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.
Just short it now dude - why wait? I'm sure that a few insiders would be happy to scoop up your shares at these prices........
Thanks TC - as usual, you are able to make my point better than I am
One person's opinion. Everyone who's bought all these shares on the way down is betting against your original point - that the market is always right .....always takes two to tango where the market is concerned.
Anyway, your original point is just not true...the market may be right with AMY for now (based on the info that's out there), time will tell whether or not those who buy and hold have made a good decision...
Nah....the market is not always right. Many successful "investors" make money when they see opportunities that are created when the market's perception is out of step with what's really going on at a company. Not guaranteeing that's the case here but....I look at an insider buy as indicative of an insider recognizing just such an opportunity - recognition based on information typically not available to the investing public.
I could swear we must be married to the same woman but mine goes by "Deborah"........
"Go big or go home", eh Danno?? Hehe.........
So what? I don't believe they are "still" on the case because I have no reason to believe they were "ever" on the case. Given (IMO) the remote possibility that they were/are on the case, then they have been billing CCME for over a year of work. First, I can't imagine it would take anyone that long to make a determination as to what went on here and second, I wonder what that does to the alleged cash balance......just sayin'.
Why is it that nobody ever hears anything from the company in the form of news/pr releases? Nothing since February of 2011. Again, just sayin'.......draw your own conclusions. I drew mine a long time ago.
TC - at this point, I can only assume it was "justly" in the case of CCME given the complete lack of info or shareholder support from the company since Cheng's BS letter of February 7, 2010. Time for his "karmuppance" as you would say :)
BTW, I'll see you on the AMY board since I am now a shareholder :)
-Chuck
I sent Mr. Nussbaum an email last month and did not get a response. Not even sure what his involvement with CCME is, if any at this point. Just sayin'...........
If this company is not a fraud, how would you explain Deloitte's findings as itemized in their resignation letter as well as the resignations of the CFO, Dorothy Dong (Starr's director) and the Chairman of the Audit Committee??
Wasn't PWC "hired" by DLA/Piper who was "hired" by the "Audit Committee" (btw, what did these people ever audit?) to do an "independent investigation" of some/all of the items that DTT alleges in it's resignation letter?
We haven't seen or heard squat about any of this since they were "hired". As Chris says in an earlier post, more than enough time has gone by for the "company" to prepare and disseminate information about the results of these "investigations", yet, nothing.....therefore, my assumption is that DLA/PWC were never hired and no investigation ever took place. Some Audit Committee (2 Bozos) - I mean seriously?
Have a great trip - my guess is that CCME pps isn't going any higher any time soon (maybe even in my lifetime - ughhh!!)
Now if you would only predict that CCME was going back to 20 bucks, maybe I would have an opportunity to extricate myself from this nightmare!! Hope all is well Dan
TC - I would guess that it probably looks a lot like the Starr complaint since many of the basic issues are the same. Obviously, the "Starr-specific" issues would not be part of the class action.....do you think these are reasonable assumptions? Thanks.
I would be willing to bet that, in China, even I could get MY credit rated "AAA" in exchange for the "appropriate" payment to the "appropriate" government official or ratings service employee. Just sayin'..........
Couldn't agree more.....
Chris - I have the same report that I got from a guy who used to be a regular contributor here. You would recognize his name if I posted it....so the report is legit but I'm not sure if the data provided in it is. Having said that, if it's not, you would think Starr would also be after Nielsen by now, no?
They were not "forced to be quiet" from the time the Deloitte allegations came out and the stock was halted through the time that the Starr complaint was filed, yet they said nothing - no rebuttal, no explanations, no defense, nothing. Is this how an responsible (innocent?) company behaves? I don't think so.
CCME management is either stupid, ethically challenged or is guilty of much of what they have been accused of (likely all of these). If Starr hadn't sued them, my guess is that we would never hear from CCME again.......
I hope things are not what they seem to be but the company has not behaved responsibly since the trading halt in March IMO. I'm truly ashamed at myself to still be a shareholder in a company run by such pathetic people and particularly for not selling when I could have, especially in late January when the stock was $23. Thanks for the debate but I'm done......
Are you serious? How about for the benefit of their shareholders or to clear their name?
You are suggesting they are innocent until proven guilty. If they were/are truly innocent, why would they risk being sued by Starr (as well as the shareholder suits which are sure to follow) along with having to absorb the expense of "defending" themselves?
They could have avoided a lot of this mess, including delisting, had they been more proactive in their own defense IMO. Instead, because they have chosen to keep quiet, they are guilty until proven innocent - this perception among investors is built into the stock price.
The burden of proof is on CCME........to suggest otherwise is a fantasy (again IMO).
And why didn't CCME respond directly to the allegations? They didn't need a forensic audit to do so - they know what they did but chose not to come clean.........
Haha - Tom could you translate please? Is CCME looking to avoid (or at least postpone) discovery?? If so, that's shocking (Not......) and why would that be a good legal strategy? What could be gained from stalling like that?
And nothing from the company to disprove that they ARE a fraud. They had plenty of time to state their case before the Starr complaint was filed. Nothing from Cheng since February 7.....one of the reasons the stock is where it is IMO.
