The pros missed it because the fuel cell stocks are too small. If you're managing billions of dollars, you screen out the small companies. All the these companies are tiny by market cap. But this is why individual investors can outperform the fund managers.
I lost any bit of respect I had for Musk when he said that. He's filthy rich and yet he's more concerned about profit than what's best for society.
They'll be announcing details and pricing for their hydrogen cars at the LA auto show tomorrow. A few other automakers will be displaying HY cars there tomorrow. Should be good.
This may be a shock for you to hear, but Pandora is NOT a social media stock. Yes, I know everyone labels it as such. But this is part of the reason people misunderstand the stock.
You're wrong. And repeating the same flawed argument over and over doesn't make it right. Competition is not new... it has been ferocious for years. Yet Pandora has continued taking market share.
If you're short, you need to ask yourself what is different now that wasn't the case six months, a year, two years ago. I am long but willing to hear a good bear argument and would sell my position if there were one. But when I hear the same flawed argument being repeated over and over by shorts, I know there is more upside.
No one 'cept Icahn knows. Most of the longs don't care because it's irrelevant. Mainly, it's shorts who seem to keep talking about this because they need an 'explanation' for the rise.
It's incredible how easy mobs of people are misled. So many articles touting twitter as evidence. On the one hand, it's nice to be right. But on the other hand, it's a bit scary to see how the public can be driven to madness and delusion.
I didn't say you specifically claimed twitter was proof of anything. But for a month, this board has been rife with posters saying to look at twitter for proof of pandora's demise. Those are the 'you guys' I'm referring to.
Of course I didn't take it seriously. As far as I can tell, I was the only one saying twitter was a completely flawed indicator.
6.6%?? That's it? What happened to all you guys claiming twitter indicated everyone in the universe was moving to Itunes radio?
Internationally, iOS has only 14% market share and that is shrinking. How are you supposed to tap the other 86%? Pandora is still only in 3 countries.
Shows he's scared of the hydrogen cars coming to market. The technology is here... it's a matter of investing into the infrastructure. Hydrogen cars can be common in about five years. Musk wants to push that out 15 - 20 years.
I surveyed twitter and find about 60% in favor of iTunes over Pandora. But did you read what I posted? My whole point is that tweets are not indicative of what actual market share will be.
Your use of twitter is severely flawed. You do realize Spotify has been around for years, yes? So according to you, 90% of tweets favor Spotify over Pandora. Yet Pandora has outgrown Spotify. Consequently, don't you think your strategy of using Twitter might be flawed?
Spotify is in 23 countries and has 20 mill users. Pandora is in 3 countries and has over 70 mill active users. According to your tweet strategy, there should be 9 to 1 ratio in favor of Spotify. Do you not see the problem?
BTW, I know exactly why this is happening. Pandora is a greatly misunderstood company by the general public. Retail investors place themselves at great risk by listening to the myopic articles being posted around the web now.
Would you drive a car by looking out the back window? Turn your head and look to the front. The future is what counts, not the past.
A ton of the sirius bulls were pandora bears a year or so ago. Many of them see the two as competing services particularly in the car. I don't hear from them nearly as much now, but a year ago they were constantly flooding message boards with negative pandora messages.