Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Won't elaborate...the PGPDQ/Cemjq comparisons/contrasts has already been discussed ad nauseum.
However, I do agree with Robo...the comparison between Cemjq & Pgpdq is a valid one.
Jr. Lol...I'm planning a trip to Toyko this Xmas.
Perhaps I should surreptitiously pack a fork in my coat pocket. Prodding is infinitely more effective than pushing:)
Pipul...thanx for the chart.
I've always liked your contribution to the board (Arnold on the other hand traumatized my frontal lobe!)
I can see that you are well versed in technical analysis. I'm liking the cup handle formation:)
Cemjq is primarily a fundamental play, but it's nice to see the charts parallel the DD and fundamentals.
GLTY
Lol..phrantic good to see you still with us.
We lost a few comrades along the way (JonPro being one that leaps to mind, among others).
Still holding my core position here. Hope to offload some of my flipping shares around the .80 mark. To be honest, I'm just too "scurred" to even attempt to flip my core...too risky.
Anyway, thanx again to all the peeps (you know who you are) who contributed DD to the board, to those who contributed some levity and some level headed banter as well.
GLTA
Hey Jellystone Man... Right back atcha!
However, I gotta defer to Wally...the court jester/bad boy of the Cemjq board:)
Anyway, we got some nice action going on. The awesome thing is, we are only at the beginning of this wild and wacky journey.
BTW where's Waldo (Arnold)?
Just checking in briefly (been a lil busy lately).
We've got obvious accumulation going on (rinse and repeat scenario, we saw in the low .20's). This will trudge north again when the sellers have capitulated.
BTW, a slow trudge north is totally fine by me...this will have more conviction and staying power than a parabolic vault (of course, those slick parabolic moves ain't none too shabby either!)
Seriously no more DD required on this stock...stick a fork in it...it's done already! It's obvious to a lobotomized cretin where this is headed.
I see lots of new handles on the board...welcome! Stay the course (unless you got to pull out your milk money). Just let this marinate and you will be nicely rewarded down the line.
GLTA
Too funny seeing G2 check in from the swamp...now that's dedication:)
Oh my oh my...our beautiful mutant is finding her stride:)
Oops she just stepped on Babs...he was cowering behind the bushes paper trading his way to imaginary riches!
Loving this slow, but strident march northward. This is sustainable unlike the parabolic move at the end of May.
One of the 7 sages of Greece (Pittacus) coined the adage:
"Know thy opportunity"
Folks, we have a spectacular opportunity here of mutant proportions...strap yourselves in (turn up the AC/DC volume!)and let her run. Our mutant is running a marathon, not a sprint...don't bail too soon!
Jr...good to have you back.
Yeah, the bonds are going buck wild...very telling indeed! I think of Cemjq as my mutant stock.After all, it was the freak happenstance of the economy that thrust her into our laps.
Under normal (non mutation!) circumstances, we never would have gotten our bargain basement PPS...always loved a good sale:)
No worries...however, the bridge offer still stands:)
Anyway, liking this slow, "steady as she goes" run up.It has more more conviction then a parabolic move caused by momo's.
Hang in there...our beautiful mutant hasn't even began to run wild in the meadow yet. She's just limbering up...
Rj, if you buy any of Babs tall tales...
Perhaps I can interest you in a bridge over yonder in Brooklyn?
Well Oaps, it may not be a matter of saving some bucks. It may be moreso a matter of principal.
Using a strong arm tactic to get someone to buy a subscription would offend my principals. This is the first board I've ever posted on. To be perfectly candid, I'm wary of public forums. You just don't know who you're exchanging banter with on the other side of that screen (it could run the spectrum from a machete wielding miscreant to a doe faced quireboy!).
I'm a low key person, who values their privacy. However,the stellar DD and sharp insights displayed on the Cemjq board coaxed me out of my shell. I coughed up for a subscription based on the valuable insights of the Cemjq board.
However, on principal I would cancel it in a heartbeat, if strong arm tactics were employed to coax me into maintaining a subscription.
Only the best for our Arnold:)
Ya can't fault Arnold for wanting to shade his lime with a pink umbrella...there is no denying the cuteness factor:)
Wall...your post is on point (as usual) and poses a very plausible scenario.
