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.
Intention to buy. They haven't actually closed the transaction yet and it's far from guaranteed it will close.
Been a loooong time since I checked this board or this company. So I did a little googling and found this, makes me laugh:
https://royaresources.com/meet-the-team/
and this (last page is too funny):
https://royaresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/CCE11032016_0001.pdf
Been a loooong time since I've paid attention to TIV but I saw the news today and, well, it sure does feel good to be vindicated after all this time. I mean the stock price already provided a lot of vindication, but now with the SEC investigating all the way back to 2002, well, that's just icing.
Ah, Jimbo, there'd have been nothing 'stunningly wise' about moving a good news release to a time when it would get the least attention it could possibly get. It was wise, though obvious, to move bad news to that point. Which they did. It didn't help.
It constantly surprises me how you are always trying to take the fact about this company and twist them so as to provide yourself with the least obvious conclusion. You have clearly fallen in love with this stock and cannot fathom the fact it's a dog.
Investing isn't about trying to fit the facts into your pre-ordained conclusion. It's about taking the facts, coming to an unbiased conclusion and putting money down on that conclusion. When you fall in love with a stock, you ignore reality and far worsen your odds of coming out ahead.
As to this news, seems to me, the agreement was 'amicable' so long as Tri Valley gave up all it's rights and profits. That's why the stock has crashed today, despite their best efforts to bury the news. You cannot bury this big of a story.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
Moving a monday release to friday so quickly after announcing the monday release does not portend a good announcement.
Friday releases, particularly after market close, especially in August, are usually designed to bury the news. No one is around to see it. Then allowing a weekend to pass, before hosting a conference call to explain it, wow, I can't imagine any good news to be forthcoming. The only exception is if there's a major change of control announcement in the works - something which is very doubtful at these valuations.
My guess is they cannot get through the auditors, and other accounting, issues in time. Not that auditors' issue are unusual, but the timing is often fairly predictable. They're probably challenged in getting them final reports completed.
Nevertheless, the optics are horrible. They should've just postponed it for a week, if they were allowed. That would give them another monday release, rather than a friday. Lynn's amateurish management capabilities continue to haunt the company.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
Knows him well. My sense is he's begun to feel like he's all talk and no substance. He likely believed Lynn's b.s. but and bought in hook, line and sinker. Got a lot of others into the stock and Opus. It took him a while to throw in the towel, but he finally did. Sort of. I think they have faith in the new guy. This is what happens when people get emotional about a stock. They lose all perspective. Not only did Lynn sell a lot of snake oil, but I think people came to the company had really good assets and it was just Lynn that was the problem. I think it's turning out the company's assets aren't as attractive as they once thought. Either that or Matson is no better than Lynn at realizing value from assets.
As for legal credentials to raise money, I believe, though I'm not sure, that it depends on if he got a finders fee for doing it. If he did, he better have been a licensed 'finder' otherwise there could be big consequences. However, I doubt he received a fee for it in which case he's probably in the clear.
As always all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
Thanks.
I seriously doubt any fund/institution has made any money on this thing. The last group is barely hanging on but this isnt what they got in it for.
I know one guy who's an Opus investor and friend of Behrooz (long, amazing yet awkward, tiny world story) he agreed when I told him I thought Lynn was an incompetent hypster but he was optimistic about the new guy. He's put in a lot of money and now I think he's pretty disgusted with the whole thing.
"Yep, back at support/resistance around .50 "
Ahem, didn't someone predict that a little while ago? :)
Never mind the fact there was no 'catalyst' other than a huge earnings surprise, that would get it to $0.80
Ok, back patting aside.
They sold so much stock at $0.50 it really had no choice but to get back there at some point. Now that it is, and a lot of buyers are going under water, the decline could very well continue. Seems like your chart is suggesting a floor at $0.40.
Well, don't forget, it took 45+ years for Lynn to destroy so much value. One year is probably not enough to fix all that is wrong with the company.
Conference presentations are mostly meaningless unless the company says something new and significant during their presentation. Despite new management, this company still issues press releases on every minor, and largely insignificant, event so there was little chance something new and significant would be announced during the presentation. Moreover with such an astonishingly long, decades long, history of never, ever, generating operating successes, the market is unwilling to anticipate operating successes ahead of them actually being reported which is why practically the only 'catalyst' for this stock will come from earnings announcements. The stock will still make moves, both up and down, due to new and uninformed investors making predictions deserving of the classic neophyte investor.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions. No facts are asserted.
Conference is meaningless. It's what they say at the conference and if it's new and improved which is doubtful.
Also, Jonesie, it is still inthe channel but it has to start moving up to stay there. So far there haven't been any catalysts to do that.
Interesting chart, Jonesie. I've been watching it, initially I thought you were just connecting lows at the most recent low, when it hit that low, meaning it was somewhat arbitrary. I thought the better line would've connected the first low, the next low in mid April and then through to the late May points around $0.70 or so indicating it a big break down (I forget how you post pics, or I would do so). But it has stuck to your trend line, so far.
