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.
Dave,
Black and white hey? Let me explain it yet again. And yes I noticed he was just removed as a moderator as well as that post.
The point is about overt bias.
1. You simply focus in on one little detail of that post (the ban comment) and then dismiss my point - clearly an attempt to avoid a real debate on my point and admit that my point on bias was correct. You choose to ignore all of his other commentary and simply focus on one minute part of it that is incorrect.
This is called deflection, those of us who have legal degrees are well versed in identifying this tactic as it's used frequently.
2. You ignore the fact regardless of the 'ban' issue, that the post I mentioned clearly shows an 'aggressive bias' where someone is 'looking for a reason' and wants to exert their power.
3. My point was simply, how people's posts are deleted is a farse, it leads to angry rebuttals - as often there is very little to support the removal of the post other than the aggressive/power seeking bias clearly exemplified in the post mentioned.
As a result, people end up getting frustrated and do say things that are not appropriate.
I suggest you review what I have said, review the post/quote and think about it for a while
You seem to want to 'be right' vs. actually accepting some constructive criticism for this site, which would actually improve it, that being, removing biased moderators.
Thanks Dave
The point is CLEAR BIAS - in deleting posts, and therefore leading to bans etc.
When you have people who feel like they need to find some power in their lives moderating boards, its a dangerous proposition...
Think the unhappy bouncer at the club.....low self esteem, given the power to affect others and uses it to enable himself to feel better...
same idea here...plain as day
Hey Dave, here's a QUOTE from a post from a moderator on the VRNG board - Napkinbie
"P.S.
Since this is your first post here, I want you to know that I'm a moderator of this VRNG board. I've deleted, censored numerous post, and banned many users. So here is another advice for you: Behave yourself!"
CASE CLOSED
Yes but moderators should not be removing posts that are not attacking anyone and simply counter to their investment views, and using an 'attack' as the excuse to effectively censor a board.
THAT, Dave, is what you are not quite understanding.
You effectively argued against yourself.
1. A moderator is in place to ensure a modicum of respect is provided to all posting.
2. A moderator therefore, needs to be unbiased, and not allow their investment views to be affecting their judgements
3. You have stated that moderators are not unbiased
4. Therefore, many often will implement their biases / views on posts as threatening when they are indeed not but simply counter to their views.
5. Please see number 1 and 2 again.
You have proven my point
Thanks Dave
Yes we all understand that Dave,
But when someone is consistently posting misinformation, simply saying 'its ok buddy!' is not right.
While the mods here can claim to be unbiased, that itself is ridiculous. No human being is 'unbiased/ 100% objective' and the mods here do certainly like to parse out words to imply things that may never have been implied.
People come here to debate, challenge, and discuss, it seems to many that the mods seem to not be as unbiased as you'd like to think, and perhaps as a business person, rather than just ignoring our views, you should consider them.
Good business people look at all views, good or bad about their business and really think about them. While you may not agree with our points, often the truth lies in a grey area, its not black or white, and therefore should be taken to heart and perhaps utilized on how you can actually improve your business vs. simply turning a blind eye and assuming we are all just angry posters.
That assumption in and of itself, which is clear from you direct to another comment (assuming we are all saying the same thing, same issues etc), speaks of the bias I am suggesting.
Good day!
I would agree 100% with your comments.
1. I am long VRNG, there is a poster "Sergfo" who has clearly been short in the past and had constantly removed by factual posts.
2. Clearly that upset me, which gets me suspended.
3. Now I see many longs on many boards creating hyperbole, and misinformation, stating opinion as facts etc.
4. I care little if someone is short or long, just that they stick to facts and provide their views based off facts, not make up facts to support their position.
5. When I call these people out I consistently get suspended for personal attacks when the issue is attacking a false fact.
6. Calling someone out for misleading investors is not slander/an attack etc...it is trying to ensure that investors who are not well diligenced are not confused/convinced of falsehoods.
I do think that the mods here need to start 'thinking' more about the point of a post vs looking for reasons to ban people.
This is why people get further upset and then yes eventually say something that is perhaps offside.
Just my 2 cents
I don't get the point of being able to post in the 'jail'? Other than to grip, people don't read this area for views on stocks...why not just suspend for 14 days or whatever and leave it at that.
Thoughts?