Not surprised about the objection either (of course it's gonna stick in the trustee's craw). From an objective standpoint, yeah I agree, but from a subjective shareholder standpoint, I’m like give them the swag already.
The Trustee astutely lobs the ball back into Rogerson’s court with the below commentary:
"The Debtors have not provided the Court with any evidence to determine whether the costs of the KEIP are reasonable...
By the Debtors’ own admission in the June MOR, “[t]he ultimate recovery by the Debtors’ creditors and the Company’s shareholders, if any, will not be determined until confirmation and implementation of a plan of reorganization.
No assurance can be given as to what recoveries, if any, will be assigned in the Chapter 11 proceeding to each of these constituencies."
Now if only Rogerson would step up to the plate and say "Chill, the creditors, Wall & his Posse will be chuckling all the way to the bank after we exit bk. We’ll even furnish Arnold with a crate of Corona and a lime incentive."
Unfortunately, this type of transparency is not forthcoming. What is forthcoming is good DD that points to Arnie swigging some Corona on Rogerson's dime:)
Countdown has been temporarily suspended due to an errant baggage handler, named Arnold impeding take off:)
Jr goes on vacay. and this busts a move...hmmmm
Pass the hat, we gotta spring for a jungle safari deep in the Botswana grasslands for our JR.
Keep him busy with those majestic lions and big tusked elephants until this gathers more steam:)
Can I get a milkshake with that:)
Well, it looks like we finally got our float turnover. Time to put these .20's in the rear view mirror already....
I'm afraid, I don't know their exact pps (I'm not the all knowing Yoda:)).
I noted on Mffais that their position was on/as of 3/31/09, so clearly they bought pre bk. I was trying to access Mffais today, to get more clarification, but had no success (some issue with the server perhaps?).
Anyway, in the letter, they alluded to the ex CEO and the CFO buying shares in the market. I know Wood & Forsyth bought back in November at about $1.60. I figure Delafield spurred by this, perhaps bought in later.
So, my guesstimate would be that their average ballpark price is around $1 (I emphasize ballpark...not sure exactly!). This would infer that Cemjq should at least see a $1 in order to see "value accruing for the shareholders". If anyone finds conclusive information pertaining to Delafied's actual buy in price, by all means share with the board.
Whilst their stake is not massive like Peltz,nonetheless I liked the tone of the letter with respect to shareholder equity. Frankly, hearing a fund or some other such entity stating "We expect there will be value accruing for the shareholders once the company has been reorganized". carries a lot more clout and credibility than some IHubber.
As an aside Delafield was recently sold, but the top guys are still staying on in their positions. More pertinently, Delafield's reason for not dumping Cemjq may also be the same reason that Peltz elected to stay (his PPS is $11, so he's really hurting or not!). We can also extrapolate this to ICC Capital (these guys have a substantial stake in Cemjq), Goldman, Heartland, Citi et al.
Peltz (like the other stalwart Cemjq holders) may very well think (or know) that that the PPS will recover.Peltz used to be inside Chemtura's inner circle, so he knows as much (or more) about Chemtura as their current CEO.
Folks, all we can do here is follow the bread crumbs and hope they lead us home safely:)
GLTA
Thanx Oaps...it's the same IPO. I used to be able to access the Pehub article via their cached website, but it seems that article is now in their archives.
However it's the same IPO referenced in the websites you posted:
"Peltz, 66, filed on May 27 to sell $300 million of stock in Trian Capital Corp., a New York-based BDC that will invest in senior corporate debt of leveraged companies. THL Credit Inc., a BDC advised by an affiliate of Boston-based private-equity firm Thomas H. Lee Partners LP, filed June 1 for a $300 million public stock offering."
Anyway...lets hope this all unfolds favorably for us shareholders. Delafield sure thinks it will:).
Yep, that's posted on Mffais. They filed on 7/16, but actual buying was prior to 3/31.
Official statement from Delafield fund stating shareholder equity value:
"We expect there will be value accruing for the shareholders once the company has been reorganized.Accordingly, despite a severe loss, we are hoping the shares will recover value."
This is the first official statement I've seen stating such a positive outcome for shareholders! The aforementioned quote is culled from a letter that Delafield fund sent to their shareholders dated on April 15th 2009.
