SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Technology Stocks : Presstek -- Stock of the Decade?? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: NEIL MACK who wrote (7622)1/2/1998 9:32:00 PM
From: Nanny  Respond to of 11098
 
Neil, thank you, thank you, thank you! Your GREAT POST was just what the stock doctor ordered. I must admit the bears do get to us...even a raging bull like me finds myself rethinking my position...and then reality comes back in the form of a GREAT NEIL MACK POST and I'm back to reality and remembering why I keep buying this stock. Just for the record, I never sold a share, never considered selling a share, and in fact bought more earlier in the week. It's that constant drip, drip, drip that the shorts use to torture even committed bulls into possibly questioning our committments!!! I've had friends call me this week to ask what I'm going to do and my answer has remained the same....this too will pass and we will be back to doing what we have done for the few years we've bought this stock....all the things you've reminded us of here. Now, when someone ask, I'll simply let them read your post.

Thank you, my friend, for saying so eloquently the things that many of us bulls think but cannot say quite the way you do!!!

Now, it's back to taking advantage of these cheap prices while they last! Thank goodness January is a good month for clipping coupons so that I've got extra money to invest in MORE PRESSTEK.

Have a nice night, my friend!

You did good!

Nanny

PS Just read George Santamaria's post and would like to point out that more than half of my shares are in fact in certificate form. Most of the shares I buy in personal accounts I take delivery of....since I cannot take delivery in retirement accounts. Might be something to think about for those that do not have certificates sent to you. Even our custodial accounts for the grandchildren have certificates issued.



To: NEIL MACK who wrote (7622)1/2/1998 9:58:00 PM
From: Nanny  Respond to of 11098
 
Neil, I know you are fully prepared for Paul's next post....you know the one telling you that you do not know what you're talking about. So please don't stray too far so as to do the same thing you always have to do when Paul doesn't want to accept your facts and report as you presented it....and as usual, you will show him he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Thanks

Nanny



To: NEIL MACK who wrote (7622)1/2/1998 11:36:00 PM
From: Terry  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 11098
 
I've been away and catching up on this thread to see if there was any opportunity now in Presstek's depressed state. Two opposing forces. The Fuji agreement vs. the SEC fine. What is going on at that company?? Neil, I enjoyed your post. Definately some food for thought there. But do you want to hear from an "average" investor??

First the SEC fine. Ok, maybe Presstek management did nothing wrong. But something smells bad. Kind-of like Marv Albert's plea agreement. Maybe he didn't do anything illegal, but few people would argue his actions were unbecoming for a NBC sportscaster. When I sold my stock, my main concern was that Presstek had hired first rate in-house counsel vs. an equally experienced CFO. If Presstek's management wants to concentrate on making plates and growing their business instead of all these distracting issues, they ought to hire what they need to avoid repeating past mistakes. There is no harm in the long run of disclosing information such as a breakout of plate revenues to kit sales. I really can't swallow the competitive disadvantage argument. I can only surmise that they don't want to give out information that they know will not agree with "street" estimates (ie. Cabot).

Now the FUJI agreement is why I liked this stock in the first place. You can just sense the opportunity in this market. But not enough information to chew on. Especially, timing. If Fuji is interested, I'll already concede it is going to be big. But WHEN??? For that matter, how is the ALCOA deal coming?

Speaking as an average investor, not having money down in any direction at the moment, I think I'll wait awhile. My guess is there is still a little more down side left. In my practice, I've seen more opportunities lost by good engineers and good salesmen with great ideas because they are unable to manage a business. Sometimes heads get a little big with lofty stock prices and cheerleading by outsiders. Is this what is happening at Presstek? I don't know. An announcement that they have hired a very experienced CFO would go along way to make me believe they have their heads in the business and not on the stock price.



To: NEIL MACK who wrote (7622)1/3/1998 4:13:00 PM
From: paul abramowitz  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 11098
 
Neil:

I think the pain of your recent margin calls has made you dillusional. I read your post with great interest and the hope of something more substantive than "I believe" and "I know" for support for your positions.

As your post is rather lengthy, I will respond to certain highlights. But first, your argurment that the bears are responsible for the recent drop is absurd. The bears did not announce a reduction in orders from an 80 % customer,nor did the bears pay 2.9 mm to settle charges of fraud and misleading investors. These "black hats" belong to mgmt and Presstek and no one else.

You state: "All of us know that the short position has certainly increased.
Obviously, there is a nice profit made if they decide to cover at these prices. So
what spark would charge the recovery..........and the resulting stampede to cover
and accumulate the shares?"

