<<It should be pointed out, that you seem to be a trader only and unaware (or not interested in) fundamentals... which is ok,>>
Lizzy, don't play your head games with me. It is an insult to my integrity and my intelligence. And I won't stand for it.
Everyone knows I have short positions here as well as other places in tech. Your implications that I am a trader and therefore not interested in the fundamentals hold no water.
In fact before I take up a short position, I dig into the fundamentals(though I admit, I'm not an analyst) and then make my entries based on technicals.
Most of my short positions have been called out 1 1/2 years ago, if not longer. I first began posting my short entries in SEBL in the 90s, CIEN in the 80s and 90s, JNPR in the 60s, VRTS in the 70s, RFMD in the 30s, and QCOM in the 60s.
These are well documented and can not be disputed. Further, when I posted my entries, I specifically said, repeatedly, I was in no hurry, I had plenty of time and it was going to take plenty of time to deflate things. I did not hide, nor have I ever hid my agenda. I never tried to spread FUD, but rather posted facts and invited discussion and debate in the chance I was wrong with my assumptions and conclusions.
Even the most savvy of posters here on SI could not put together a good enough argument to convince me I was wrong with my assumptions and direction of the stock prices.
I have also learned people who know the industries best were(are) the worst at analyzing the stocks and placing legitimate valuations on them.
I'm not going to belabor this point further than to say you are off base implying I have no interest in fundamentals. Fundamentals, or the deterioration of fundamentals is what provoked me to sell my long positions and then later begin shorting the very stocks I was previously long.
<<I remember after the last cc you confused revenue per employee at sebl with employee pay. (if everybody in SV made an equivalent salary to their revenue draw, we'd all be pretty happy).>>
You know, I know, and everyone else here knows that was an honest mistake I made late at night after listening to and taking notes of the CC- #reply-17755353 . A mistake which upon being informed of
I admitted to immediately #reply-17756891
<<Its hard to make fundamental calls on companies with missteps like that.>>
Again, that was one error against a fair amount of fundamental analysis supporting my reasons why SEBL was(and still remains) over valued. Further, the stock price of late alone supports my thesis, this can not be denied.
<<At your $3 target, sebl would be trading for below their cash position. It could happen in this bear market, sure, but notice even dog telecom companies whose business has literally dried up (I'm talking about ciena going from over 450mm/qtr in 2000 to 50mm/qtr today) have a hard time trading for under cash. >>
Give it time, and there will be further mergers and/or BKs and continued drying up of business will eat into their cash on hand. They will still likely trade for more than their cash per share, but at probably at lower prices still.
<<Siebel is doing worse than 2000, sure but it is not the complete dearth of business and "no light at the end of the tunnel" that optical faces.>>
Are you kidding me? It's very possible that CRM will dry up worse than the opticals, and there ultimately won't likely be enough business to keep more than two or three software companies busy there. Niche companies will not be survivors. They will either be bought out, merge or simply go BK also. Even Tom said there isn't enough room for all these companies and more than half will go out of business.
<<Additionally, many cash-rich companies are burning cash. So the bears argument is, that the cash will be gone one day. But sebl is cash flow positive and making money, >>>
That is only valid as long as that business continues to come in. You argue it will resume and continue, I claim it is very unlikely. Can I be wrong in all of this? Sure. That is precisely why I look for exchange with others. And why I encourage others to do their own DD and not believe anything(including my posts) with out confirming it personally.
And if that time ever comes- when fundamentals begin to improve, I will admit to it openly and begin looking for the surviving leaders and invest in them, provided they are not trading at obscene multiples.
<<other than buybacks[SEBL] doesn't spend on much and will probably add to his cash hoard over the year.>>
I didn't know they had bought back any shares yet(All I know is they "announced that it plans to commence repurchases of its Common Stock pursuant to the repurchase program previously approved by its Board of Directors" #reply-17822117 ) Am I mistaken? If so, please refresh my memory otherwise we'll have to wait for the SEC filings.
Additionally, there have been a number of high profile companies whose boards have authorized share buy backs.
Even Cisco announced a buyback, I honestly don't recall if they have boughten back any yet. I'm sure there are some who have, but who, and how much?
It's one thing to announce it, it's quite another to actually do it. The authorizations make for good press, but there is zero doubt in my mind a majority of these announcements are intended to boost the share price. Will some go through with the buy backs? Probably. I sure hope so.
<<From a TA perspective, I agree with you, sebl is going down although it closed well above the lows on friday and seems to be up again ah.>>
Thursday's close was $7.51, Friday's range was $6.50(low) and $7.38(high), it closed at $7.01. That is not "considerably off the lows". It is just about right in the middle range. Stop sugar coating everything and perhaps you will gain some creditability.
On another related subject, I find your agruments on options expensing totally agenda driven and I submit that you are of the "vocal minority." We all know you work for a dot com company and you rely heavily on options as part of your pay package. Why not lable something for what it is? Options are a compensation expenses and should be reported as such. Period.
Also, here is yet one more example of how you twist and make things up to suit your agenda #reply-18019772
If an honest mistake on your part, than you are not capable of even reporting something with out major "missteps". And with "missteps" like that, how can anyone believe anything you post?
P.S. It saddens me that I have to post things such as the above message, but it appears you are trying to destroy my credibility. I must and will defend myself. |
