Richard;
That doesn't seem reasonable. Remember the Swiss shorted the
stock, even while they were buying as a private placement. This is
called "shorting against the box". Many here on this thread
criticized JMAR for seeking private placement and it has been a
recurring theme on this thread.
However, you can't have it both ways, (that is if you want
to be a management critic.) If the Swiss shorted the shares they
bought to lock in a profit. Then when the restricted period ends
they have to deliver the stock to cover the short. If they SELL the
stock, then they are truly in an uncovered short position. This
doesn't make sense on a stock that is under $3. The stock has to be
coming from somewhere else. If it's coming from the Swiss they think
this stock is going to $0. I find it hard to believe that someone
who would short against the box would later turn the position into an
uncovered short.
Look at Market leadership. It has been confined to a relatively
small group of stocks. (And we know what relatives are like :-))
However it is true the small and micro cap have underperformed the
Market by a wide margin. If you check this Monday's IBD in the
Mututal fund section you see that VALUE fund managers have actually
been getting fired. To illustrate the point and at the same time
risk being flamed by others, consider the following taken from
nasdaq.com 5 minutes ago.
CO Shares EPS Total earned Cap
MSFT 5,046,918,000 1.27 $6,409,585,860.00 $428,672,597,625
IBM 920,651,000 7.08 $35,732,179,440.00 $179,066,619,500
Perhaps you see the same thing I see. MSFT, as good a company
as it is, made only 1/5 what IBM did. But look at the Market Caps.
Of course some will argue growth rates and the like. I only make
one point. The market has been led by the "darlings". This is why
I feel some of the critics of JMAR have been unreasonable. The
market has not been reasonable. Enough of my soapbox. I haven't
posted for some time, and now you all get these longwinded responses.
Hope it helps some to think things through.
MJ |
