RE: OT: Hey, Kirk, it looks like your WCOM buy at 7 cents was a good move.
Yeah, but it will have to get back to high $2 a share for me to be even on all my shares as I bought some earlier when I thought they bottomed in 2001 and the financials back then made WCOM look like a real value stock. Still, it is encouraging.
Before the validity of every number they post was in question, I couldn't see how they would have problems meeting their debt obligations from cash flow as all they needed to do was stop all CAPEX and they'd have an extra $5B or so a year available.
An idea dawned on me that might have validity. How do you restore confidence in the market and yet not destroy the major banks? Well, you can give them huge fines and break their operations up to seperate investment banking from analysts. You don't want to bankrupt the major institutions that keep our US running so you also allow them to accumulate bankrupt WCOM shares that they are also major bondholders for. Then they slowly break up the company to pay off the bonds but do it in a way that retains some value for the shareholder and eventually the shares they hold go up in value and pay for the "confidence restoration." The losers are those that sold when the talking heads said "this stock will have little or no value after they pay off the bonds."
Maybe I am nuts, but if WCOM can break its last high of 27¢, then it could be off to the races.
Also, if every asset they held was only worth book value, what does that do for the NASDAQ valuation? Down another 95% perhaps?
I still kick myself for not buying Chrysler back in the 1980's.... I won't repeat this mistake.. a grands worth of WCOM now is not too much a risk... for over 5,000 shares.
I have never trusted talking heads... and the pat answer was that WCOM was worthless.. Well, I doubt MC would take over the helm just for a salary to pay off bondholders and I think others are getting the same idea.
Kirk |
