is... a buy and hold investor of dividend US and Canadian stocks
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.
Given that this is pretty much a done deal, why wouldn't you sell at the buyout price? How can it go any higher?? Special committee has approved deal, shareholders will undoubtedly approve??
I think the thing to do with tis is to simply buy a shitload of shares after it falls back to the .02 level. Today shareholders or unitholders got a return of 66% if they sold. If they hold they get a divvy worth 3% unless my math is wrong. 12% on the year. Liquidity is a problem... I have had it before where I buy some penny stock and there simply isn't enough liquidity to execute the strategy. In tis case, you could simply sell what you can and then hold of the divvy with the rest. I wold say... don't buy now.. let it settle down.
Interesting trading pattern...
This thing is a turd. I have listened to all of Rory's SHACs and talks. He is nothing but a salesman and all of his lines are so typical of penny stocks. Why are you guys bothering with this one. Thus stock is not about 5% of what it was when I first looked at it.
I just stumbled across this... this is an interesting stock. The problem with it is that the chances of them ever drilling for these oil deposits are slim, seeing as they are so deep. I have a link below that seems promising... but you must remember this was back in 2014 when oil was 100/ barrel.
http://buysidenotes.com/2014/04/10/gulf-coast-ultra-deep-royalty-trust-gultu-a-very-special-situation/
Here is the statement: "Nine out of every 10 prostatectomies in the United States is performed with the assistance of a machine, "
contained in this article:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/the-fight-for-robots-in-canadas-operatingrooms/article35897282/
"
Nine out of every 10 prostatectomies in the United States is performed with the assistance of a machine, Kelly Grant writes. But in its first ruling on the subject, the committee that advises Ontario on which health technologies to pay for said the benefits weren't significant enough to justify the cost – a recommendation that could send ripples through the whole country's system
Dr. Nathan Wong and a team of skilled health technicians at St. Joseph's hospital in Hamilton support a robot assisted prostatectomy on Thursday, July 27, 2017.
Dr. Nathan Wong and a team of skilled health technicians at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Hamilton support a robot assisted prostatectomy on Thursday, July 27, 2017.
Christopher Katsarov/the Globe and Mail
Kelly Grant Health reporter
Published August 7, 2017
Updated November 12, 2017
The patient, a 70-year-old man with high-risk prostate cancer, was a Jehovah's Witness.
His religion was one of the reasons he decided to undergo surgery at St. Joseph's Healthcare in Hamilton, home to a robot named da Vinci whose steady metal hands can remove a prostate with scant risk of the blood transfusions forbidden by the man's faith.
On a recent afternoon, the patient laid unconscious on an operating table as surgeon Bobby Shayegan and his team plunged a camera and three robotically controlled surgical instruments through small incisions in his abdomen.
Dr. Shayegan settled himself in front of a three-dimensional screen, clasped the two joysticks that controlled the tools inside his patient's pelvis and proceeded to cut, cauterize and stitch until he freed the man's prostate, pulling it out through one of the original incisions.
There was next to no blood.
"That was routine," Dr. Shayegan said afterward, holding the plum-sized gland that he and the robot had removed together. "Very routine."
This is how nine out of 10 prostatectomies are carried out in the United States. Robot-assisted surgery isn't the way of the future there – it's the way of now.
But in Canada, where robotic operations are much less common, a new recommendation against public funding for robot-assisted prostatectomies has physician leaders warning this country could fall even further behind the rest of the developed world when it comes to offering cutting-edge medical procedures.
In its first real ruling on a robotic surgery, the expert committee that advises Ontario on which new health technologies to pay for said there was no good evidence that robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is any better than conventional open surgery when it comes to controlling cancer or preserving urinary and sexual function.
The panel said the robot's other benefits – patients have smaller incisions, lose less blood, suffer less pain and leave the hospital sooner – were not significant enough to justify spending, on average, an extra $3,224 a case, a figure that does not include the millions that wealthy benefactors have spent buying the machines for Canadian hospitals.
"
correction... 9 out of 10 prostate removals in the US is performed with the assistance of "a machine", not necessarily the Da Vinci machine..
I just read an article that the DaVinci system by ISRG did 9 out of 10 Prostate removals in the US last year. That means that the are a dominant player. In order to gain a foothold, Transenteryx would have to differentiate somehow... is that the touch sensitivity?
The guy that put me on to this stock told me tat the only competition was ISRG, currently trading at a PR of 44 with solid financials and a similar chart to every other stock right now, beaten down... my research tells me there are a bunch. Looks like it has taken it's time to be successful after FDA approval in 2000.
The pro argument for this company would be that the market is so huge that it is only a matter of time before they are successful. ISRG has one hell of a chart.
Transenteryx is differentiated by having touch sensitivity?
