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 : Roger's 1998 Short Picks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Roger A. Babb who wrote (11622)	7/17/1998 12:11:00 AM
From: Peter V	Respond to of 18691

The high ratio is a bearish indicator, correct? I was just saying today that I might give up on my BEARX fund as it's lost over 17% since I bought it (in an IRA that doesn't allow shorting or options), and recognized that my action is itself a bearish indicator. Good luck on convincing those FBN longs. They are a hard-headed bunch, convinced that all the evil shorters are conspiring against them. (we are, of course, but don't tell them, we'll just keep the collusion amongst ourselves . . . ) But that floorless is going to be a killer. Short to zero!

To: Roger A. Babb who wrote (11622)	7/17/1998 12:12:00 AM
From: Wowzer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18691

Roger you may be on to something with that NASDAQ 2000 problem. Check the current bid and ask on EXCIT according to SI exchange2000.com I pasted just in case they fix the problem by morning :-) Rory Excite (NASDAQ: XCIT) Date: JuLy 16 Last Trade Change Bid Ask 91 5/8 + 3 3/8 (+3.82%) 262143 63/64 262143 63/64

To: Roger A. Babb who wrote (11622)	7/17/1998 1:04:00 AM
From: S. maltophilia	Respond to of 18691

<<SI bull/bear ratio is at 6.0, an all time high. >> Can trial members participate in that poll?

To: Roger A. Babb who wrote (11622)	7/17/1998 1:56:00 AM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18691

Help! TAVA's new loan agreement is very confusing and it is possible that TAVA has made an error in their SEC filings. The loan agreement is contained in TAVA's 10-Q filing: sec.gov The basics are: 1) TAVA borrowed $4.0M on March 27th. 2) TAVA agreed to pay interest on the loan at 11.5% AND 3) TAVA agreed to grant warrants for 155,000 shares at the lower of $6.25 or a market price formula in 6 months. There are other complications, but this paragraph makes no sense: "Borrowings under the loan agreement were $4,000,000. In connection with the loan, the Company issued 155,000 warrants to purchase an equal number of shares of its common stock. The estimated value of the warrants was determined using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. That value, $315,000, is presented as a discount to the loan and is being accreted as additional interest expense over its term." Here are the problems: 1) On March 27th, TAVA's stock closed at 13 1/16. Therefore the intrinsic value of the warrants was over $1 Million. How can the Black-Scholes value be only $315K? 2) How can the value be "a discount to the loan" and be "accreted as additional interest expense"? That makes no sense. In fact, elsewhere in the 10-Q, TAVA reduces the loan by principal by $315K. By the terms of the agreement, they still owe the entire $4.0M and interest. No where (that I can find) does it say that the loan is to be reduced in anyway by the warrants. Regards, Bill