I was curious why they held on to their 1.2 million stake (yeah Oilbaron, there I go again with the curiosity!) and with a lil snooping I dug up the letter addressed to the fund's shareholders.
Obviously the fund (like all funds)lost money recently, so in their letter they tried to address their investment missteps & strategies. Despite buying Chemtura pre bk, they have no intention of offloading those shares. See the excerpt below, which references their Chemtura holding:
"This been felt by virtually all our holdings, from the largest and strongest to the smallest with the least financial strength. One, Chemtura Corporation, which has been restructuring for some time, brought in a new Chief Executive Officer (CEO), whom we knew well as CEO of Hercules Incorporated. Unfortunately, they were unable to sell a division on reasonable terms, the proceeds of which were to be used to pay off near-term debt and, instead, elected to file for bankruptcy.
The former Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer had purchased substantial amounts of stock in the open market within the past year, so we were not alone in believing the shares undervalued. We expect there will be value accruing for the shareholders once the company has been reorganized. Accordingly, despite a severe loss, we are hoping the shares will recover value."
Chemtura is referenced on page two in the following link:
http://www.delafieldfund.com/literature/pdfs/shareholder_letter_latest.pdf
East...I don't trust either of the Economou boys in Drys or over in OCNF.
I also think George is not very adept at disseminating information. Some of this may be intentional, but I also think George has the social skills of a sloth!
Regardless, I'm still on board with Drys.
Some Ouzo would be nice with that baklava:)
Yeah, it is confusing and it's been difficult finding more information pertaining to that recent IPO deal.
I've searched and really couldn't unravel much. Still, it does bode well that Peltz is getting involved in the credit side of things.
We will see what unfolds soon enough...
The 2007 deal:
http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSBNG21702420071102
The 2009 deal:
http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:cSNbwt4ZTlwJ:www.pehub.com/tag/trian/+peltz+2009+iPO+pehub&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Of course, as with any information this make have changed recently. Regardless, I like the fact that Peltz is getting involved on the credit side of things.
CM that $750 million figure is from a prior IPO back in 2007 (as far as I'm aware?). It's hard to keep abreast of all the DD on Cemjq (got others on the front burner that also need my attention:)).
Regardless, Peltz is craving some credit action. Like you mentioned in your other response to my prior post, perhaps himself and some of the other big Chemtura investors can rollover Cemjq's bonds. The company could be parsed up and sold off down the line or a Tim Hortons scenario could come into play.
There are innumerable scenarios that could come into play here down the line...lets hope one of them pans out in our favor:)
Peltz says "good deals will need to be refinanced."
If he extends Chemtura a nice refinancing deal, he could help his bottom line (considering he still has $200 million wrapped up in Cemjq) as well as ours! If Chemtura can get the bonds refinanced and keep on trucking with respect to profitable MOR's, we may not even need an asset sale.
Here's an excerpt from this weeks CNBC interview:
"On the credit markets, Peltz says there is $1.6 trillion in leveraged loans and high-yield bonds between 2004 – 2007 that are in trouble. He expects them to put pressure on lenders as well as the market. Peltz told Maria “good deals will need to be refinanced.” He also expects up to a trillion dollars worth of refinancings alone will happen over the next six years.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31911622
This is a quote from the IPO PR release last month (remember that $300 million IPO):
"The proceeds from the initial public offering are to be used to invest in credit, in particular the loans and bonds of leveraged companies."
Our Norman is craving some credit market action and Cemjq needs to get their bonds refinanced...a marriage made in heaven:)
My Big fat Greek Earnings coming soon to a souvlaki stand near you:)
Trueheart...stellar post.
Indeed, Drys does have a "trading mysticism" that billows above all the other BDI stocks. She's always been a favorite of mine. Drys is a great day trade,swing trade and investing stock...she's like a multi flavored popsicle:)
She can be merciless when you board her at the wrong port. Once she sets course, she can be relentless (like a heat seeking missile). IMO, the best way to trade her (especially for a swing or long term trade) is to average in (difficult to pick a bottom on this stock).
If you plan to commit 10K...just ease in with about 5k and wait to see what course she sets.If you boarded at the right port and she picks up momentum, slap down the rest (if not, wait for a reasonable pullback and commit the remainder of your initial allotment).