Its not a 'deal' lol...its oral arguments for appeals (laches and jury error)
What is an oral deal? lol....think a bit friend
not disputing this is undervalued, point is people need to temper expectations....just because vrng asked for a billion does not mean they will get anywhere near it...and that was my point about management being reckless and pumping on the call.
they have been inundated with pissed off shareholders bc of their sales / trades and then try and pump the stock to make up for it, just making one error after another
this group may be good at litigating but pearlman and his ir people are monkeys...they have no idea how to manage a public company and constantly are making errors which is not helping this company's credibility in the markets
as i said, every time they have a conference call what happens to their pps? it drops that says everything.
not going to happen....google isnt going to capitulate that is obvious...they will drag it out for no other reason than they can..
as for zte, they may settle but it certainly won't be for the billion management pumped on the cc...that was poor taste and in my mind stupidity...i guess they were trying to throw a misdirection play so people wouldn't focus on their sales...
zte will be much lower and that won't help this team's credibility.
the market wants money, they want mgmt to hold shares and they want real guidance...
when your mgmt team does none of that, its pretty hard for tut's to even want to bother...this team needs to learn what wall st. wants if it want's their money, and cliff the baboon is not the guy to be handling ir...just look at what happens after every call, the pps drops, that should tell us how well the ir dept here is doing
whats your view if not? my guess given the action here is 'bad news' has been priced in no?
unless there is a move before a markman is scheduled this may be a bottom...
thoughts on the pps if a 'non perfect win scenario' ?
Agree with your comments other than this
"Agree with most of your frustrations. I guess the hope we bag holders have is that insiders/mgt team cannot buy more shares or off schedule shares while they are in litigation. In other words they have non public information and thus cannot purchase sums of the stock based on knowing information or that it is undervalued. Insider purchases of VRNG, I believe, is currently a poor way to evaluate the current price. Just my opinion. "
there have been 2 open market purchases that were not option related in the last year. The CFO and a Director made minute purchases.
clearly if they were able to the rest of mgmt can as well. this is really bothering me and has for over a year when i made similar comments that shareholders and mgmt were not aligned in terms of incentives.
In addition, if it is undervalued and they can purchase as per above, it is very typical sign of bullishness used the street wide. When a mgmt team is putting their own skin in the game it sends a message of confidence. When they are selling it sends the opposite message.
if you keep spending other peoples money you think very differently than when you are spending your own.
as I said, i am hoping for a positive ruling on zte then I am selling the pop and out. I mentioned when the news came out in November I was already at the end of my rope but that given the dec 17 deadline i would hold out.
I will sell and re-enter in summer 2014 when this is back under 3 bucks.
You think they care Kevin? Seriously, I have been concerned about management from the day we saw google's strategy of delay.
1. Being 'superstar' lawyers they should have anticipated this. Going after Google first (David vs. Goliath) was a poor strategic decision as we've seen. These guys are paid to make those decisions.
2. While they can't update us on legal processes for obvious reasons, the non-disclosure of the India suit/injunction, amongst other PR failures really shows they lack the wherewithall to understand their position as a public company.
3. The company focuses on 'milestones' of sending out new suits. Again, their lack of market savvy is really showing, suits mean nothing to the pps, they are a MONETIZATION COMPANY. And given the only thing they have monetized is a garbage settlement with msft and what pumpers hope has some 'more behind it' means jack squat to the market. This is all the credibility they have earned. Yet they think their resumes are all they need, their history - NO THE MARKET IS ABOUT WHAT HAVE YOU DONE FOR ME LATELY....ITS THAT SIMPLE- AND THEY DON'T GET IT
4. With all this in mind they continue to think like 'lawyers' in a position of strength. Ie if this rumor about ZTE wanting a lump sum vs rr is correct, mgmt is failing shareholders by not taking it and moving on. They are not considering the ramifications of delay here on their pps and effectively the requirement for a secondary in six months (you don't go to market when you need it, you do it in advance).
5. Why does mgmt think this way? well when you are spending other people's money, do you spend the same way as if its your own? nope...and do we see mgmt buying any stock? why aren't they? isn't this undervalued? don't they have a great portfolio and team? but all we see are tax sales and issuance of new shares for free. It must be nice to have free options AND high salaries, not the right way to incentivize management to be aligned with shareholders.
We are stuck holding the bag now with a management team that fails to understand they are a public company and that shareholders matter. Why? because they just keep issuing themselves more shares when they need to top up their bank accounts.
I am selling next pop this company and management team are garbage and the pps and market have shown it. They have little credibility left and I don't want to be around when what ever ounce of credibility they have is gone.
