The problem shorting net stocks is they are news-driven, and you never know when that news will happen.
Robert,
You might want to consider what news might get released. If the interference proceeding mentioned in Priceline's 10-Q is approved, it won't be a problem for the shorts:
from the 10-Q:
On January 6, 1999, priceline.com received notice that a third party patent applicant and patent attorney, Thomas G. Woolston, purportedly had filed in December 1998 with the United States Patent and Trademark Office a request to declare an "interference" between a patent application filed by Woolston describing an electronic market for used and collectible goods and priceline.com's core buyer-driven commerce patent. Priceline.com has received a copy of a Petition for Interference from Woolston, the named inventor of at least three United States Patent applications titled "Consignment Nodes," one of which has issued as a patent. Priceline.com currently is awaiting information from the Patent Office regarding whether it will initiate an interference proceeding concerning Woolston's patent application and priceline.com's core buyer-driven commerce patent.
However, it is impossible to predict the outcome of an interference with certainty. While Woolston claims to have an earlier invention date by a period of approximately sixteen months, the final decision as to priority of invention would be made by the Patent Office after considering facts provided by each party during the interference proceeding. If an interference is declared and thereafter resolved in favor of Woolston, such resolution could result in an award of some or all of the disputed patent claims to Woolston. If, following such award, Woolston were successful in a patent infringement action against priceline.com, including prevailing over all defenses available to priceline.com such as those of non-infringement and invalidity, this could require priceline.com to obtain licenses from Woolston at a cost which could significantly adversely affect priceline.com's business. If Woolston prevailed in both an nterference and an infringement action, then priceline.com could be enjoined from conducting business through the priceline.com service to the extent covered by the patent claims awarded to Woolston. In addition, defense of the interference action may be expensive and may divert management attention away from priceline.com's business. |
