Recent

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

Delcath Systems, Inc. Message Board

ucited 48 posts  |  Last Activity: Jun 17, 2016 2:11 PM Member since: Jan 26, 2000
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Wow. That moronic pissant continues to post and it looks like he broke out a couple of more aliases since the last time that I visited. Just remember anything posted here (particularly this board, and yes, including by me) is worth exactly what you have paid for it. If someone could be less than worthless, it'd be that moronic pissant......

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • ucited by ucited Jun 11, 2016 1:51 PM Flag

    I just finished reading an article in Baron's about the fact that Michael Dell and his partners were sued, and in a ruling by a judge, lost millions as compensation for having underpaid when they bought the computer maker "Dell". The judge effectively ruled that they screwed shareholders by about 20-25% by offering a price lower than fair value. This type of stuff is going to become more common since these deals screw shareholders way too much. My takeaway from the article was (and I'm not a lawyer and can only surmise) that if you vote for the deal then you are precluded from participating and receiving any funds from a suit. T.Rowe Price had apparently voted for the Dell deal and could not receive any funds from the suit that was won.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    Logic

    by lifeisjustagameweplay May 26, 2016 10:21 PM
    ucited ucited Jun 2, 2016 5:32 PM Flag

    You should consider NVIV as your alternative investment.....or additional investment.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    Bird's the Word

    by ucited May 27, 2016 4:28 PM
    ucited ucited Jun 1, 2016 3:26 PM Flag

    Alright. Alright.....so maybe it's a slow glide upward....
    I see that supreme moronic pissant is still posting. Wow. Very few are so full of it as he is.......

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Although some of my largest gains have been made in Chinese companies such as NTES, SINA, CCIH, and SVA, I think that I am going to find it difficult in invest in China again if SVA is sold off at one of these ridiculously low bids. It would amount to pure theft.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • hehe.....as in soaring.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    Tomorrows press conference

    by prchar1 May 26, 2016 12:28 PM
    ucited ucited May 26, 2016 6:40 PM Flag

    I, previously, had become convinced that SVA would not accept either offer. However, this financial news release is written to be slanted toward the negative, which now leads me to believe that they are trying to take the SP down so that they can claim that the offer was attractive. The appearances are that they continue to throw everything but the kitchen sink into costs and expenses. They are performing theft...........

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 23, 2016 3:21 PM Flag

    You really are a sap. Delusional. You believe that you know something when you know nothing. Let me ask you, how much in international sales, that previously would have been SOFO's sales, are now assigned to the
    MediaMission and MSKK operations? Tell me how operational losses increased 400% in the first year after the acquisitions when nearly all of the revenue gains were from the acquisitions and were supposedly accretive? Go ahead lay it out for me........ya goof.

    Let me know when you want to discuss a real investment of some swamp land. I have the perfect parcel for you.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 23, 2016 12:24 PM Flag

    Well, first of all, I did correctly predict before you answered that you would be dumb enough to try to spin it by saying it was accretive but losses were due to other circumstances. Geez, what did I say about you being one of those suckers that are born every minute? As long as you believe your delusional line of B....S, I think I have some swamp land that you would be interested in. NOBODY else believes it, as judged by the lousy price performance.

    OPERATING LOSSES:
    FY 2013 was a LOSS of $638K
    FY 2014 was a LOSS of $3,082M
    FY 2015 was a LOSS of $4,092M

    So, YES, losses have ballooned. Kind of obvious. I do not wish for you to lose your money. You obviously can't avoid it.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 20, 2016 9:04 AM Flag

    All you have to do is look at the financials' profit & loss statement to see what you state is not true. Losses have ballooned since the acquisitions. This is just further confirmation that you're dumb as a box of rocks. Accretive! Ha! A sucker is indeed born every minute. Stop trying to invest on your own and save yourself some money.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 19, 2016 1:39 PM Flag

    No. It was not accretive. Unless you're going to be dumb enough to tell me that it was, but the losses were caused by something else.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 19, 2016 12:18 PM Flag

    I don't give a d am about your posts. Why would I bother flagging it? Apparently you're a conspiracy believer?

    Geez. So since you nicely provided a definition of years, you can see why it is not limited to 2. Right?

    No. Investors have not JUST noticed. They have fleeced people like you who do not understand that market value fluctuates. In other words, just because this had a higher value 20 days ago doesn't mean that it was the correct value. Is that too difficult for you to understand?

    So your defense of the debt load is that it was made to make an accretive acquisition? Is that your story? Was it accretive?

    Unbelievable how dumb some of you guys are. You should put your funds into the hands of a professional who understands the difference between a debit and a credit. Asset & Liabilities.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 19, 2016 11:49 AM Flag

    So the reason for the debt increase matters? It's only debt under certain circumstances even though it's debt? Is that what you're trying to tell me? REALLY?

    YOU used the term "for years". That generally means more than 2. Get it? Sheesh.

    Without looking, I would guess it is because of the acquisition of the Japanese operation?
    In any case, I just don't see how you possibly make any money in the market. Honestly!

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 19, 2016 9:43 AM Flag

    Dumbdaddy, do us all a favor and go back to school and see if you can improve upon your reading comprehension. Maybe then your commentary would have a modicum of value.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 18, 2016 12:28 PM Flag

    Furthermore, let me give you some specifics since you claim the Balance Sheet to be "stable" and "flat". The difference between current assets and currents liabilities has declined by $3.2M over the last 3 full years. Over that same period, long term debt increased by $4.6M. To sum it up, debt increases exceeded asset value increases by a total of $7.8M over 3 years. It has not gotten any better for 2016. Of course the darn market value should decrease. Get it??? Please give your funds to a professional to invest. Sheesh.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 18, 2016 12:16 PM Flag

    Have you looked at the current ratio and then the long term debt? Judging by your comments, it seems that you don't understand how the Balance Sheet applies to valuation.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    I'll call that progress.

    by rogergopack May 13, 2016 3:30 PM
    ucited ucited May 18, 2016 9:40 AM Flag

    Apparently you haven't looked at the Balance Sheet?

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    New Corp Presentation

    by biotrader922 May 18, 2016 8:05 AM
    ucited ucited May 18, 2016 8:59 AM Flag

    What's painfully evident is that moronic commentary knows no bounds on these message boards.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    EV-71

    by emarbach May 10, 2016 10:32 AM
    ucited ucited May 11, 2016 2:55 PM Flag

    Actually the simplistic notion is yours. Conspiracy. Always a conspiracy. Very, very simplistic.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

  • Reply to

    EV-71

    by emarbach May 10, 2016 10:32 AM
    ucited ucited May 11, 2016 2:07 PM Flag

    Really? Your theory is thoroughly illogical. If they are manipulating the price, it would have to end up with uncovered short positions. Readily available to be part of a lawsuit. I'd say that they would have to be pretty dumb to be doing that at this point.

    All of the above, just one man's opinion.

DCTH
0.2579-0.0037(-1.41%)Jun 24 3:58 PMEDT