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.
Fraud Case:
Get even more money from investors
Non-Fraud Case:
Prove their legitimacy to the world while the spotlight is on them so that advertisers know they are a trustworthy company to advertise with (granted: this has backfired so far)
I think that comment is simply referring to the pieces by Citron, Muddy Waters, etc.
If CCME is just a scam and the goal is simply to unload the shares, then I agree... If you know the company is real and have no intention of unloading your shares, however, you want to increase your stake regardless of the market valuation of the shares you own.
If I were management and owned 70% of the shares outstanding, my primary focus would be increase the value of those shares.
He's a witch!!
Let's throw him in the lake and see if he floats!!
What's the longest NASDAQ halt - anyone know?
It would be great to see an extended forensic audit with no news, during which time almost all puts are exercised, with shorts paying sky-high borrow rates, then a flurry of good news as the clean audit is announced, along with special dividend or tender offer...
Well I certainly heard a phone ringing at the 50 second mark in this clip, and the one person at the computer was working...
Value of being a public company
One of the big questions about CCME has essentially been "If they're so profitable, why go public?" Experiencing this whole debacle with MW & Citron has inadvertently helped me to get past this question and understand the value to CCME of being a public company:
While obviously we are all convinced, of CCME's legitimacy, it has taken a lot of DD for us to be confident of this fact... With the nature of such a company, it really takes a lot of work to be certain they are what they say they are. If you are a company looking to buy ad time in China, how do you know the company you're dealing with has the number of buses, screens, etc. that they say they do? It really is hard to know for sure. Invariably, a public company will have a greater level of scrutiny related to these issues, and therefore can help prove the company's legitimacy to advertisers... Increased confidence on the part of advertisers increases their pricing power and allows them to sell more ad time directly (as opposed to allowing advertising agencies a slice of the pie).
added scrutiny = value to advertisers = pricing power = shareholder value
45 seconds into this film you can see one:
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNzcyNDc2MTY=.html
Yes, I saw that... the reason I was meddling with the file in the first place was to try to see if I could find evidence of tampering.. while I couldn't find that, I do think that the tables being simple images is good extra evidence that this is simply really old data that someone was just too lazy to recreate with updated data
What I'm trying to imply is that whenever they updated this old presentation, they would be unable to increase the bus count to actual numbers as of 2010.
(edit: not totally unable, obviously, but it would make it a lot more cumbersome... they may be tempted to just indicate separately that these are old numbers)
I'm not implying that it would be impossible for a short seller to edit these tables then bribe someone to upload them to the website if they really wanted to (although I do think that scenario is improbable)
Advertiser's Kit Sleuthing
Apparently, you can actually open the slide show document in powerpoint... all you need to do is change the .pps file extension to .ppt
Once doing so, you can look at the properties of the file..
File > Properties > Statistics tab
...the document was originally created Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:05:56 PM (according to my computer anyway)
...also of note: while some text is editable, the tables are all simply images.. therefore, anyone updating this presentation from an earlier version would be unable to edit any of the tables.
Just thought you guys might want to know...
YONG - new SA article
By the same guy who had the negative article last week...
http://seekingalpha.com/article/252617-yongye-international-some-answers-and-a-new-concern
Full-text feed for iHub board?
Does anyone know if there is any way to get a feed containing the full text of posts (to be able to read within Google Reader from work)?
Great post DLouis! eom.
Thanks for the responses to this question...
I took "gross of depreciation" to mean "before depreciation", but I think the rest answers the question well enough... I forgot the airport busses had so much higher CPM and had not considered the impact of decreasing LCD costs
Variant View Research "equipment efficiency ratio" argument
I was just re-reading this article and comments:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/252032-china-mediaexpress-the-most-polarizing-stock-in-the-world
It seems as though this argument has some logic to it and was not debunked adequately for my taste in the comments.. does anyone here have any thoughts?
For the period from 2008 (year-end) to 2010 (Q3 or run rate for revenues):
Display network equipment, gross of depreciation, grew 39%
Bus count grew 53%
Revenues grew 227%
I define “equipment efficiency ratio” as revenue $ per equipment $. This ratio grew by 135% over this period. However, ad rates grew only 16% (to Q2’10). Ad minutes grew by 33% due to the addition of embedded ads. This leaves a gap of ~80% unaccounted for. It does not make a significant difference if we substitute bus count for equipment $.
