<What is it that you want? Transcripts of my phone conversations? A summary of my meeting with some DTN subscribers? I only have so much time...and a good short-seller doesn't show all his cards at once :)>
Bill, let's face it, you have nothing. Nada, zilch, zero. You don't have squat. I called your bluff and you couldn't produce. You have no basis to short DTLN. Don't even try to assert that you have some sort of inside information to base your prediction on. "A good short seller doesn't show all his cards at once." What a friggin' joke. Bill, your problem is that you have no cards to show. You have a Herb Greenberg 1-paragraph piece on DTLN, where he was the mouthpiece for some short sellers who were losing on their DTLN position. That is all. You should be ashamed of yourself.
<Yes, I know for a fact that there are no serious bids for the company>
And Bill, please tell us, how do you know this? Of course, you don't. You are blowing smoke, in true BillWexler fashion. You would be dangerous if you had one ounce of legitimate evidence of why DTLN is a short.
<The advertising revenue sucks and isn't growing. This is an important point. If DTLN's demos and subscriber base were that exciting, the opposite would be true. If you want to position DTLN as a "media" company, then explain how to profitably leverage their subscriber base.>
Oh Billy boy, it's time for you to get on the bus, because Mr. Reed is going to take you to school yet again.
Please explain to me how ad revenue is an important point. Please examine the latest 10-Q. Do you know what a 10-Q is??? Here ya go:
Subscriber revenues: Rose $3.6 million, from $25 million
Additional revs: Rose $150,000 from $1.6 million
Comm. revs: rose $200k from $2.5 million
Ad Revenues (your point of contention): declined $155k from 935k.
Total revenues: rose $3.4 million from $31.4 million
Now Bill, total revs are up $3.4 million, so can you please explain to me how a $150k decline in ad revenues is even relevant in this picture? Because it isn't. Please explain to me your theory that ad revenues declining $150,000 will take DTLN to single digits. You can't. Class dismissed.
Care to make another weak baseless statement about DTLN??? I'd respect you if you had one reason why this thing was a short, but you can't. Perhaps you should rename this thread "Hank's Profits of DOOM." Because Hank could actually give legitimate reasons why he was short the stock. You cannot. You are merely parroting what Greenberg said on TheStreet.com a few weeks ago. Once queried about your basis for shorting the stock, you are lost in the woods and you pull out some silly ad revenue decline of $150k, which pales in comparison to what total revenues did.
Rest assured I will continue to use your thread to make you look bad. Perhaps I need to look into shorting your precious COST. Oh, by the way, funny you should mention HEPH as another one of your short candidates. Just last week, a buddy of mine who runs a mutual fund in California told me he was investing $20 million in HEPH. I guess you know more than him too, huh?
Gary
P.S. Where in the hell did you go to school??? I cannot believe you could get a degree in accounting without understanding simple income statement concepts. |