Anybody know who the other competitors are?
hi. new to this board. I got into this stock in some way awhile back and I regret it. Not sure what to make of it. I don't usually buy these kind of developmental stock. Got approached by a guy at work and he swore by it. Sad it had a really hot product and that there were few players in this emerging market. blah blah. I believed in the market need... got excited... and got in in the summer.
well having had time to think about it... I am simply going to wait for the next popup and get out. It seems to pop up on a regular basis. Unfortunately, the market right now is not kind to these companies.
I don't usually do this. I normally buy stocks based on their numbers and stock with that approach. Works great. solid dividend-paying stocks.
Stocks like this all have great ideas. only a few come to fruition.. most don't, and that is where the losses are..
I am here for discussion. Quite frankly it is hard to find any research on this company and what I have found is not good.
Have half a mind to contact the analysts listed on their web site and see what they can tell me.
Thoughts??
Just had a look at the financials for this stock. Personally, I don't think the R/S is going to be bad for the stock. The issue appears to be delisting. The financials look OK for a recovering stock and it should not crash following uplist, as is usually the case. Can't see a problem.
Having said that... I sold most of my hipping holdings after the last runup, years ago now. I am surprised how beaten down the sector is... this is the only one I held because it was so strong. And I doubled down on it... did all the right things from a textbook, just can't believe how beaten down it is.
Now that is reaching. I don't think that Donald Trump gives a sh&t about international trade in gaming...
Than again, didn't he come up with a defence strategy or weapon that only exists in video games??
GLUU is like most hi tech companies... they boast about their ever-increasing revenues, but the costs are out of control. It is usually either R&D or SG&A that is out of control. As a result it is very difficult for them to be profitable.
GLUU is typical. Looking at the stiff competition, which could wipe them out at any time, I elected to sell half. It all rests on the quality of the games and the interest level in them. That is such a hard thing to judge...
I sold half..
I can give you my first impressions of the stocks touted in this article. They are crap compared to GLUU, with the possible exception of ATVI (Activision), and here is why.
Following the link in the article... "More ResourceFull Video Game Giants"?? is the tout for these 3...
https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/02/12/3-top-mobile-gaming-stocks-to-buy-now.aspx
I can discuss each one objectively.
ATVI is expensive, with a PE approaching 55 and a price of $71. That is way too much money for a diversified retail investor, especially in tis risky game. I admit that Activision is solid and could likely use their pricing to put considerable pressure on GLU. They are more "resourceful" in that sense. The dividend is puny.
I don't buy stocks like this. You either buy a stock for capital appreciation or the dividend, or for both in a perfect world. I can't see this having much appreciation with the PE the way it is. And the dividend is puny, so what would be the point?
CYOU has choppy decreasing earnings, a fairly high PE at 15, and it is Chinese... whoa right there. Chinese companies are reputed to be scams... that is just what leaps out at me. Puny dividend as well. Not recommended by analysts as well.
TCEHY has on information in my trading platform, off to a bad start right there. puny dividend... chart looks smooth but maxed out.
GLUU is domesticly owned and on my trading platform has positive earnings increasing going forward... highly regarded by analysts... at an affordable price point. For someone to write an article like this is not seeing the big picture.
I bought in 2014 and have since made a 50% return on my investment (unrealized).
Your criticisms are lame. This is my first time posting on this board. I have been a sto killer for years. I think I am up, but I can't be sure.
I view GLUU as a risk. I bought 3 tech stocks years ago. 2 of the three are doing well, the other went bankrupt.
I agree that GLUU is spending a lot on marketing and sacrificing margins, but the other 3 stocks mentioned in the article are a joke. There is no comparison. After reading that article I am glad I am a shareholder of GLUU. It is the best of the bunch.
The only variable is if the games catch on.
I can't understand negativity here as GLUU is forecast to make money going forward.
Investors beware!! Pick your sticks wisely and look at the while market. Do not buy stocks that are pumped in an article like this!! The author was paid, don't kid yourself.
interesting...
come to think of it... why is Rory so concerned about the stock price... for the same reasons..
Suggestion for everyone... take a long-term view. The current price fluctuations mean nothing in the long term scheme of things. Think about it for a minute... what difference does it make in a year of the stock price is $10 or $15 where you got in?
I do dividend stocks but the principle is the same. If you chose well, it may have a temporary downturn, perhaps due to the activities of shorts. But it will recover... I hold for a year or more minimum.
so Rory was very specific about the shorts. He is the only one I have heard propose this POV. He said that the Shorts sold their shares lower than the current stock price and therefore are getting squeezed. He was quite clear. That is entirely different than a scenario where the evil shorts are simply driving down the stock price (over the last 2 months) and trying to "kill" the company. I have to give him credit for it at least being plausible..