To current/former longs who have been here awhile (Chris, Trader, Shermadog, etc.): have you guys determined a good way to stay on top of info that might become available about the company (Starr legal proceedings, Piper investigation, etc.)? It just feels like we have fallen into a black hole here where info is concerned and it doesn't seem likely for the company to release any given its track record since February........thoughts??
Dude's a legend in his own mind I think.......
TF (Traderfan) - That's how I've always known you but I am also aware of the "Thomas Franklin" connection for some of the newer folks and those who have been known to hang out at Yahoo....not to worry though - no way anyone would confuse you with this Thomas Franklin character!
I'll agree with "a" (obviously), "b" is true but a pretty big leap given the contents of the DTT write-up and the $23 pps in "c" is a pipe dream......those who own shares will be extremely fortunate if the stock ever trades again IMO.
Chris - 5 bucks 10 years from now would be a 32% annual return from here (.31/share) - pretty good!! Of course, if your cost basis is 6 bucks like mine, your annual return goes negative (-1.8%).....not likely that I'll hang on that long anyway!! LOL
You're my idol - maybe you should start a hedge fund that specializes in US listed Chinese companies.
Or a double if it goes to .52 - but then you already knew that....
Haha...yeah, we absolutely killed it today :)
Who said Dorothy was fired? Help me out, I don't remember seeing that.....
Agreed, and similar to the way I would explain Dorothy Dong's resignation. Even though she would normally be considered "part of the problem" as a BOD member, she had to get out of the way so her employer, Starr, could file suit against Cheng, Jacky, etc.
Tim - nice to hear from you again. Do you by chance have a link to that Nielsen report? Saw you guys over on the AMY board - Dan, Trader, you, etc. Sounds like a legit potential winner! Best of luck; I hope to join you over there ate some point, hopefully sooner than later :)
-Chuck
Since academics and government officials typically make lousy business people, I'm even more comfortable taking the side of the argument that says he couldn't pull this off (at least not without a lot of outside help as Chris suggested)...thanks for making my point for me. :)
Chris - I'll wait for the movie to show up on Netflix LOL. Even then I'm not sure I could watch the whole thing without blowing lunch.
By the way, do you put any stock at all in Ping Luo's DD? If my memory is correct (big "if"), even after she was let go she reiterated that she stood by the work she did. Also I noted from Deloitte as part of their 10K work that their bus count came up short but only by about 1300 out of a possible 27,200. That would imply an existing business although who knows what the revenue, expense and margin numbers look like.
Lastly, CME has stuck with the 27,200 count on its website and in the minimal press releases and SEC filings that we have seen since the halt/delisting. I know the plan was to increase the count over time through the addition of more clients but that does not seem to have happened........not sure what to make of that.
Obviously still WAY to many unanswered questions which is why we are at 30 cents.......
Your post documents how it would work if this were all an "outside" job so I guess I would have to agree with that since I do not believe there was ever much brainpower at the company to begin with.
As a result, it is quite possible that Cheng was an easy guy to "recruit" by people who know how to make such a fraud go, once they showed him that he could make a lot more money running with them as opposed to being a responsible CEO.........
Chris - I get your points completely even though I may be a bit more hopeful than your posts suggest you are.
Here's what I don't get. If, in fact, this company was/is a total fraud, who is responsible for creating the "illusion" that it wasn't? Jacky? Cheng? The Board?
My point is that none of these people, or any others that were close to this debacle, possess (either individually or collectively) the intellectual horsepower to be able to think this through to the point where they could design, develop and implement a set of circumstances (a "plan") that would fool everyone including Starr, Deloitte, individual investors etc. At least I don't see it.....Cheng? He owns a company with his mom of all people and he has never struck me as being the sharpest knife in the drawer. Yet, would we have to look to him as being the "brains of the outfit" since almost everyone else quit?
So I guess my hope is that he isn't so bright as to be able to create such a plan and perpetrate such a fraud and that there really IS a business that is making money here that eventually shows up in the results of an investigation, a re-listing of the stock and a subsequest rise in the share price.
Sure, he seems to have screwed a few things up, maybe even some things that are important to American investors, but I can't see that it's because he's a genius.....more likely that he and many other Chinese companies have their own way of doing business that doesn't jive with how we expect to see companies and CEOs behave in the US.
Call ME stupid (for sure for not selling at $23) but no way these guys are that smart.........
Sure but how? (Although someone pointed out earlier that they were able to buy through their broker.......)
Joe - not sure what (if any) brokerages will let you buy. Fidelity will not (although as you have seen written here, they will let you sell). So the question becomes: if you can't buy the stock anywhere, how does the price go up, that is, without the re-enlistment of a transfer agent? Seems like a bit of a catch 22 to me but then who is buying up the shares that are being sold off on a daily basis? A market maker? If so, why buy them unless he is just taking a gamble that he can sell them at a higher price later, but to whom? I should have sold at $23, what a jerk......
Andrew, Koufax, FHM - can any of you guys confirm this info and that this is on PACER? Thanks.........