Neil,Even though you state "all of us know", you couldn't be more wrong. The short postition has decreased dramatically. 4 weeks ago, the most shares availiable to borrow, ie. short, was 5,000. Yesterday, I was told I could borrow 100,000. Given the recent drop, many shorts I know, have covered portions of their positions. My guess is the present net short position is less than 4 million shares.

As for your explanation of why management did not disclsose the Heidelberg issure and correct forecasts, one need only look to mgmts insider sales during the period (2.9mm was cheap):

From the class action complaint:

"Presstek directors and officers sold a

substantial number of shares of Presstek stock, during the Class

Period at artificially inflated prices, as follows:"

Date
of
Sale Total
Name 1996 Shares Sale Transaction
----- ---- ------ ---- -----------

Bert DePamphilis 03/29 3,800 $111.75 $ 424,650
Director 04/10 1,500 $114.00 171,000
----- -------
Subtotal 5,300 595,650

Robert Howard 03/28 1,000 $111.25 $ 111,250
Chairman of the 03/28 3,000 $111.50 334,500
Board, Director 03/28 5,000 $108.50 542,500
04/03 10,000 $113.50 1,135,000
04/03 4,000 $113.00 452,000
04/03 6,000 $113.00 678,000
04/03 5,000 $114.00 570,000
04/04 5,000 $116.00 580,000
04/04 1,000 $116.50 116,500
04/08 2,000 $111.75 223,500
04/08 5,000 $113.25 566,250
04/08 4,000 $112.00 448,000

38

04/08 5,000 $112.00 560,000
04/08 5,000 $112.25 561,250
04/08 5,000 $112.50 562,500
04/12 1,500 $111.75 167,625
04/12 5,000 $111.50 557,500
04/16 2,500 $112.00 280,000
May 43,500 $180.00 Est 7,830,000
------- ---------
Subtotal 116,000 $16,276,375

Harold N. Sparks 03/26 1,000 $106.75 $ 106,750
Director 04/03 1,000 $116.50 116,500
04/09 1,000 $115.75 115,570
Subtotal 3,000 $ 339,000

Robert E. Verrando 04/04 1,000 $116.00 $ 116,000
President, Chief 04/04 1,000 $116.75 116,750
operating Officer, 04/04 2,000 $116.25 232,500
Director 04/04 1,000 $115.75 115,750
04/04 5,000 $115.88 579,400
------
Subtotal 10,000 $ 1,160,400

Richard William May 12,100 $180.00 Est $ 2,178,000
Chief Executive
Officer, Vice
Chairman of the
Board, Secretary,
Director
Subtotal 12,100 $180.00 Est $ 2,178,000

Lawrence Howard May 43,500 $180.00 Est $ 7,830,000
Director
Subtotal 43,500 $180.00 Est $ 7,830,000

TOTAL INSIDER SALES
DURING THE CLASS PERIOD 184,600 $28,379,425

Cont next post.



To: NEIL MACK who wrote (7622)1/3/1998 4:32:00 PM
From: paul abramowitz  Respond to of 11098
 
Neil, then your post continues

My thoughts on the positive end result of the SEC settlement to Presstek:

1. Any stigma surrounding the accusations with the SEC officially ends.

Response: Actually, Neil the Stigma becomes worse as is evidenced by the decline in stock price. While you may be blinded by passion for Presstek, most investors are not pleased, and institutions avoid companies who they feel have mislead them. e.g. Oxford Health, and Scholastic.

2. The short position loses their last remaining ace in the hole.

Response: This was not even viewed as a card by many shorts. My short position is based upon a view that this company is overvalued on the fundamentals. The SEC was never a factor in my decision. However, the loss of management credibility is now a key factor.

3. The SEC saves face and recovers their investigation costs.

No response.

4. The shareholders are protected, as well as the Presstek company from future
deterioration of earnings, caused by fines and the long standing legal costs associated
with defending the SEC allegations.

5. The shareholder suit has very little substance remaining.

RESPONSE: You are very wrong on this point, The shareholder suit is strengthened. Their claims are substantially identical to the SEC, and Class counsel will seek the deepest pockets for restitution to the shareholders who were harmed. I don't believe (IMO) that the company, who is defendents, will be able to argue it was Howard and Verando-the Chairman and President, and not the company.

6. Mutual Funds and Money Managers that may be waiting for the bottom of this
correction, are now free to buy at bargain basement prices.

RESPONSE: First, PResstek price is far from bargain basement at 65 times trailing earnings. Second, What mutual fund manager is going to take the risk on a company who's mangement just paid 2.9mm to settle charges of defrauding shareholders. Their are too many CLEAN companies without this risk.

7. Companies that would like to associate with Presstek for their expertise and
contract for their technology, now know that their desire to affiliate with the company,
will allow them to complete any started business transactions as Presstek will remain
quite viable,
profitable, a producer of new technology, and free to negotiate and fulfill their
business commitments, with guarantees to their partners of their continued success.