Fact is, if you are all thinking long term it does not really matter.. I would not stress over it. Fusz will either execute as you are predicting it will or it won't... end of story.
Salesmen must adapt instantaneously to any question... I should know I am job hunting right now.
I think that it is a rounding error on my trading platform. I just looked at the Filings on the web site and got this:
2017 2016
(k) (k)
R&D 375 287
SG&A 4327 2873
That is an R&D staff of 4 people in 2017. And about 10 times as much Selling and Administration.
My trading platform showed zeros.
My little table does not work well here. 375 k in R&D in 2017. 4327k in SG&A.
Another thing about the latest SHAC video that stuck out was Rory's take on shorting the stock. It actually makes sense as opposed to the standard model, it is just less applicable as time goes on here. And could it have happened as Rory is suggesting??
His premise is that shorts sold the stock short before the runup of the last 3 months and are now forced to cover at a loss. This is not the usual story told by a CEO. The usual story is that the shorts have driven the stock down from highs. So the shorts would be responsible for driving it down from $2.50 or thereabouts to a buck where it sits now. That would be the usual story line from a CEO.
In order for what Rory is proposing to be true the shorts would have had to have tried to drive it down from .10, where it was back in January, to an even lower number.
I don't know much about shorting stocks, just know that if the price continues to go down the problem that the shorts have, supposedly, will be less and less. And... one must question... would they really try to drive the price down from #0.10 to an even lower price?? At that time what was the publicity surrounding the stock like? Would there even have been an investor base to attempt to scare out of their shares as he postulates? If you want to scare investors out of their shares there has to be people listening and a somewhat elevated share price. The price had been around $0.10 for 3 years.
Just be careful with that one.
Maybe I am not but that is not what is important here. I am trying to give investors reasons to question tings and maybe make better decisions. There are lots of stocks to choose from and they all have great ideas. Thinking that one stock is "perfect" and has the answer to everything is unrealistic.
Any product or marketer must differentiate themselves from the competition and attack a target market.
Getting onboard with Oracle is a good thing, but truly anybody can buy from Oracle, and is Oracle putting p any cash unless anything is sold?? likely not.
Good luck to yourself as well and all nFusz investors. I am not one btw... and it does not fit my style so I likely won't be.
It is in the "I Hate CRM" video directly in the iBox. I can paraphrase what Rory says...
- he hates CRM (most CRM packages)
- it takes more time to learn them then to get results from them
- Everybody sells, even if it is just themselves...
- not many are good at it (I agree with that...)
- therefore the solution to increasing sales volumes is to remove selling skills from the sales process... whoa!! that is a serious statement...
- the interactive video sells the product for you.. another serious statement..
I think there is a definite positive in that the SG&A Cost is seriously reduced... but the kind of product this approach is used to sell gives rise to some doubts.
Is it similar to an email scheme used to pump and dump stocks that generates thousands of emails in the hopes of getting a 1 or 2% response rate and making money?
Personally, I would not want to send out an interactive video out to all of my contacts without some kind of warming up to the product.. just my point of view. It may leave a bad taste in some people's mouth.
I watched the last SHAC video and maybe one other, although I cannot remember for certain. These are just my opinions... maybe not shared or voiced by others. I do know that Rory said words to that effect, maybe not the exact words. He started out by saying that he "hated CRM systems"... and then went on to say why his was different.
Oracle is marketing the product to their substantial customer base. They are a channel for nFusz are they not? So they would not necessarily care if nFusz had any R&D cost or not. I just find it odd..
On thing to consider... better to do it once and get it right if you are going to sell something to somebody. Otherwise is a "scorched earth" policy where a company continually relies on new business whilst leaving a trail of pissed off customers.
What is the first reaction to the video going to be as opposed to a polished personal performance...
As I said in my earlier post.. SG&A expenses are a challenge for any startup, this would reduce that cost and get the message out. Not true for a larger enterprise that can afford to make that excellent first impression.
Is the target market smaller companies that may want to reach their customer base in a professional manner without incurring high SG&A??
My Sales experience is limited. I guess it depends on the type of product. For anything complex, I would think that it must be face to face. And it should be a short pitch. I remember one sales company in particular, that used to send their salesmen from business to business in the US with a prepared pitch. Tough work. maybe the distribution of a video would be similar to email sales campaigns where a huge volume of potential customer is targeted and all it takes is a few to make money?
Anyway I can't see how removing the F2F personal aspect is a good thing.
Another question... you have no R&D expenses in your financials... how can that be? typically, hi tech companies have high SG&A and R&D and have trouble controlling R&D costs. You do not have any R&D costs... I must conclude from that that your product cannot have any value, as no work has gone into it. ??