What I find amazing is all the longs here say its a long term thing, be patient they will execute, fair enough argument but, ask yourselves one thing, if that's the case and this is significantly undervalued, again
WHY IS MANAGEMENT NOT BUYING THEIR OWN SHARES AND WHY DID THEY DUMP WHEN IT HIT 4.50 OR WHATEVER THAT EXERCISE PRICE IS?
THAT IS THE BIGGEST SIGN OF CONFIDENCE IN YOUR COMPANY, THE UNDERVALUATION AND EXPECTATIONS
MGMT HAS NOT BOUGHT ANY SHARES BUT TELLS US TO 'HAVE FAITH'???
Management is losing credibility by the day. Since the news of the india injunction, and even in the face of a coming decision in germany, this stock has traded down >10% from its high the day the injunction was announced.
Clearly, the market is saying it doesn't believe VRNG management has the ability to achieve a decent settlement in the near term and it is aware Google will continue to fight.
This is not simply shorts anymore folks, its a lack of buyers with size to move the pps upwards, and that is simply about credibility because that's what it takes for institutions to get in.
I do think we will see a pretty hard sell off back to the 2.60-.2.70 range if these bozo's can't actually achieve something with ZTE in very short order.
Hate to say it but I called 15 cents a number of months ago when it was in the mid 20's....
May be a time to step in now...
Good luck to all I might just take a dip this week!
Would also be nice to see VRNG actually monetize something this year with ZTE.
Let's see if this great 'team' can actually achieve something other than throwing suits against a wall and hoping something sticks and so called 'milestones'
Milestones aren't money.
I assume that was sarcasm? And did VRNG as for injunctive relief there?
Ps...anyone have any news on what's happened, ie have the courts set a date there for the ASUS ruling given today's events?
I would think, from a logical perspective, if the judge wants a settlement here as many are suggesting, he will rule on the W/A before any conference is set. By doing so, both parties are aware of their respective positions in terms of leverage. Certainly prevents the losing side from digging in their heels as they will have nothing left.
My guess, is we see a response on the w/a by the end of December with a settlement hearing set for early January once the judge determines its validity/invalidity.
There is clearly no need for a settlement conference from google's perspective if they think they can pull the wool over the judge's eyes with the w/a, and more importantly, the judge knows it will be useless to force a settlement without that information (as we've seen with their irrational actions on the RR).
just my view...
I can't speak for 'shortsqueeze' and to clarify, the posts I generally post on here are 'daily short volume' not 'short interest' - these are two different numbers/values and are to be interpreted differently.
1. I post a number daily from shortanalytics.com that provides the trade data for that day and I think (don't have it open right now and can stand corrected), the previous 5-6 trading days as well.
2. That number is sourced daily after market close directly from the exchanges.
3. It provides a value for the volume of short shares traded that day (and the previous 5-6 as mentioned).
4. Short Interest is a 'point in time' number. It is reported by the exchanges every two weeks and provided on numerous sites (I tend to use Nasdaq.com). It is however, 'dated' as it reported some time after the actual date its reflecting. (ie November 15th short interest just came out). ie its a lagging number/dated.
5. The reason I post the daily short volume is to give people an idea how how the shorts are behaving from the date of the most recent report to now. It allows us to 'guestimate' a bit on whether the most recent (yet dated) numbers provided for short interest are likely higher or lower than the 'actual' number as of right now. These numbers let us think about how that number may have changed from November 15th (the day of the last short interest numbers) to today. In fact you can even select 'data' on that site and see the short volume back to november 15th and get a decent estimate of short interest to today. The only issue is you don't know how much of the subsequent buying is covering so you can never be right on the nose.
6. As for market data sources, they are always difficult, even Bloomberg is off alot etc...best way to ensure you have the right source, is use the exchange numbers if available and check on other sites as well as a proxy. Also, if a number seems 'off' compared to a reliable source (like an exchange) it likely is.
46% short volume today
basically the majority of selling was shorts...lol...wow google doing everything they can aren't they
http://www.shortanalytics.com/getshortchart.php?tsymbol=vrng
wow...those aren't low end phones! nice...this will help us...thanks for the post, this should help speed up a settlement with zte is my guess.
alot of people were saying 'low end' and clearly that isn't the case.
it also implies, as you and I have discussed in the past, that very low estimates of the settlement numbers may not be as valid as some percieve them to be.
reason being, if you look at those three products clearly there are higher end and they type of products zte would want to sell more of...if our tech is in there we deserve a royalty.
there is clearly a mix of products etc here and vrng's 'ask' was high/absurd but it will be a nice settlement in my view. certainly one that will be viewed as 'material' by the market.
thanks kevin!
