are the hogs. The longs become hogs only when the price is actually higher than a fair financial valuation justifies, and yet they don't sell. Basic math says we are less than 50% of that value. You want to drag in a bunch of irrelevant stuff about pipeline, etc? Go ahead - PIP has richly earned some of the critiques along those lines. But cash is cash. Selling $2 bills for $1 is stupid, but team-evil-moron-thumb-on-the-scale is convinced that they can trade their way out of a horrifyingly-bludgeoned-by-Justice short bet by faith in the Ginsu-magic of one Ronald O Perelman. Tell me Drod...did trusting Perelman to do right by other holders of SIGAQ actually work for you? Has trusting Perelman ever worked? For anyone? Or has he lived his life making bitter used people like you everywhere he goes? I think you know the answer to that better than most.
This word "speechless"...I don't think it means what you think it means. They fact that you can't resist the urge to bash, however, says plenty. Now go over to your mom, and say "Hi mom. I harass random strangers on the internet. Does that make you proud of me?"
The bashers are just plain dumb. Anyone with a plugged nickel's worth of sense should know by now that I mostly counter-punch. Their game isn't profitable unless their painting/bashing tag-team makes longs lose confidence, and they plainly hate the fact that I trumpet "THIS is their strategy...don't be deceived by it - buy the cover they'd hoped for in overly greedy bids and sell into their fears - only dump into their abject terror, for their abject terror comes like a righteous thief in the night to their portfolios of evil! Amen!". For some reason that I certainly can't fathom, they find this pompous ;)-. When they make their main point "that butthead teebrane is a butthead" instead of hard facts as to why PIP, winner of $205M and counting, is over-priced at $111M, they are making my case for me - that they are dreadful sore loser-bullies with more money than they deserve, and they are soon to have less money - even today, one of their number lost their nerve, and had to have the fight maintained by another from team-crooked-bad-guy (as I predict will be revealed as a fact in the SI report of Feb 24, when the SI doesn't budge much - we've seen this darkpool movie before).
What's worse, I'd have a case of sour grapes if it wasn't for the fact that MY BET WAS CORRECT and YOU JUST WANT TO WHINE ABOUT ERIC ROSE'S SALARY. Move on already, drod. If you bet on a winner that was all over except for the short covering explosion that was delayed because shorty still had money to lose in a futile, last ditch attempt to save some face, would you be doing any different than me? (probably, because you a bad at this "investing" thing...) Whatever.
Ah, the rest of team-harrass-me, putting words in my mouth to prove a strawman....I never said $20 - did say $8 when other facts were on the ground (2011 - SIGA had been near $16, PIP got "half" is the gist of what you won't bother to understand anyway), but you guys are so full of it, I won't be too surprised if you get squeezed up way past what's fair now - doubt it's $8, but short squeezes are a funny thing. I will laugh last, and your mom is still ashamed of you for harassing strangers on the internet.
And there you go again supposing that anyone will assume you are being honest...basher, please. Fact: 1.88M shares worth of you and/or your buddies' shorts are outstanding. Opinion-so-close-to-obvious-it-may-as-well-be-a-fact: Your team of lawbreakers really don't want to be short when PIP sets an ex-date on paying out a majority of the damages as a distribution, so you fight the tape now to foment investor fatigue, even though that's a patently illegal tactic. Tic-tock on your defiance of a now-certain minimum intrinsic value - patty-cake with your buddies only works if it reduces team-long's confidence. And don't look now, but that's an inverse head-n-shoulders on the chart. Fight the tape, ape. Pretty please. And then you can join that KBIO shorter who E-trade hit with a $100K debt.
Nah - JackHat's just a short who thinks he can push my buttons (and thinks his perception of me as arrogant entitles this behavior) - note how worked up he gets when I mention that I could easily prove his criminal intent with no more than his dated Yahoo posts and his trade history. Check the percentage of his posts that include "teebrane" or some derivative in the title or text of a PIP board post - he's been harassing me since 2011, and it's usually BS taunts in support of a bid he's managed to pin. If he's a friend of Ron, Ron has pretty low standards. Smokes is the gold standard drivel guy in these parts.
Bullies like you need to be stood up to. You are a textbook short and distort felon, JackHat. It is one thing to say "here is why I don't think a random stranger should buy this stock" or "I am short XYZ because A, B, C". It is quite another to harass someone online, by name, thousands of times because you have some fantasy that this behavior, in conjunction with an illegal trading scheme with intent made obvious by the posts, will cause the object of your harassment to dump shares. I very much hope this "official" you send your "I'm rubber you're glue montage" to follows up on your info. Taken in context, you'll be fined or taken to jail. I have a very particular set of skills, and a better memory than you give me credit for. Please try me on this. Making you pay for your awfulness will be a joy no simple cap gain can ever surpass.
Pull ease. My typical post is bashing bashers, and making sure everyone knows just how many shares you phallusies owe. And my prediction that DSC would uphold Chancery came to pass. Do you really want to see if I'm right about how much harder it will be to cover more shares than less? I sure hope so, because people like you apparently need a cashectomy.
Selling with the intent of inducing others to sell is a crime. Every short commits this crime in their heart, but it only ever gets prosecuted (eg SAC) or otherwise punished (eg Icahn taking Ackman to the cleaners on HLF) when the short wrongdoer boasts or has their trades under SEC investigation for other reasons. There are few who are as boastful as you, JackHat. And usually when you boast, it is out of a fear that you won't find cover unless you do. In this stock, one can make about 20% per round trip buying on your "haha teebrane! Low price!" taunts. I'd tell you how I know, but that would be, um, boastful.
There's no such thing as a nice short, JackHat, and you are a living, steaming paragon of that assessment. If you want to contemplate committing securities crimes in a public forum, go right ahead - the market may take its time to punish you, but your punishment is assured, whether the SEC indicts you, or your broker sends you off to kickstarter to see if you can get your house back after the margin call. We won. If you want to owe us more shares, go right ahead...it will be a pleasure to see you try to buy a pot while we hold two aces on a 3-suited flop with aces on the turn and river. Most people in your position fold, though I'm sure we all SHOULD have been terrified of your mighty pocket kings - it rather showed on your face when you got no help from the flop. If you want to pay more to be SURE we're not bluffing, well, YTF would we do anything but raise now?
I didn't pull the trigger on KMI yet - that rally is premature IMO, but it could go parabolic/short-squeezey - if it does, I'll know I missed the boat. I mentioned it before as an example of "every stock with positive intrinsic value has a price worth buying" on that 11 or 12 buck day. Lots of those still out there.
Long story short, smokes got excited about Prescott selling almost 1M SIGAQ shares at a fairly nasty loss, and my bad reading of an old 13F made me give him the benefit of the doubt. Thanks for catching my error, fwabuster.
You have to look at Prescott, not SIGA. 13Fs supposedly have the whole portfolio, and are filed quarterly. Go to SEC Edgar, look up the latest SIGA-related filing, then click on "0001166152 (see all company filings)" instead of the SC 13G/A. But on closer look at that latest filing, you do have it right - item 5 is checked, meaning "If this statement is being filed to report the fact that as of the date hereof the Reporting Persons have ceased to be the beneficial owners of more than five percent of the class of securities, check the following". So the weird thing is: why wasn't SIGA in Prescott's 13F's for 2015? I read the reg a little more carefully - SIGAQ (i.e. delisting from NADAQ) had happened by the end of Q1 2015...that must have allowed Prescott to keep in off the 13F.