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.
No value investor would touch that crap since there is no value in it to begin with. So saying you are value investor while buying this kind of crap is misleading.
First of all, there are not many cases where you break the long term downtrend. Perhaps on any given day, only 1 out of 3000 stocks. You are going to watch all 3000 of them?
Three, false breakouts are more rule than exception, these days. What this means is, you will buy at, say 0.38 but it drops to 0.34 the next day. You just got screwed by the hedgies. And then you panic, and sell.
Take profit or let it run? It does quite often fall back to 0.36 (which is now support) before moving higher again. After all, you don't know much about the company in the first place. So you will probably take profits too soon. Or not?
You are right I pissed my pants. When I saw that they stopped releasing reports in 2015, I did pissed my pants. I don't even need to look further or deeper. It is one of those stocks I wouldn't bother touching with 12 feet pole because it has nothing in there to see to value it properly, in other words, it is not transparent enough. That's value investing.
If we cross it, we will have more buying activity. Simply the way it is in general.
"You don't think trends and patterns matter? Then only buy stocks after a double top and sell after a double bottom."
As for "Value pretenders". lol. Yes, there are many of those but I'm not one of them. I'm the one holding HERB stock. I can show it to 100 value investors and none of them would buy it. So who is the Pretender here?
"The chart usually tells a story."? If you look at the chart alone, would you get an idea on what's really happening in a company? No! How about if you look at the financial report alone? Would you get an idea on what's really happening in a company? Absolutely, charts and TA are just noises, it's just a way to entertain yourself.
" And we will get more buyers when we break the long term downtrend. " No! We will get more buyers OR sellers depending on the news. Trends and TA don't play a role much here. They just reflect what already happened in the past. That's why you don't use it as a guide to predict the future.
I am really curious what books you have read about value investing, because I've read almost all of it (Ex: Benjamin Graham, Phil Fisher, Mark Howards, Seth Klarman, Jason Zweig, Joel Greenblat and more), and non of them would participate in Technical Analysis hysteria, NON...ZERO.
If you have read Margin of Safety by Seth Klarman, he talks about the "Value Pretender." Makes me wonder if you are one of them. But one thing I'm sure about you is that you know your stuff very well, you just keep falling on these traps that I previously stated.
The price of a house goes up and down everyday, but does it necessarily mean that the quality of that house is different than it was couple minutes ago or couple days ago? Not necessarily. That's the idea of the market and its short term fluctuations, technical indicators don't mean anything.
"Currently there is some resistance at 0.34 and the MA100 is at 0.36" Those are just your imaginations. The only thing that will move this stock is news and it has nothing to do with technical indicators.
I thought you are value investor, you think Warren Buffet would bother spending a second of his time looking at the charts and see where these technical indicators right now? I don't think so.
The idea of value investing is to look at the financial reports and try to come up with your OWN valuation of the company regardless of the market price or any of these technical indicators. And if the intrinsic value of the company is higher than the market price, then you buy the stock, but it has NOTHING to do with technical indicators whatsoever. So simple, yet people like to complicate things. Ask yourself a question, when deciding buying a house, would you look at some charts to decide whether it is a good purchased? No! You will go inside that house and see if it is actually worth purchasing based on its quality. The decision is based on your own valuation NOT on some charts.
It is embedded in our genes to always try to predict the future and attach meaning to almost everything. It is a part of our survival during the evolution process, but this way of thinking is faulty in investing world.
All this time you thought I was RealDutch? I wish I were him in terms of doing my own due diligence. But even RD is falling on the ideas and traps of Technical Analysis and excessive predictions, that's why he kept getting disappointed when things don't go well as he predicted. Other than that, he is a smart guy.
"That means the stock is moving in a bullish direction" if it was that easy and obvious, everyone would be a millionaire by now. And since there is not a lot of millionaire out there means that Technical analysis are no different than palm reading.
And Efficient Market Hypothesis do NOT apply on technical analysis either. So what exactly is your investment strategy? Pure gut feelings? You might as well just toss a coin to decide for your next "investment." or just simple invest on low-cost index fund.
I'm still little bit confused, why would the market makers be involved in this?
First of all, thanks for taking your time to respond.
When you said "If they are distributing $1 of value then the market makers will beat it down by $1 on the ex-date." Shouldn't it be the other way around?