Drys has always been a consistent winner for me...GLTA
Here's the quarterly report for the Brandes fund. On page 4 it refers to deletions and additions in the fund. Chemtura is listed under deletions as of Q1 (period ending march 31st 2009).
However, note that Brandes also offloaded Pilgrim Pride Q4 2008. Pilgrim had a nice run from December to now (it seems Brandes made a boo boo there:).
http://www.brandesinvestments.ca/site/brandes/assets/pdf/QPR_Brandes_U.S._Small_Cap_Equity_Eng.pdf
Funds selling is not surprising in a bk stock...it's inevitable. The vast majority of these funds that wanted to sell, already offloaded most of their shares when bk was in the offing or shortly thereafter. We may still have some straggler funds offloading smaller positions over the past few weeks.
However, most of the selling is done...stick a fork in it already! That's the good news:)
Anyway, the players we need to pay heed to are Citi, Trian & ICC Capital. Why the heck are these players holding on to a bk stock? Yeah, Oilbaron I'm curious as heck!
Both Citi & ICC Capital ran into a burning building when other funds were leaping out the window.Peltz just eased back in his Lazy Boy and swigged some Snapple in the midst of all this chaos.
Why, why, why?
Come on OB, give us an answer:)
I was following Brandes and I know that he offloaded his entire position in Chmetura. I saw it on a quarterly update he sent out pertaining to his fund.
As for Price, I think I saw it on Mffais that he offloaded (he only had 500,000 anyway, so no biggie there). However, Brandes had a sizable position.
If I find the link to this info, I'll post it later.
Ob, if I'm not mistaken Michael Price offloaded his position. Charles Brandes another heavy hitter also offloaded his position.
I was hoping that Brandes especially would stay on board.
If you have corroborating proof that Price is on board, please post a link or whatever.
I would love to be proved wrong on this...
Well since May 29th (when this downturn started), we've a had a turnover of almost 100 million (not exactly chump change).
Funds/Tutes don't always go in with barrels blazing. They can and do accumulate for weeks if they deem it opportune to do so. With all the selling that's been going on since May 29th, any big player could easily have racked up a sizable position for themselves.
That's why it will be interesting to see what happens when we get a float turnover. Whoever is stockpiling those shares will have to hit the ask if they want more.
So far they've been feeding at the trough at the bid...once that dries up, we'll see what the real deal is with Cemjq.
Thanx...
If too much misinformation is posted on the board, this board will lose it's credibility real fast.
Well Cemjq doesn't really have much insider holding (not like Pilgrim), so we need to focus on the tute holders.
Cemjq used to have 44% institutions/funds on board. The Bk event made some of those offload...we just don't know how much.
The Mffais info has a time lag of 3 months, so it's difficult to figure out exactly. All those websites...msn, aol etc., also have time lagged info.
I do however, think we're due a float turnover soon, so that would bode well for a reversal in the absence of other positive news.
Agreed, that we got some accumulation going on. The available float was larger than people here said (much larger). People don't really want to acknowledge this on the board, but they should.
The upside to us having a larger float (the only upside!) is that accumulation takes longer. That might just explain our lingering time in the .20's.
Can you imagine how this will fly when the float is locked up in strong hands...smelling salts won't keep you upright!
Robo...as always you keep it real:)
Yeah, we got colossal support down here (22 is the new black (.20)). No worries, I ain't bailing (unless some catastrophic event rears it's ugly head).
Cemjq consists of 20% of my portfolio (a sizable position).I never commit such a high % in any one stock unless I have supreme confidence in the outcome.
GLTY
In point of fact it's August that usually sees the big Summer wind down. I used to trade professionally and was always quite busy up until August.
Regardless, if a stock has merit it will get attention from the big boys. I'm not saying that Cemjq doesn't have merit (it does). There has been a whole lotta selling going on, but not enough buying. Otherwise the 20's would be in the rear view mirror already.
However, like I mentioned, as did you, the selling has buyers content to load up at the bid. Hopefully once all this selling has subsided they slap the ask...retailers sure as heck won't.
Just trying to keep it real here.