Rory or anybody... I took the time to listen to your latest SHAC video. This stock is intriguing, although I don't profess to understand the CRM marketplace and your place in it.
Why do you say that you need to "remove the sales skills" from the sales process? I think all would agree that sales work involves some tactics which may be viewed as sleazy by some,, to varying degrees, No one can be totally honest when selling something, especially themselves. But that is what makes salesmen effective, and it is a skill that not everybody has...
So why do you think your company needs to focus on removing sales skills from the sales process.??
Thanks...
I think it is similar to poker where you are playing odds and making decisions wrt how much to Risk on a given bet. Yesterday KAT (Katanga Mining - TSX) crashed. I don't think anybody would have known that. If you had everything tied up in it, it would have been a 50% loss if you panicked. It has recovered today.
The clip in my last post from Molly's Game showed it well. The guy was playing the odds then he cracked after a bad hand.
My Method involves selecting dividend stocks through stock screeners and looking for solid dividend returns and capital gain were possible. I also do some swing trading.
But in the area of pure trading... I know of a couple of ways to make money by using "Rules" as you say.
- buying at the open on Good News when the Bid/ Ask does not gap up from the close of the previous days trading. That means the news has not been disseminated fairly to all investors as intended. So that is Market Inefficiency. it is possible to make fairly regular 10-20% returns this way. You have to be tied in to News on all stocks of interest. Understanding charting helps as well.
- playing weather patterns. Using Fear and Greed. I had a thought last fall that perhaps Property and Casualty Insurance companies were taking a beating via Hurricane Irma. Sure enough, I found a great insurance company trading near $16 that was valued at $25 prior to the storm season. I bought and sold at $25, making $5k in the process... Greed means selling when things are absurdly high...
Those are the only ways I know of making money via trading... it bothers me when I see those presentations encouraging people to start trading options. If you can't trade stocks fairly well, you can't trade options. To say an Option is "Insurance" is simply a simplification of something much more complicated that would drown most people in transaction fees.
Given that, I am curious what your SLAB Method entails but truthfully I would not spend the $$ on it.
Thanks Clay. Keep up the good work. I wish you all the best as well. I am also an Engineer...
Clay: Here is why I say your response is like a Contemporary Artist. If you have ever taken a tour through Europe you saw a lot of art and likely had a tour guide explaining it to you. Everything in a piece has meaning. People's expressions, everything...
Then you look at a pile of Brillo boxes piled haphazardly in the middle of a room. It sold for $1 Million. Speak to the artist on a contemporary art piece, and the answer is always the same... "it can mean anything you want".. every single time..
Funny...
The stock market is open to interpretation and there really are no rules or Right/ Wrong... the only way to be truly successful is to be able to predict the future, which no one can. In that sense it is like playing poker... you have to play the odds... if you don't...
what are you into.. Contemporary Art?? Actually I am not trying to be critical, just funny. Good of you to get out there and peddle your wares. You are very forthright.
You remind me of someone from another board that once served as the Investor Relations Rep for that company. He is now working as an analyst for a firm. In his videos he professes that one should invest with him because he knows so much... he lost money for his first 10 years.
Honestly, I am curious what your SLAB method entails. I have a Method and if you want to know I can explain it right here. It works well...
Clay: I have a question.. on this video..
Hope no one got burned on this one. I got out over .80. Bought in at .75.
Headwind seems legitimate, whatever one may think of their product, but it looks like they need funding as well. Best thing to do is to sign up to Headwind's web site to get news releases in case they sign with anyone else. There is money to be made here, although anyone who did not get out is now screwed.
https://www.headwindtechnologies.ca/timeline
"Headwind Technologies Ltd. is in the final stages of preparing our turbine for the commercial market.
The purpose of our relationship with MITU was to fund the final stages of development and provide us with a marketing agency.
Thus far we have had difficulties finalizing the contract and hope to come to a mutually satisfactory conclusion shortly.
Please refer to this website for further updates."
The problem with this is.... which way is it going to go? I think you can only go with history... it might possible get a bump here if it is promoted. However, the story that has unfoldd is nto the story I was told. I was told specific sell dates and price targets, onw of which has come to pass.
What I have seen is that the stock does respond to call volume. It is a boiler room operation.
The story of getting to the NASDAQ won't happen now... that was bullsh**.
It could get a bounce but there is no way of telling, and when it dumps... it dumps fast.
"Drag??". You mean pull...lol
I got a call yesterday. I happened to be at work so did not take it.
Looking at the chart, the success of the stock appears to be reliant on the call volume, not the promotion "story" that they tell. If that story is true, it certainly is not working...
It did double initially. I held on, but now I have sold what I have. Too scary.
I think that it is a simple boiler room operation and that the story is manufactured to generate buys.