If they are distributing let's say $2, shouldn't that be the benchmark on the price, therefore a $2 or higher valuation for SIAF is an appropriate number at that point?
Can you elaborate more on how we will be trading at $1.50 on first distribution and lower on the second? And how did you come up with that numbers? If that information is really accurate and everybody knows about it, does it make sense to you that people are not buying at this level so that they can make quick profit on first distribution and sell it before it reaches $1.50? How can you be so sure about this price? Are your valuations based on fundamentals or just technical and predictions?
how long do you expect before these key drivers to materialize? I mean, we've been waiting for years and years for these key drivers to come soon, what makes you think that this time is different?
Sorry for too many questions, it's just I need to ask how you'd come up with these ideas.
Or are they? With the amount of shares being issued recently coupled with poor performance, I guess they are right so far.
You said "Bubbles move in an upward tend are created from HYPE." And does it make efficient to you? The keyword in your sentence is "HYPE" which is based on emotions and not logic.
The main idea of Efficient Market Hypothesis is that all the participants in the market are rational beings, that they all have the same skills and informations to decide whether the assets in question are cheap or expensive which is absurd.
I believe that the market does an excellent job to reflect the intrinsic value of an asset but NOT ALWAYS, bubbles is one example of this concept.
I believe SIAF deserves to be criticized based on its performance these past years. But I also do believe that people are just overreacting to it, thus driving the prices lower than it should be. It's just like a bubble, but this time it's on the opposite trend. it's still an inefficient market.
So if the market is efficient, explain to me why bubbles exist? You did not answer that part.
"They are what their PPS says their are" in other words, you don't believe in inefficient market? You believe that each and every stocks in the market are valued correctly am I right? If so, how do you explain the bubble then? A week before the dot.com bubble bursts, yahoo was trading around 100s, after it bursts, it was trading around 10s. Surely one those valuation was incorrect. This is just one example out of many.
Nothing has changed much about its fundamentals. The only thing that has changed much was the perception of the participants.
If you are going to let the PPS guide you, one day you will find yourself buying when everybody else are buying and selling when everybody else are selling. And we know that's not how you make money here.
This is zero-sum game, the only way to make money here is be on the opposite side of the crowd and be right at the same time. The PPS does not tell much, it only tells you what the majority of people thinks and what everybody thinks can always be misleading.
When do you expect the entire Tri-Way stock dividends will be distributed to shareholders? 2 years from now? And do we need to wait for Tri-Way post-IPO before we can sell it if we want to?
Will the collateral shares receive a portion of it? And if so, are we going to get it back once the collateral shares are gone?
It's worthless to argue with these type of people, they will never see what you see. And that's a huge advantage. Someone should always be on the other side to prosper in the stock market.
The real question is where are they going to get that 6 mil to pay as cash dividends to shareholders? It seems like they are desperate for cash, the last thing they should be worrying is to pay cash dividends or buy back shares.
And even if they have a little cash to spare, at this depressed price level, it is more sound to buy back shares. One should put themselves in their position and act rationally and insist the urge to act for their own benefits.
Like most investors, I would prefer dividends over shares buy back. But if I were in their positions, I would rather buy back shares, it makes sense since it is a lot cheaper and more beneficial for the company in long run.
I already put that into consideration.
I'm only here to look at the numbers and facts, assume the worst case scenarios (ex: dilution, obsolete inventories and plantations, uncollectable AC, bad management etc..), and if the price still looks attractive, then I would buy it.
2 years ago when it was trading at high multiples, I would consider this as risky investment. Now, the lower it gets, the less risky it becomes. Right now we have reached that point where people's perception about this company becomes worse than reality.
There is no such good investment if bought at high price, but there is also no such bad investment if bought at low price enough to justify the purchase.
Let's say everything that SIAF owns are "shit" (Which is highly unlikely) except its AC and Cash, that alone are worth around $3 per share. Even if you divide AC by half because, some of it are "uncollectable" (Which is also highly unlikely), that still won't justify its price right now.
I would like to say thank you zero, I've accumulated almost the same amount of shares around at 60 cents to 80 cents. Thanks for all the hard work, you did all the job for me! I don't know if this was your plan all along, but thanks!
