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.

Technology Stocks : Safeguard Scientifics SFE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: still learning who wrote (1406)	5/21/1998 11:26:00 PM
From: ncs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4467

For the past two years, SFE has been making larger average purchases in their private companies which will allow for more shares to be offered to their shareholders, therefore I would thing they will be able to split the shares if they choose and still use the 1:5 ratio. Conversely, they could split and make the ratio 1:10.

To: still learning who wrote (1406)	5/22/1998 11:45:00 AM
From: llwk7051@aol.com	Respond to of 4467

Large volumes are not unheard of for SFE. On May 24, 1996 when SFE hit its all time high according to my records, volume was over 500,000 shares. Volume was over a million shares on one day in July of that year. While I did not follow SFE net asset value at that time, I believe it was probably trading at a substantial premium to net asset value. The stock was prominently mentioned in several articles and was hitting new highs regularly. From that date the stock went into a tail spin that didn't turn around until it hit the 18s in March 1997. SFE started buying back its own shares in March 1996 , and it was trading below net asset value at that time. Since then net asset value has risen dramatically and SFE stock price has risen. Once or twice the price got ahead of net asset value by several points or so. This was usually about the time of a rights offering. The net asset value (NAV) then moved up and/or SFE pulled back in price slightly. Several people on this board probably have more accurate information on NAV than I do. The current premium over NAV is somewhat more than the recent history, but probably not unprecedented. I hope this back ground helps. If someone else knows what the NAV was in May 1996 that information might be very interesting. Good luck to all. Robert D.

To: still learning who wrote (1406)	5/22/1998 12:13:00 PM
From: John Arnopp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4467

still learning: I think you are on to something with your analysis of the limits on outstanding shares of SFE and the impact on rights offerings. Most of SFE's investors are individuals, not institutions. Most of us want the excitement and potential of owning these new companies, not the potential "dividend" stream they could be (otherwise we would have taken $7 for OAOTR rather than holding to now have about $0.50 net profit or so). If SFE as a stock changes to become as "institutional" type stock, I think we could all be in trouble. Institutions would probably not want to keep the (smaller) holdings in new companies, but would gladly take the cash for rights. This would depress the prices of the new companies in the short term, and may even affect future rights offering prices (now usually $5) negatively in the long term. On the other hand, though, I think the above would be the only way that the stock would go from trading around its NAV (also its "fair risk-based value" according to the CAPM -- see my next post) to trading at a "fully valued" price. Which comes first, I don't know, but one would drive the other. So, in my opinion, we will pick up institutional holders if the premium remains for an extended period. I am not sure this would be in the best interests of individual shareholders, or the direction Safeguard wants to take their company. --John