Yes, I totally agree with you. However Bush considered himself a conservative right but he was actually a progressive in disguise. Cox, by getting rid of the uptick rule gave the shorts the tool they needed to bring down the market, as they did. But that has to do with the market.
CPST has an internal issue that needs to be addressed, being an ineffective CEO. If a CEO can not make his (and ours) company money, he needs to be replaced. How many BOD replace CEO's if there performance is poor...., the good BOD's do. Bad BOD eventually will be replaced by an activist group once the get the backing from the institutional stock holders. I think we will see this sometime in the next year.
That may on the low side falcon. If you look at what CVS will do starting in October, we should benefit a lot from that and see those gains in November with the October numbers. Value for RAD on todays valuation vs. peer group is $12.50, we have a lot more of a move up with that than down. If you look at price to sales, RAD's pps vs its peer group would be over $18 today. Once wallstreet sees that RAD truly turned the corner, we will see more institutional activity and should see a really good move on the upside. As long as RAD continues to achieve its goals, value in its shares will move up. If they can get their debt down further, this too will strengthen them and add shareholder value. This CEO so far has done a great job restoring this company IMHO.
Yes, we get it almighty one you know all. It must be nice kissing yourself at night in your mothers basement. Just remember any idiot can be right once in a while if they keep saying the same thing year over year.
You are right. If they lose on the product they sold, they just sell stock to make it up. Must be a progressive Democrat running this company. He is good at spreading our wealth..., especially his way.
I think my main point is with lawyers who want stockholders to join the law suit that in the end will cost the very same shareholders as owners. Ironic isn't it?
Actually, if I read the recent dividend schedule (and admit I could be wrong and if anyone who wants to point this out please do so) correctly they have reduced the increase from .00025 to .0001 per month. Check it out and let me know if you see the same.
What! So if this is true then why only go after the shareholders? Did the Shareholders violate the law?
My friend you are mistaken Corporations are a business that has people who work for it. Shareholders are the owners of the Corporation if it is a public company. The workers in the Corporations can also be owners if they hold stock in the company as many do. However, it is a person and not the entity that makes a decision and if the entity (Corporation) pays the person to make the decision and that person makes any illegal decision, it should fall to the person and not the entity. The entity is not human but made up of many owners who are human. If an individual hire makes a decision that violates the law, then the individual should be held responsible. You can no hold an entity responsible since the entity is incapable of making a decision, only a human can do this. However in todays world of suing lawyers look for deep pockets for money. Most of this activity is a catch 22 as the very same people (Shareholders) lawyers want to represent are the same ones that will pay to settle only to receive money they paid out in the first place. It is weird but it is reality. The only ones that benefit is the law firm suing. So if the settlement is 900K and the law firm gets 300K for representing shareholders, shareholders lose 300K in the end and that is just goofy. It is like three handed Monty or don't look at the left hand taking money out of your pocket, pay attention to the right hand.
What my main point is, PEOPLE who make an illegal decision should be held responsible for their actions and not an entity that had nothing to do with the decision. Now if the entity itself had policy to deceive then those lawyers who wrote the language to hide the facts should be the ones to be prosecuted. In the end it is not the "Corporation" it is a human. But no money in that.
"............Great Times Ahead!" When DJ resigns or gets fired. I agree. As a long don't be a Pumper Puppet for the current non producing management. Take hold of your investment and push for change, that will lead to great time ahead instead of where we are today and have been for a couple of years now. The Time is now! Change is needed to advance shareholder value.
Well after FBC announced the investigation the Lawyers gathered like wolves, only to cost the company and us more money in legal costs for something every bank is going through. The government needs money and the banks are their piggy bank right now. No person or persons are brought up on charges although it took a person(s) to make the problem in the first place, not to mention the government policies of the 1990's that started the whole thing.
But it is all about the money and not about justice and that is where we are today. We all know who benefits from this and that is the Lawyers at the cost of share holders. By making a bank settle and payout from shareholders ownership in the bank and taking a huge cut for themselves giving the rest back to shareholders, makes no sense to me.
If anything should be investigated it is the legal system itself in the U.S. that is involved in writing regulations forcing banks (not to mention other industries themselves) to do something they warned the regulators would happen if they were forced to comply and then sue the banks for following the laws the lawyers wrote in the first place. What really needs to change is the stronghold the legal system has on benefiting from things they cause in the first place. Now it may not be the same Lawyers writing the regulation but it still only benefits that industry in the end and we all know Lawyers like to take care of their own at the publics cost. If anything at all needs to change in this area maybe we can start with reducing the amount lawyers can receive from the settlement to no more than 10% and if they lose a court case they pay ALL the cost of the party they sued. All this is just my humble opinion of course but in the end one has to understand something is wrong and more companies should go to court than settle, bring out the facts so the public knows the details.
If people are at fault, prosecute them and not the business. Oh, that's right, there's no money in that.
Well I see some real short term low hanging fruit for VVTV in two areas right now.
1) Lower the return rate
2) 24/7 programing
Because VVTV is so small compared to their peers, they have the most opportunity, on a percentage bases to grow faster..., this is the low hanging fruit.
Now one thing that I do not see any posts on is the NY connection. By setting up an office in NY, will they finally break into that market? If so then getting to 1.3, 2 or even 3B is a strong possibility. NY is the largest market. Also eventually getting more international sales would push them further. But first things first lets see MB present an outline of his plan for the next three to five years, so we can measure his performance. He at least owes us that.
If they would fill some of that backlog in addition 4 to 5 month lead time on materials is totally unacceptable. There is a little thing called "Just in time". Sounds like CPST is in the stone age as to its manufacturing process if it's suppliers need4 to 5 months lol.
stern, I agree that DJ did a great job when he took over. However, this really hasn't shown up in the pps long term from his start. Also he had the skill set at the start, however he is now at a point he is over his head or skill level, to move the company to the next level, profitability. That happens to CEO's. He is just sticking around too long, but understandingly so, I would too getting paid his salary and stock options. IMHO he is just waiting to see what kind of severance he can get, then he will move on. Or he'll get forced out by a private equity activist. If I were him I would want to leave on my terms, not on those. The facts are the facts and it is all in the financials...., thus he knows he needs to step down for the good of the company and its shareholders. He knows this.