With a Net-Net Working Capital alone worth $8, and a Book Value worth $21, this is a no brainer. Even under the worst case scenario, there is no way you wouldn't make a profit out from it with this kind of price.
Maybe 2 years ago, its price was risky, but at this level? I don't think so.
Numbers don't tell you much about its future prospect, did you predict this downfall with your "Audited numbers" when you initially invested on this company? I'm pretty sure less people did.
I have my own facts and numbers, but I am not certain about the future since everything can happen like what has been happening right now.
Well on other hand you are shouting "I'm gonna become rich on this stock" as if you are really certain. Both of you are acting irrational.
And you didn't make 10% yesterday, as long as you haven't cash in, you are still expose to massive risk of losing everything.
You are starting to sound like zero, one is very indefinite optimistic and the other is indefinite pessimistic. Both talking non sense.
Did I ask for your opinion? No! so shut up! Like I said before, all I hear from you is blah blah blah. I won't take your advice seriously as long you dont provide me a facts. Everything you say are just pure assumptions.
P.S Don't reply!
Thanks for the reply RD!
More question:
What do you think is worst case scenario for a new investor at this price level?
Since you are more informed than most of us here, I just want to ask you few questions.
1) How many collateral shares are out there, and will they ever be bought back? If so, what is the estimate date?
2) Couple years ago, its market price was around $10. Do you know what started the decline?
3) And Last, what's your experience about its management throughout the years as an investor of this company?
Thanks again!
Even if you try to compare your unfortunate results from the ones who had it worse, losing is still losing. You can rationalize as much as you want to make yourself feel better, at the end of the day, you lost money.
You have to avoid this comparison bias if you want to become a better investor.
The only question you should be asking to yourself is "Was I right all along"?
I don't know where people got the idea that this stock can surge to $100. With 28 Million Shares and a stock trading at $100, that's a total of 3 trillion dollars market price. Is the company worth 3 trillion dollars? I don't think so... That's just basic math and common sense.
Hi RD, you mentioned that you have small group who invested on this company. I'm just wondering when did you start accumulating the shares, what is your average total holdings per share?
Too much of prediction, the least of what you expect will occur more
I completely agree with you about what word "should" implies, but just like what you stated "...For instance we don't know that there will be people living on our earth in 10 years." His previous statement of "Earnings for SIAF SHOULD be going up again." is also futile.
I guess my point is that predicting the future is really misleading to the public. Especially, to people who don't know what they are doing.
No one asked for your opinion. All I hear from you is blah blah blah.
If you have no facts to provide me, don't even bother replying on my comments period.
PS: Go play CSGO
When you said "Earnings for SIAF SHOULD be going up again." Are you really that certain? Do you know what the future will hold?
Like I said previously, certainty and over confidence are most likely the reason why this stock has been going down. People had higher expectation that didn't materialize. There was a lot of things that "SHOULD" happen but didn't happen.
So you are basing your valuation on something that everyone knows?
So you are buying when everyone else are buying and selling when everyone are selling? You don't have your own methodology of valuing a company? It's just pure following the herd?
If it was that easy, don't you think that everyone should be rich by now?
The site you provided me indicates only what has been happening, not what's going to happen in the future. No protection on the downside whatsoever.
And how did you come up with "...can easily be valuead at 5-10 times earnings" and "..16 usd was only a a fantasy number, all mathematic values are much higher.."?
Can you provide some facts to justify that valuations?
The future is uncertain, if you are just basing your valuation on something that may not occur in the future, this kind of valuation is really misleading.
This is also one of the reason why its market price has plummeted these past months, people had higher expectation but failed to materialize. They were over paying base on hopes and gut feelings.
As I previously stated, I see a lot of potential on this company, but I won't overpay so much for it. No stock is a safe investment if bought at higher level.
I agree that its value does not reflect on the price yet. But to tell people that it is still a bargain if bought at below $16 is really misleading.
People being so over optimistic about it's future prospect is what scarring me the most.
This is how people got screwed up in a first place. Just wondering, where do you get that valuation from?
I get pretty nervous when someone is pretty sure on what they are doing. Especially, when they starts saying they would get "filthy rich." Most of the time, it is the opposite that would happen, and they would start blaming the outside factors like they always do.
I see potential on this company, but I won't always be certain since a lot of things can happen.