RESPONSE: This is a "Neilism" with no support, but it sounds good.

8. Presstek should now be free from further positive disclosure restraints that could
have been a fear of the Company due to being under the microscope of the SEC. This
should allow them to divulge more forward information, not less!

RESPONSE: Neil, how can you keep a straight face and make this statment. Management announced they would make fewer disclosures, not more. And now the Presstek homepage, states you cannot copy or link the information on the net. This management has a siege mentality, deservedly so.

In fact, later in your post, you state:

"In response to my questioning the NON-DISCLOSURE NOTIFICATION PRESTEK RECENTLY ANNOUNCED, [emphasis added] non-disclosure notification the bears and now even some of the uneasy bulls that have chosen to sell
shares, have interpreted this announced decision to not disclose details in a negative way.
They interpret it to mean Presstek simply does not want to provide us any "early
notification" regarding the "for sure gloom and doom" Presstek is bound to be facing, due
to the Heidelberg cutback and their guess that the Fuji alignment must be smoke and
mirrors, concocted by unreliable and crooked management, that truly belong in a cell!

Your intrepretation of the shorts position as to why, is not far off.

Cont.



To: NEIL MACK who wrote (7622)1/3/1998 4:56:00 PM
From: paul abramowitz  Respond to of 11098
 
Neil:

You then state:"Think about it. Do you actually believe that Presstek would make the glaring error of not
providing any meaningful disclosure if the Heidelberg cutback would have, in any way,
substantially or materialy decrease company revenues and affect the shareholders
investment?
Presstek had no choice but to disclose if this were true. My bet is they would have or
would now be facing a repeat of the just completed SEC sanctions. Even though
Presstek received $7 million for a 25% temporary decrease in production in 1996,
management were censored for not reporting it. A 25% decrease today would equate to
a drop from 80 to 60 kits. Would you not think that Presstek knows what they are doing
and will not take risks to place them in jeopardy again? "

ANSWER - YES.

You mistate the SEC settlement. My interpretation was management reviewed, did not correct, and knowingly distributed forecasts known to be wrong, partially as a result of the Heidelberg reduction (1996), but also because forecasts by Cabot and/or Penn Merchant, estimated plate sales of 28 million, when Presstek's internal forecast was 7 million.

The recent announcements by managment of the reduction in DI production for Heidelberg, and no forecasts, could provide management the excuse to say it was already disclosed.

Neil, As long as your faxing posts to Presstek, why don't you fax a request to disclose Heidelbergs new order level, I would hate to you surprised and wiped out as result of uninformed optimism.



To: NEIL MACK who wrote (7622)1/5/1998 11:15:00 PM
From: D. J.  Respond to of 11098
 
You said...
I recall when 20th Century Ultra purchased 744,000 shares and subsequently made a killing on this stock.

This sounds like an interesting tale. Could you retell the story as to how they made their killing, and what happened? And I'm curious as to how you found this out...

- DJ



To: NEIL MACK who wrote (7622)1/6/1998 12:11:00 PM
From: Pierre Panet-Raymond  Respond to of 11098
 
To Neil and the other Bulls. I am just getting back into a normal routine but I needed to also reply belatedly to this and a few other of your recent posts.

In # 7622 you stated: " Think about it. Do you actually believe that Presstek would make the glaring error of not providing any meaningful disclosure if the Heidelberg cutback would have, in any way, substantially or materialy decrease company revenues and affect the shareholders investment? "

Neil they did state the expected materiallity of the cutback in the 8-K filed December 23 in the following paragraph:

"As previously noted by the Company, the backlog that existed for theQuickmaster DI's has been filled by Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG and the Company's order input rate for direct imaging products used in the Quickmaster should now be based on Heidelberg's inventory levels and ability to continue successful marketing. Although the Company and Heidelberg have not finalized 1998 production schedules, the Company expects that sales of Quickmaster DIsystems may slow considerably during 1998, but the Company anticipates that sales of its other products and revenues from new product development shouldoffset the reduction."

"...expects that sales of QM-DI's may slow considerably" are the key words in that paragraph imo. These words are assigned a far greater probability by the writer than the the words which follow about anticipating new products to offset those reduced sales to Heidelberg.

In post # 7628 you stated that you were going to fax that post to the company. I hoped that you saved yourself a nickle for we all know that somebody at the company monitors every word that is said at this site.

In your post # 7629, the only thing that I can say is that your repetition of the word plates 135 times is very close to the installed base of QM-DI's consuming plates in the U.S.

As far as your flippant comment today about Heath replacing Heidelberg, get real. The only thing in common between these two companies is the first letter of their names.