Yes, there are 3 pages of discussion on the site (you can get guest access for free and you should be able to see it) Here is his response (on 12/30/2010) to an earlier request to post the SAIC document:
"Round, I already said that I am not going into the fraud case in detail, and I will respectfully decline your request to post the SAIC financials. I'm not sure what commenatary you want to add about them but I am well aware of what they are and their limitations. My only point in getting on this thread at all was to say that I believe the risk of fraud is substantially higher for Chinese reverse mergers in general and this company trades where it does because the market is pricing in a significant risk of fraud. I am probably guilty of stating the obvious. If you have done your diligence and you are comfortable it isn't, if you are right you will kill it on this one."
The bolded portion also sounds like something he posted on SA about "the fraud case" or "the short case".. He also mentions in the discussion that he is short a basket of reverse merger companies...
Anyway, the reason I mention it is the admission on that site that he was not sure they were authentic... Not that we haven't already figured as much, but it is good confirmation, and he should have indicated as much in his SA article.
Chiming Sang alter ego???
On http://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/value2/ (you can apply for free delayed access) I believe user "specialk992" is Chiming Sang... if you search for CCME, you can see some posts by him in the comments. On 2/7/2011 he states:
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have some summary SAIC information that purports to be from CCME's primary operating subsidiary. The only year I have is 2008 but the stated revenue is way below $17M. I cannot personally vouch for the accuracy of the documents as I received them secondhand and I know they are not always 100% accurate, but $17M is an order of magnitude larger than the SAIC stated revenue.
Chiming Sang alter ego???
On http://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/value2/ (you can apply for free delayed access) I believe user "specialk992" is Chiming Sang... if you search for CCME, you can see some posts by him in the comments. On 2/7/2011 he states:
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have some summary SAIC information that purports to be from CCME's primary operating subsidiary. The only year I have is 2008 but the stated revenue is way below $17M. I cannot personally vouch for the accuracy of the documents as I received them secondhand and I know they are not always 100% accurate, but $17M is an order of magnitude larger than the SAIC stated revenue.
That quote is from Andrew LEST not Andrew LEFT :)
Question
As crazy as the theory may sound, what is happening to this money?
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/644295-leland-miller/128080-can-china-stop-its-banks-from-lending
"Chinese banks typically hit their loan targets far before year end, leaving regulators the impossible (and perhaps dangerous) job of enforcing an almost total clampdown of credit at the end of the year. In 2010, for instance, Chinese banks hit their quota mark in November but still managed to loan a massive 480 billion yuan in December."
I've been following this board for a while now and only recently started posting some, but I think Rato may well be the best poster on this board... I don't necessarily feel as negatively as he does about the sector but it sure is nice to have a rational opposing viewpoint to keep people on their toes... Also, that person has to be someone who everyone can trust... Clearly, Rato has the trust and respect of the members of this board.
You're right, it does not say Microsoft Excel on mine, it says PScript5.dll Version 5.2.2 Nonetheless, perhaps we could get some one with better knowledge of Excel to verify that there is no software or configuration that would result in the PDF showing simply the user at the time the file was converted to PDF
I just PDFed a spreadsheet downloaded from the internet, and it lists me as the author in the PDF... I'm using CutePDF FWIW.
..others should confirm before making this into too big an issue otherwise it would be easy to refute
Cheah Cheng Hye @ 2010 Graham and Dodd Breakfast
I just watched this presentation (http://www4.gsb.columbia.edu/valueinvesting/news/item/7217649/2010+Graham+%26+Dodd+Breakfast+Video%3A+Cheah+Cheng+Hye) by Cheah Cheng Hye who manages Value Partners (www.valuepartnersgroup.com.hk/eng/about/aboutus.php) which manages almost 8 billion in assets with a focus on Greater China and the Asia-Pacific region. The presentation is titled "Value Investing - Making it work in China and Asia"
Overall it was pretty good and worth a watch.. I thought this board may be interested in his comments around the 55 minute mark:
"If you are [a] private enterprise, you don't get access to bank lending, bank loans; you don't get access to privileged locations, and you have to wait a lot longer for licences and other things. So the playing field is very unfair if you are not a state-owned enterprise, and the way to get around that is to be corrupt."
...not sure if this changes the idea that being able to get bank loans is necessarily a warning sign for companies in this space (and vice versa for those able to obtain them) ..or am I reading too much into that comment?