I agree that we should all be aware of a person's motives when they post so let me be up front that I am LONG 15k shares of MCF. I am not a person that does much from a technical standpoint when I trade but wanted to think out loud about something and receive feedback from others as to what they think.
I feel that there are two inherent levels of support in this stock. The first being the price at which Yorkton paid for their shares which was $6.50C (As we know, Yorkton does not do things for charity and you know they feel they got a deal regardless of where the stock is trading today) and at a higher level $7.30C which translates into $5 american which is the magic number for the NASDAQ listing which we all covet.
Please let me know what you think about that and I would also appreciate an explanation of something that has been bugging me since I read the Adamou interview last month that brought so much attention to this stock.
The answer Adamou gave when he was asked why MCF was his favorite Canadian Internet Stock (I copied his answer below) compares it to Amazon. Why would he compare MCF with Amazon? I understand the comparison from an infrastructure standpoint but not from a business perspective. With the fact that Amazon has been an unbelievable Internet stock and that they ahve a market cap of more than $30 billion does he really believe that the business model of MCF is better in the long run?
ADAMOU RESPONSE:
In my opinion MCF has good marketing growth, diversified business. MCF is, I think, what Amazon should have been. Amazon went out and started selling books. What they did in order to sell their books, they needed to put together the marketing arrangements, call centers, distribution, shipping, warehousing, and all of that stuff. What they did was create a huge, beautifully efficient organization to push products over the Internet. Then what they're doing is, they're using this very efficient organization to squeeze and stuff pinholes out of the Internet. That's leverage off the organizational contacts that they put together and increase the size of the pinhole on the Internet to get more products through it. What MCF is doing is something similar. They've built the vast infrastructure that Amazon has. Why should they go out and try and put their name on stuff and try to get people to come to their pinholes? They go out to guys like Sony., the National Bank, Ford - the big organizations that are looking at the Internet and saying, "Boy, this is really good. We got to get on there but I can't justify it to my shareholders and all kinds of money, because they're going to nail me on my value in the market in the meantime." What they're (Microforum) doing is, they have got everything that Amazon has in place, but they put other people and names in on top of it. So, you know Sony might be one, Ford might be another. What they're doing is saying, "You guys drop your name on top of ours. We'll do the e-commerce stuff. We'll do the fulfillment, shipping, the marketing, call centers and we'll make it look like it's you, ok? But you pay us to do it, and then you give us a royalty." So what they do is leverage one infrastructure with possibly 5 of other organizations out there. From the organizational perspective, they get in cheap. They get the right to buy stock at a future date. They don't have to worry about being all - they're not geared to do it anyway. And they can do what they do, which is manage the product. So as a concept, it's probably one of the most compelling ideas I have heard in a very long time. It's starting to happen. They've got a lot of different things on the go. They're making the right decisions. They're slowly, methodically building a real business in terms of Canadian Internet companies. That (Microforum) is my favorite right now.
Wingman23 |
