Personally, I like PGN better although 70% of PACD is owned by one investor which makes it a little less volatile. DO similarly has a big investor which decreases volatility.
If you want a safe bet, I would buy PACD, NADL, HERO, PGN and VTG. They won't all close up shop and eventually the survivors can go up 10x.
My guess is that the debt holders that converted their stakes to equity aren't dummies. They must see something you don't? Otherwise they would have forced liquidation and taken what they could.
Add NADL to that list. All four stocks, HERO, PGN, NADL, and VTG are very different. Everybody faults the Prospector acquisition, or the fleet age, or other missteps by management, but that isn't the real reason for the fall. All these companies are down more than 90% over the last year. The market has lumped these all together along with other smaller ones. But they won't all fail, and those that survive this downturn will be worth substantially more. My guess is that PGN is a survivor.
I think the recent drop is primarily on HERO bankruptcy causing fear, and the company leaving the small cap index. In other words, it is nothing that fundamentally changed with the company in the last few weeks. As I look at the bonds, they are not trading in that 40-45 cents on the dollar range.
But you are right that the market is rarely wrong, and has put HERO and VTG and PGN into the same basket. But I don't think they're all the same. I believe the market is wrong. We'll see and know better in a year. This will either be 0 or $10. Stay tuned.
Not sure if that is them buying the debt. They would need authorization from the board? Or is there still some outstanding authorized purchases?
Go skiing - So you are saying that you own shares but believe it will go bankrupt?!?!? You do realize that inconsistencies in "story telling" make everything you state irrelevant and uncredible for any intelligent investor? I'm putting you on ignore. Really wish you had something more intelligent to say about the stock (positive or negative) because you clearly do follow the stock and the company.
People extrapolate. If last q was 80 cents, this q 40, what's to say next q isn't 0 and the following q -40? Don't get me wrong, I'm long. But I do see why shorts are short and it could take a year or two to figure out.
There's always a point to estimates. If you're not thinking about how earnings are determined, where they've been, and where they're going, then how can you understand where the stock is going?
Knowing that earnings could be in the 40 cent range (which is down 50% from the last quarter) means that the stock could tank into (and or maybe up to a month after) earnings. So I will be a buyer on weakness post earnings. Seems logical? Shorts will see earnings falling q/o/q and use it as a reason to short it back to $1?
SG and A could be slightly higher because of prospector acquisition (potential lease termination fees or accounting fees or who knows what). Costs from this will fade, but my guess is $16m for SG&A. I figured there wouldn't be as much taxes because of all those write offs last year (although I realize they guided to a 30% effective tax rate). Interest could be a few million higher. And I thought the revenue would be slightly higher than this although I haven't done a detailed analysis.
I don't mean to be nit picky. You have been spot on, and I think this is probably fairly close to what will happen (as well as fairly close to what they guided to). I don't quite understand why the analysts are so far off?