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.

Non-Tech : Kirk's Market Thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Ox who wrote (4644)	2/9/2017 1:23:46 PM
From: Kirk ©	1 Recommendation Recommended By The Ox Respond to of 26780

Hard to say. I have little trust for companies that split off nonvoting class shares.... I wonder if Curry gets shares of stock that have voting rights... I won't buy shares that don't have voting rights as the company has no reason to buy those back. money.usnews.com Ever since what was effectively a 2-for-1 stock split back in April 2016, there had been two publicly traded classes of Under Armour (ticker: UA, UAA) stock: Class A shares that traded under the ticker symbol "UA", and Class C shares, which traded under ticker symbol "UA.C." Adding more confusion to the situation, the two tickers just changed again in early December. The two classes of Under Armour stock now trade under the ticker symbols UA and UAA. The main distinction between UA and UAA shares comes down to voting rights. UA stock, formerly trading under the UA.C symbol, stands for Class C shares, with no voting rights. UAA stock, formerly trading under the symbol UA, stands for Class A shares, which confer one vote per share to the owner. I won't touch the shares you posted even with your 10-ft pole but perhaps UAA is worth looking at. Notice how cleaver the smartest scumbags are about naming stocks... recall how I sold all my GOOG stock after the split and used the proceeds to double my GOOGL position as those smarty pantz played the same bait and switch game on unsophisticated investors.

To: The Ox who wrote (4644)	2/13/2017 4:19:50 PM
From: Kirk ©	1 Recommendation Recommended By Investor Clouseau Respond to of 26780

"I subscribe for the articles" bullchips finally proven false.... In the dumbest idea since "The New Coke" Playboy puts nudes back into its magazine after a brief "experiment" in stupidity. Playboy magazine to feature naked women again Telegraph.co.uk-56 minutes ago “This is a remarkably special moment personally and professionally that I get to share this issue of Playboy magazine with my Dad, as well as ... Playboy: Nude photos are back CNNMoney-1 hour ago Playboy Is Bringing Back Nudity a Year After Pledging to Stop ... PEOPLE.com-1 hour ago Playboy Takes Its Identity Back, Puts Nudity In New Issue Huffington Post-3 hours ago Playboy to bring back nude pictorials Highly Cited-CNBC-1 hour ago Playboy is featuring naked women again Highly Cited-New York Post-2 hours ago

To: The Ox who wrote (4644)	11/8/2017 12:20:59 PM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26780

It sure seems we were right to avoid Under Armour after the monkey business to make two share classes in February. I LOVE how your chart updates with today's price and starts back when we discussed it. It might be a good time to put it on the reverse watch list as it seems to have had another "Half Off" bake sale as it tests its 2013 low. I'd still want to see PE, PEG and other ratios at screaming buy levels before I'd take a risk on retail. I own some of their compression shorts and I'm amazed at how long they've lasted with tons of life. Definitely a quality brand but if you can buy the major, popular items as knockoffs at Costco for 20% of the list price, they'll continue to have issues, especially with people like my 25 yr old nephew who won't display brand advertising on clothes he wears and like most his age, doesn't have a lot of free cash to pay luxury prices.