I thought I'd add my 5c worth here regarding comments made about GENC and whether or not it's worth investing a few dollars in this company.
Yes, maybe EJ Eliot is an a---hole, etc.., etc... BUT, IMO, one is in the stock market business to make a return on one's investment, irrespective of the character/personality of directors et al.
And there are only really two ways to make money out of a share, viz. Capital Gain and Dividend. Unfortunately in GENC's case there's no dividend.
However, there may be Capital Gain. And here one needs to have a look at its Financials to see if there is anything supporting a reason for a share price increase ....
In its latest Quarterly (from Yahoo Finance) we see a fairly dramatic rise of its Gross, Top Line Revenue as well as concomitant rise in its Bottom Line. So the company is "sucking in" more money and making more profit. Is this being translated into a share price improvement ?
According to its chart one sees an upward trend in its price over the last few months ....
So if there's a rise in price and this is supported by "financial evidence" then maybe it's worth keeping an eye on GENC.
And, personally, I wouldn't get too hung up on whether or not Asset/share is greater or less than share price. A shareholder gets no real benefit from that calculation unless the company gets liquidated and those "Assets" realise their stated book value, and that value gets distributed to existing shareholders. But there again how often does one hang around until a company gets liquidated ?
At the end of the day it's really more about whether a company makes an ongoing and increasing bottom line profit which should, generally speaking, be reflected in an increasing share price.
I know this is not an ideal comparison, but Berkshire Hathaway has NEVER paid a dividend. It has a very sharp and competent CEO who states he can make more for his shareholders than the ~3%, ~4% or ~5% he would pay them in a dividend.
I guess, as an added benefit, he's a much nicer guy that Mr. Eliot !! |
