You seemed to sum up the situation with quite a few fact to support your conclusion. I have little to augment your post.
I do not own, nor have I ever owned LZR, but I have relatives who do, and, because I invest for a living, I get 'polled' for my opinions. Here's how I respond:
I look for companies who have a potential to 'change the world we're live in' as well as meeting some other criteria. I think LZR, as an investment, is the opposite of the type of company I'm looking for. Let me explain: IF everyone was correcting their vision with surgery an $2,000 per eye, and someone came out with an alternative such as fitting people with a lens mounted in a frame which could be worn in front of the eye for about $100, and the frames could be produced in a wide range of styles, colours, and prices to suit everyone, I'd view this company as having the investment potential I'm looking for: namely, providing the same utility at a fraction of the cost to the consumer in a mass market. LZR, offers the utility of a $100 pair of glasses for $2,000 per eye and investors are in love????
I'm won't even touch the potential liability of a procedure going wrong. Imagine the settlement! Now LZR is expanding south of the border. I can almost hear class action lawyers licking their chops. U.S. juries love to put the screws to foreign companies who harm one of their own. As you said, $4.65m profit seems thin. Sounds like a good start toward settling ONE person's lawsuit.
I think the investment community infactuation with the only successful Canadian IPO in the last year or so will soon end, and when it does, LOOK OUT.
I don't short stocks. This may be a classic short, BUT, the market is still in love, and love is blind.
I'm curious about your point 10, and 11. If you feel uncomfortable posting more detail publicly, would you be kind enough to send a PM.
I think your post will re-kindle a discussion.
Thanks, PW. |