Interesting article on ZTE and India (importance)
http://www.china.org.cn/business/2013-05/20/content_28870844.htm
Some key quotes
In 2012, ZTE India posted a small rate of growth, realizing revenues of $700 million, around half the $1.5 billion it received in 2009. But Xu said he is reevaluating India's telecom market and has decided to shift focus from telecom equipment to smartphones, which now account for around 10 percent of ZTE's sales in India. Xu wants to raise that to 30 percent within a few years. In three years, he added, ZTE will be among the top three smartphone makers in India.
Local media reported that ZTE and Huawei accounted for around 30 percent of India's smartphone market in the first quarter of 2013, up from 13.2 percent a year ago
impossible to prove it w/out someone coming forward.
1. If it is google, they aren't doing it 'directly'. It would be via a hedge fund who they either own/invest in or more likely someone close to the founders but not 'tied' other than perhaps being invested in google.
2. Clear linkages are easy fodder to find illegal activity so you'd hide it.
3. Money circles with money. Larry Page/Brin are quite close (because they are also public) with numerous hedge funds and likely on a very friendly basis. In fact likely many real friends. Billionaires play together.
4. Very easy to have a beer and ask a favor. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours and if there are losses i'll deal with them to x amount...yes? ya sure larry...but you gotta give me some news once in a while too, deal? ah of course buddy!
5. I am not aware of anywhere where you can actually see 'who is shorting'...unlike shareholder lists I do no believe there is any reporting (and perhaps I am wrong and someone who is more of a trader will correct me, but to date I have never seen any such reporting). So effectively you never know...that's enough right there to give google incentive.
Short volume on Friday was 41% ... very high again.
There is clearly a large short doing everything they can to keep this pps down. Every time there is positive news, this is met by heavy shorting.
Again, many may say I am a conspiracy theorist suggesting its google but
1. Who would continue to ignore the risk to a short position in the company as more and more and more news (and legal arguments) show that this company is well positioned to the upside.
2. A hedgie is always concerned about risk adjusted returns. If that hedgie has made alot of money shorting, they are smart enough to see the risk here, cover slowly and reverse their position and make money both ways.
3. Here we see someone constantly throwing more money at an increasingly higher risk and potentially higher loss proposition.
4. The amount of shares shorted on Friday were over 1 million.
5. Who has no concern over risk/ return but benefits from keeping the pps down? Only one group. Clearly its google.
6. What's interesting is even in light of this significant amount of shorting over the last month, the pps has risen 20%.
7. This is setting up for a major squeeze and perhaps google doesn't care if it loses another 100-200 ml from shorting who knows, but my guess is Larry will care about that number..so eventually he will be forced to cover.
8. When shorts are working this hard and the pps keeps rising, it means longs are holding, and big buyers are coming in. As we know tuts have increased 25% over the same period and now own 20% of the company.
9. If zte settles, or even the ruling in germany should bring more in who have been watching. There is a 'tipping' point here because google doesn't control 'all the shorts'. There are certainly enough others out there who will cover on real news.
10. I believe if zte settles in the near term for 200 ml plus this stock will be at 10 bucks by Jan.
well the buying and selling has been balanced. if there were alot of longs 'selling' along with shorts we'd see imbalance to the downside.
given few longs selling, the real selling is coming from shorting but its balanced.
moreoever, if there are buyers in size (as we've seen increased tut ownership) its hard for shorts too hold the pps down.
perfect storm is beginning here.
1. You have an immense short position 25% of the float
2. Tuts increasing
3. Longs are not selling
4. Catalysts coming
5. Shorts are getting greedy to try and hold the pps down but as you can see its becoming weaker. Unless longs start selling en masse the pps is not going down because simply there are now more buyers and 'true' sellers...
6. If there were no shorts, well the pps would be going up faster because new buyers would have to bid up their orders to get shares and entice longs to sell.
....when news hits it will be big folks
these are shares that are reported by the exchange (by exchange feeds as shorts)...
yes you are right, mm's do not have enough shares to sell on many days as no one is selling. There have been many days recently where shorts are effectively slitting their own throats by throwing more money at this to hold it down (ie when we see 45% of the volume was short).
