Sirius Weekly Thread Week of 11-23-09

[Sirius Roadkill]

Stock
Date of Reverse Split
Return Since Reverse Split

Palm (Nasdaq: PALM)
Oct. 15, 2002 (1-for-20)
633%

priceline.com (Nasdaq: PCLN)
June 16, 2003 (1-for-6)
347%

Laboratory Corporation of America (NYSE: LH)
May 4, 2000 (1-for-10)
330%

Corrections Corporation of America
May 18, 2001 (1-for-10)
483%

Brightpoint
June 27, 2002 (1-for-7)
1,788%

[bassmaster]

Stock
Date of Reverse Split
Return Since Reverse Split

Palm (Nasdaq: PALM)
Oct. 15, 2002 (1-for-20)
633%

priceline.com (Nasdaq: PCLN)
June 16, 2003 (1-for-6)
347%

Laboratory Corporation of America (NYSE: LH)
May 4, 2000 (1-for-10)
330%

Corrections Corporation of America
May 18, 2001 (1-for-10)
483%

Brightpoint
June 27, 2002 (1-for-7)
1,788%

5 companies , 3 - no ones ever heard of. whats the sample size?
yes, i understand you're trying to quell fears. but we have not had a profitable Q ,half or year. not yet anyways. the economy is in the dumper. i am very bullish on this company but dont think for 1 sec it will be doing a R/S into strength. the stock is moving fine and will have a better return without a r/s than any of those. am i worried about being delisted? when that bridge comes i'll cross it, otherwise R/S is BAD NEWS that will be treated as such.

[bassmaster]

and if anyone says we are doing r/s into strength is dillusional. the R/S issue is regarding the nasdaq compliance and being FORCED to get the price over $1. wheres the strength in that?

[Sirius Roadkill]

Hey Bass

I hear your concerns . . just saying that

1.) many companies that R/S are already suffering from deteriorating metrics/fundamentals and would have suffered further price erosion with or without the R/S . . Siri's fundamental metrics are improving.

2.) the ability to "margin" is essential fuel for speculative buying; look how the price erosion accelerated in Q3 '08 due to margin calls going unmet.

But the obvious problem that is exemplified by your post is PSYCHOLOGY . . there is no convincing a large number of investors that R/S's are not automatically catastrophic . . so we are our own worse enemy . . many here have already expressed their intent to sell ahead of the R/S and buyback later . . effectively shorting the stock and creating a self-fulfilling prophecy . . . . . knock yourselves out . . I know you'll be back to say I told you so . . could care less.

$1,000,000,000 in FCF in 5 years is $1,000,000,000 in FCF regardless of R/S . . . but dyodd . . I am not a short term trader. Goldman Sachs can rot in hell before they will pry away my shares from my clinched fists . .

In the end, however, I do believe Mel will get a special exception from NASDAQ . . as the $1.00 rule is clearly arbitrary . . but if he doesn't . . I'm not losing any sleep over it . . the stock will eventually trade relative to its earnings!

[Sirius Roadkill]

5 companies , 3 - no ones ever heard of. whats the sample size?

ha, have seen a lot of tickers on Market Watch thread no one's ever heard of . . . more important question is what was the direction of fundamental metrics of the vast majority of those companies faced with R/S

yes, i understand you're trying to quell fears.

True. Probably an impossible task unfortunately

but we have not had a profitable Q ,half or year. not yet anyways.

True if considering backwards-looking analysis TTM . . I am looking FTM or future earnings . . . I am also factoring-in "1 time charges" to get a clearer picture of the company's true fundamentals.

the economy is in the dumper.

The economy is recovering . . the glass is half full

i am very bullish on this company but dont think for 1 sec it will be doing a R/S into strength.

All fundamental metrics are improving across the board . . . merger synergies still being realized . . . that is strength.

the stock is moving fine and will have a better return without a r/s than any of those.

The stock is NOT moving fine! The stock is range-bound . . the future return to investors will be based on future earnings . . . which are growing.

am i worried about being delisted?

We will NEVER be delisted! We will either get a special exemption/exception from NASDAQ taking total market cap into account or we will R/S

when that bridge comes i'll cross it, otherwise R/S is BAD NEWS that will be treated as such.

This is why my efforts to quell fears will be entirely unsuccessful. Market psychology. I am simply trying to make the counterintuitive argument here . . I wish someone had made the counterintuitive argument to me when the merger was announced. Nope, that was universally hailed as GOOD NEWS!

gltawyt . . . dyodd . . . hopefully this discussion will be moot

[SiriMonkey]

Good Morning Happy Thanksgiving

Bumping thread.

Although my post count is looking good, this is really annoying.

[john]

Hey Bass


In the end, however, I do believe Mel will get a special exception from NASDAQ . . as the $1.00 rule is clearly arbitrary . . but if he doesn't . . I'm not losing any sleep over it . . the stock will eventually trade relative to its earnings!

I disagree with this because what Mel is saying and asking for makes absolutely no sense. To prove this lets try to follow the logic here.


Mel is going to ask NASDAQ to forgo the PPS because of their market cap. He has to convince them, that look we may have a low PPS but look we have a 2 billion market cap and to delist us makes no sense.

The NASDAQ says OK mel I see your point to a point but you have to understand you just showed your problem for what it is. You say you have a huge market cap but a low PPS right, so the clear fix to that is you do a reverse split. You clearly have way to many shares outstanding and therfore should do a RS to take care of the problem.


For me the answer is clear and I would bet that if SIRIXM is not above a dollar by at least Jul or Aug (because they already have what the NASDAQ requires to have for an extention) then they will have to do a RS and that is going to be the only way they dont have do a RS.

[Hopeful]

"I love Mel Ha Ha Ha" - John Malone

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1340836052&play=1

[Sirius Roadkill]

I disagree with this because what Mel is saying and asking for makes absolutely no sense. To prove this lets try to follow the logic here.


Mel is going to ask NASDAQ to forgo the PPS because of their market cap. He has to convince them, that look we may have a low PPS but look we have a 2 billion market cap and to delist us makes no sense.

The NASDAQ says OK mel I see your point to a point but you have to understand you just showed your problem for what it is. You say you have a huge market cap but a low PPS right, so the clear fix to that is you do a reverse split. You clearly have way to many shares outstanding and therfore should do a RS to take care of the problem.


For me the answer is clear and I would bet that if SIRIXM is not above a dollar by at least Jul or Aug (because they already have what the NASDAQ requires to have for an extention) then they will have to do a RS and that is going to be the only way they dont have do a RS.

The eloquent logic of your post proves my point precisely!

THE $1.00 LISTING REQUIREMENT IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY!!

why not $0.99?
why not $1.01?

And moreover numbnuts . . . what business is it of the NASDAQ to tell a Company how many shares they should have? That should be an internal corporate decision reached between Company Executives, the Board of Directors and the Company's Shareholders.

So frick you dipwad

and Ho, Mel beat DOJ and FCC . . . NASDAQ will be a cakewalk

[Havakasha]

Good Morning Happy Thanksgiving

Bumping thread.

Although my post count is looking good, this is really annoying.

Yes you could say that about the annoying part. its in your power to stop. i know you can do it.