Yeah, Manti I've seen that too. Hold it down, to get the last exasperated longs out and then they pop it. I actually saw it recently on GGWPQ. Good news came out when it was sitting at $1, but it didn't pop immediately. Some exasperated longs bailed and thereafter it popped to $3.
However, if this doesn't pop soon, it doesn't bode well. There's been a barrage of good news of late and Cemjq doesn't even ebb up (never mind vault up).
Initially a few weeks back with the initial retracement, I attributed the downtrend to retail selling. I based this on the fact that tutes offload most of their position when bk is in the offing, not after.
This continued downtrend, however, leads me to believe that we've had some straggler funds offloading recently.Also, this brings me to the recent Mffais confusion concerning Barclays. I always knew Mffais was lagging (it seems some here didn't). I've used Mffais for a long time, but when I came here someone introduced me to thebuylist.com.
However, this website is very misleading with it's updated weekly statement. They infer that the information is recent, which I've since realized it most certainly is not (for a while there, they had me duped). Mffais may be lagging, but at least they dont't intentionally infer misleading time periods (the columns clearly state filed and As-of/On...As-of/on being the important one). Thought this warranted a mention as the thebuylist is bandied about here quite often.
Anyway,back to the funds offloading recently. Good news is they've also been meeting with someone buying...just not enough to vault up the price. Again, I really think the float or rather the available float on Cemjq is larger than what people here thought.
When I started posting on this site back 3 months ago, the refrain was the float was almost locked up already...well evidently it wasn't! Also Manti mentioned that it was Momo players that vaulted this up on May 27th. I prefer a Peltz related scenario or some fund or other big fish with a long term horizon loading up. Momo players hit and run and that doesn't bode well for Cemjq.
We need strong long term hands to muscle Cemjq up. The only reason that I decided to play this longer term (as opposed to flipping) was that I thought Cemjq would garner interest from heavy hitters (hope I was right!). Currently in the absence of an asset sale, I don't see cemjq vaulting up without their muscle. An asset sale will vault this up on retail alone.In the absence of an asset sale, we are dependent on the bigger Fish.
Look at the rocking MOR...retail couldn't give a fig!
Somebody start chumming the waters..we need to lure in the Big fins:)
Question to the Mod or Admin (whomever is running the show)...why hasn't this guy been banned from the board?
This is his second post where he blatantly posted a lie. Wallstreet gets his privileges curtailed to one post per day posting the truth and "Fundie" gets a free ride posting lies.
What gives?
Hey Brass, I just quoted the court document to show the flaw in Chem's argument. The court document, challenged his argument and effectively nullified it.
I don't see where my naivete leaps off the page? New recruits won't sign up unless they get some SWAG per the Court document, not per per me ! .
Now does it stick in my craw (see my follow up post to Chem), that they would be seeking bonuses in this economic environment, yes, it does!
However, the issue at hand for us: will the commons remain intact? We don't know, but the wording of the court document (I read all 35 pages) was positive.
We need quality personnel to get us out of this mess, so if that requires some swag, so be it.You can't take a moralistic approach to this matter...it's just makes good business sense!
You my friend are naive if you think otherwise and I mean that with the greatest respect.Some friends I went to college with...had quality degrees and were loyal employees, yet got pink slipped in this economic downturn.
So yeah I get the distasteful aspect of bonus incentives in an environment such as we have now.
However, lets see how fast the shares price drops if they can't retain or hire new quality personnel...pretty damn fast!
Granted, offering bonus & incentive plans in this type of economic environment does teeter on the edge of ethical misconduct.
However, the point is we gotta forge ahead and not dwell on the past issues. Didn't you read my post properly? I quoted that excessively verbose court document:). They lost key personnel (26 management members) and need to retain new ones.
"many potential recruits have made it very clear that the Debtors’ ability to offer a near-term and long-term competitive incentive package is critical to their decision to accept employment with the Debtors"
The potential recruits won't sign up unless they get a nice incentive plan (this may stick in your craw..sticks in mine a lil bit (considering the poor saps that recently got pick slipped in this dismal economic downturn).
That aside, I would most certainly rather have a motivated key executives (one with a nice incentive plan) at the helm rather than a disgruntled one. Disgruntled employees won't hussle for Chemtura's successful emergence from bk.
A motivated executive bodes well for our bottom line, so by all means bring on the swag:)