There is a big squeeze coming sir...now day in day out some of those may cover, doesn't mean they are holding, ie even intra day, but it can explain why we see edgx come up with big sales at $3.15 every time we encroach it..its a resistance point
the shorts are scared of a squeeze...question is who keeps throwing money at this? as i have stated i believe its google. no hedge fund in their right mind would keep this up..too much risk.
only group not caring about profits from trading and risk and an advantage from keeping the pps down, is google.
nah dont need credit...there are too many idiots on that board to care over there...and personally i dont care who shares my ideas on any stock..with or without credit! lol
information sharing helps everyone make better decisions, whatever the view, bias etc etc...
i think they are trying to rid 'frivolous' law suits...to the extent someone own's a patent and its being infringed, sorry i own it...
i am not invested in other npe's s not sure how others will be affected but this may just mean many of those companies will get bought out....
if they have valuable patents someone will pay for them...
i think they are trying to rid 'frivolous' law suits...to the extent someone own's a patent and its being infringed, sorry i own it...
i am not invested in other npe's s not sure how others will be affected but this may just mean many of those companies will get bought out....
if they have valuable patents someone will pay for them...
nothing new there..and doesn't affect us...is the gov't going to say well all of those nokia patents are invalid because you bought them?
nope - love this one, of course, so they can steal!
"Internet companies largely support the Goodlatte bill, and the effort is backed by Cisco Systems Inc, Apple Inc, Google Inc and other technology powerhouses."
yes....enemy of my enemy is my friend...they are taking every angle they can to stop the market abuse by google...so if google is trying to legalize theft, stop it where they can....
Positive news..msft and ibm vs anti troll legislation, siding with us!
http://bgr.com/2013/11/20/anti-patent-troll-legislation-microsoft-ibm/
Well its not a happy anniversary when you've been wanting a divorce for a long time but the lawyers keep arguing! lol!
Shorts working hard still. 43% short volume today, 46% yesterday...
pps going up still..good sign
http://www.shortanalytics.com/getshortchart.php?tsymbol=vrng
I think people who don't believe that naked shorting is going on need to read the VHC 10Q Risk Factors - they explicitly stated they believe their pps has been affected and may be affected by manipulation. They have spoken with FINRA and the SEC according to the commentary and state both those regulatory agencies are effectively useless (but in a nice way)...
Read it please if you don't believe its happening. Given all those fail to deliver positions, its happening, perhaps not enough to significantly affect the stock but it is....
If you look at the ftd numbers that were posted about 350k shares or so...while not a huge impact, they are helpful in 'capping' the price when it starts to move...given the lack of shares available to short, clearly, this is a way shorts can lock the price down...
wall street is simply legal rackateering folks, sooner you get that the better, at least you understand your risks.
if a company like vhc states it in their filings clearly its happening.
Short volume up today, shorts continue to try their best.
46% of volume....pretty obvious their game, wait in between news and then short hard....
what's interesting is in that last couple of weeks, for the most part we have been well above 40% short volume on a regular basis, yet the pps has moved up and has held.
they are losing their ability to affect the price, partly because tuts have been buying in (now at 20% tut ownership) and clearly fewer shares available to short out there...less dry powder...
actually kind of funny when you think if this ISNT google shorting (which i still believe it to be, but if it isnt), don't really understand how they are not seeing the red flags everywhere for their position here (other than they are certain the coin flip will go their way). While I don't like the judge, I am certain that google has no w/a so don't really get the risk they are taking.
http://shortanalytics.com/getshortchart.php?tsymbol=vrng
yes and then there will be the inevitable motions from google to first move to another room, followed by another motion for another building.
when google shows up at a different building than expected, VRNG will table a motion for obfuscation, to which the judge will retort, wasn't that clever? you didn't sign any agreements they would come here
:)
dude that's simply your opinion..
it can be interpreted 2 ways and none of us know what it means. the only way to find out is to call cliff and ask what they have been told.
it is either
1. "schedule" the hearing before december 1 - which they now have after giving the court notice today via pacer and now its up to the courts as to when it will occur.
2. Or the courts were meaning, "if you cant come to an agreement you need to have a hearing with us on or before Dec 1".
NONE of us know the correct answer here.
I as you, hope its the latter but we won't know until the company can give us clarification, or the courts do via an order.
well...for a man apparently 'tired of the games' lets see how he utilizes his efficiency and 'judicial economy' now...
he has no more excuses other than his own friggen delay after delay...let's see if he grows a pair now and man's up...
i have my doubts
because all of that ambiguous language allows for delays correct?
who does delay benefit? the winner or loser?
so plain...aren't lawyers and legal documents supposed to be very specific?
yet our judge ignores specificity...interesting