I may be mistaken (as I have never heard of neither these co.'s nor tickers before), but you seem to be confusing FRO (as you wrote in your previous message, which I responded to initially) and FOR (as you wrote in the one which I am replying to now)?
As for FRO, the one I (briefly) looked at, its stock price seemed to take quite the dive after 2011, when the co. started putting out negative numbers, as the stock fell 90 % within 2 years.
I would have similar hesitation in regards to FOR, though, after having looked at it similarly briefly. Also, its stock price seems to have moved up a little too quickly in my eyes. As you said: "it seems that the "Market" couldn't care less about "Losses" that occurred over 7 years ago seeing as FOR's stock price TRIPLED over the last 13 months." As an investor, I would find that lack of concern concerning, as it is likely reflected in the price that I would pay – it sure looks that way to me. ("Be fearful when others are greedy", and all that... I'd rather invest when Mr. Market couldn't care less about the profits!)
But revenue has no doubt increased handsomely, that's for sure (again, a little too handsomely for my taste, though – let's see if it lasts!) – if they can keep it up, and remain profitable everything will obviously be fine & dandy. |
