Okay, since this stream has trickled on a bit. Geoff, you sure have got realistic cover! Well done. I even tracked your IP address and ended up in Prague. Was that you hacking my computer on Memorial Day and making a hang-up phone call using a female voice with American accent?
Meanwhile, I don't understand this:
<Buying as "a trade" i believe you are correct (not to be confused with buying as "an investment"!).
I believe buying now as "a trade" at this high single digit level is a relatively "safe" proposition given the current high %age of shorts and the high likelihood of a great Great SQUEEZE sometime in the not to distant future (well before the inevitable Chapter 11 filing next year or perhaps even this year).
So, to take your advice (but perhaps not as you intended it) I am seriously entertaining buying a block to add to my 1 share long position (#reply-13799707 :) at this level strictly as "a trade": to play the coming sequeezerama (at which point I would sell) and then (try to) re-short to ride along on the gravity of the decline back down to these single digital levels again, and then, of course, cover (buy back in to pay for the stock i borrowed and sold).
Maybe my blood is not very thick or maybe i'm just not greedy enough :), but i wouldn't want to be shorting (or holding a short) at this price. Risk/Reward ratio is just not there for me -- this is coversville and buy to trade out on a sequeezerville jump, IMHO, nothing more...
But then i guess if one were to see this as "an investment" (i.e. you believe in the demand and demographics for the product/service, and hence, the business case, as well as the management team, execution, partners, investors, et al) now would be the most opportune time to "back up the truck and load up". As the record here will show (#reply-11665407, #reply-11666902, #reply-11684987) I do not, and this, of course, is what makes "a market" for us all and the SI forum here such an interesting, informative (and entertaining!) place to be.>
Geoff, It seems really screwy to me. You say Globalstar has no net present value. You say it's on a one way trip to the breaker's yard and sooner rather than later. Meaning this year.
So, why on earth should any shorts cover? They will all just ride it to zero. There is no need for any covering, short squeezing etc. Any that want to cover can just buy as panic sets in amongst the finally fully demoralized shareholders who were totally psychologically defeated by the defeat at OK Corral on Memorial Day.
I read back through every one of your posts. I read the stuff which John Markoff [as if anyone would have a real name like that - or Goodfellow come to think of it] wrote. I was trying to see what I might have missed. I found stuff I had missed, but it affirmed by position rather than weakened it.
So, I'm puzzled.
The theory I come up with is that you don't believe your own story. I think you have been secretly and subconsciously persuaded that Globalstar is a huge winner. With the market value so low, you subconsciously know that there is enormous upside.
Not wanting to miss out, you have bought big heaps at $8.50, you lucky dog and I do admit that I am envious having paid nearly twice as much for my latest little Tonka-Truck full.
If G! gets some success over the next couple of months, you will get a good rise in price. Then you will figure that - hmmm, things are looking not TOO bad, so I'll just wait a bit more. You will keep waiting and there really WILL be a short squeeze, then you'll smugly step off the elevator at $200 a share.
If you seriously believe the stock has zero value, there is no reason at all to expect it to rise, other than normal statistical variation around a constantly declining price as the money and hope run out.
You buying would be similar to me shorting it at these prices, in the expectation that demoralisation will carry it lower at which price I would load up. Why on earth should I expect anyone to sell it to me cheaper than it is today? Why on earth should you expect anyone to pay more than it costs today?
You say a short squeeze will happen. A short squeeze can only happen if the price rises enough to panic them or force covering. Just as margined longs don't get sold out with a bit of market downturn, shorts won't be made to cover with a bit of market upturn, especially as the price keeps sliding.
I really don't get it.
Especially since you didn't quail in terror at the GGMDM and buy before the well-advertized allegedly market manipulative hypothetically price-increasing dehypothecating.
I think you are a closet long in short drag!
I think you are going to turn out to be the champion long with one of the low buy prices. I think you know it. If this theory really is wrong in your opinion, and you really do think that there will be a greater fool to fulfill your theory, then I have a chain letter I'd like to send you. Also, a really good business proposition, where you buy a franchise from me to sell franchises to other people who will pay you for the right to sell franchises to other people. Send me a cheque and you can get in on the ground floor! Do you want the chain letter or the franchise?
Puzzled, dehypothecated but hypothetically thinking...
Mqurice Winn [which is a really good and obviously real name]
PS: Sorry if this is confusing folks. It makes sense to me.
Oh, now I see the Barrons item - thanks for that. You are wildly enthusiastic in your comments that this dog dies!!! But you bought?! Oddly, the very things which Barrons comments on are what I think are strengths - big lead times, big cellphone adoption. Then they think management is great, but I've been concerned that that might actually be a weakness. Barrons does NOT seem to me to have a clue. |
