Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Allen Furlan who wrote (17929)	10/25/2003 4:43:03 PM
From: jeffbas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78752

Allen, with that kind of stock you not only have to ask yourself what is the catalyst to attract anyone to the company but also to attract anyone to buy a stock with zero liquidity. You are also exposed to greater risk of it being taken private (the logical next step), at an unattractive price. On fundamentals, they are losing money and have a lousy balance sheet, in a lousy (distribution) business.

To: Allen Furlan who wrote (17929)	10/26/2003 8:51:43 PM
From: rjm2	Respond to of 78752

Its happened to a number of stocks I have owned or followed. On one hand, its not good, on the other, if being public costs them $200k per year and not being public adds $200k to their profitibility then it might overcome the liquidity issue. But, how much liquidity do these small stocks have anyway ? Not much. Regarding MHCO, I added a little at just over $2 recently. (Very small amount and a small position for me) The CEO recently exercized an option at $2.625. I dont think he would do that if he thought the stock was going to $1 ! Also, the company bought a big block from a director with health problems for $3.50. MHCO is a value stock and they had a pretty good turnaround. The way I see it, they could sell the thing in a few years at $5-7 and that would be our liquidity. HGPI is trying to do it. EDIN did it. HURC tried and failed. ANII is doing it via a reverse split. There are more examples. It appears this is the risk of owning such small stocks. If management & the board are above board then I can see it as a positive for shareholders in the long run. Of course, thats just assuming that the company earns $200k more per year every year.

To: Allen Furlan who wrote (17929)	11/4/2003 5:09:42 PM
From: Allen Furlan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78752

Comments from board please. I am curious about market cap and enterprise value from multex as shown in yahoo. Enterprise value obviously factors in debt and maybe someone can give me an opinion on how multex makes this calculation. Here is what I find interesting: Stock Market cap / Ent value amr 2.15 / 13.33 dal 1.6 / 11.07 luv 14.67 / 14.46 aes 5.48 / 24.23 ep 4.37 / 27.07 xom 242.51 / 241.06 The heavy debt load of major airlines has resulted in the sector being severely punished(rightfully so in my opinion). Similarly the heavy debt load of the energy sector(traders) has caused a severe sell off in their stocks. Here I think the public is wrong. In any case I have been accumulating aes and ep for the past half year and think that these stocks have a way to go.