On the other hand, I see it as having absorbed the news (so far not really a 'catalyst' someone was claiming it would be), ran up to the 50 day ema and, so far, is failing to power through it. It is still below the 50 and 200 day ema's which I think make it challenging to breakout. But if it can, it'll be a pretty strong one. It has a chance as I think the news was somewhat impressive, well, for this company. Still no operating profits (interesting to note, the value of the company increased by about the same amount as the upfront payment) but a more credible partner taking the reins.
Next few days/weeks will be interesting.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
I'm not sure how much the market believed that stuff about some July 1 catalyst, but if the market was buying it and given it's the 4th and no catalyst has yet emerged, the lack of such news could result in the stock testing the lows and probably going through them.
Also, don't forget, the company sold a big slug of stock at $0.50, stocks very often test those levels (for a couple of reasons - a) that was a value rational and well informed investors thought the company was worth, less a discount, and b) there are always flippers in secondaries, especially huge ones like this, that'll take opportunities to sell for a quick buck when they think the uptrend has stalled or is failing). I think it may have been testing it already (it's never perfect) and possibly basing around here. Difficult to say, but there's probably some more downside risk but not a whole lot and if it continues to base here it might be a nice time to pick up some for a trade.
Of course, fundamentally, I still think it's way overvalued, but new management did add value and some credibility, so things could be changing.
As always, all of the above are my opinions, no facts are asserted.
$0.55 - $0.80 is not a big gain? For the mathematically challenged, that's 45% and it's in a week. You must have a whole lot of losers to think that one stock posting an astronomical return isn't big.
I seem to think when I first questioned you on this you were only predicting a 30% return and that was over a month. Now you've shortened your horizon by 75% and increased your return prediction by 50%. And yet your target price, which you clearly pulled out of thin air, remains the same. It says a lot about how the market values your prediction. Do you really think you have info the market doesn't?
You're claiming trading expertise and yet you're basing it on info that's been publicly available for a long time? Think the market hasn't absorbed that info? Think it's not already discounted and in the price? Sure, it could go up on the announcement but why $0.80? You have no clue. (Btw, if it does get there, it won't stay there, that's for sure given how many people have been burned in this stock for so long.)
Still, you haven't answered, what price and when?
So to avoid look behind bias, what did you pay and when?
So, to recap, you've got nothing to support your claim.
Catalysts are so because they presage future profits. Those future profits are discounted to today and are represented, more or less, in the stock price. You're trying to claim that is irrelevant. For someone who claims they' not a market novice, you sure are talking like one.
Stock message boards, particularly this stock, are littered with all sorts of people pumping one theory or another about why the stock is going to show huge, very abnormal, returns. I find it really interesting those doing the pumping typically do not understand how equity markets work.
I find it even more amazing after decades of abysmal results with not one commercial success to point to, people still come here and tout great things are just around the corner. With such a history, even if something great does happen (the likelihood of which is very low) the market will not reward shareholders with huge returns until the company proves it can turn such a great catalyst into actual and substantial cash flows.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
That's not what I'm saying. Why $0.80? Why not $0.90 or $0.70? You don't have any justification for $0.80 except a supposed event (ignoring for the moment how, given this company's loooong history of non-performance, unlikely that event actually is or their ability to generate shareholder returns from that event).
I'm saying you have no justification to support a 30% return in 1 month. That's a 400% annualized return. You don't support that with actual figures and it's not credible. I'm no rookie and you're no expert. Experts would justify a price target with valuation metrics.
Why $0.80? That's a huge, 30%, return from here in less than a month in a horrible market by a company with a horrible history of never, ever, producing positive results in over 40 years.
What metrics are you using to justify that price and return? P/S? P/E (if so, what earnings will they have and when)? Or do you have a technical indicator that you could point to?
Sorry but I'm a doubter of people who post wild-ass predictions without any rational justification other than a hoped for/expected event. I think you need to also justify it with what that event will mean in real $ terms.
As always, all of the above are my opinions, no facts are asserted.
"Preparing..."
New management, same 'ol. Now they've got a biased (likely paid for but I'd rather not get spammed to death to find out) 'research' from a schlock shop issuing PR about what they're going to do rather than what they've accomplished. Sheesh. Lynn's ethically loose culture sure is hard to shake.
Before some of you all try and jump down my throat, this is from their own disclaimers:
Bedford/Paragon receives compensation from third party organizations for advertising services. Bedford/Paragon and its affiliates, officers, directors and agents have been compensated to perform research and therefore information should not be construed as unbiased. (emphasis mine).
Nevertheless, I still believe this stock wants to head down to $0.50 level, where huge amounts of capital was recently raised, before it can move to significant new highs.
Note, as always all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
I still think it's going to $0.50 and possibly lower. The chartist in me sees that it just crossed below the 50 day ema and is heading lower with a bottom in the $0.35 - $0.40 range. The fundamentalist in me sees the company raising a lot of equity well below market at $0.50 and often stocks head to, or just below, where companies raise capital in the short-term.
As always, all of the above are just opinions, no facts are asserted.
Been away from this stock and this board for a loooong time so I'm not up on all the latest except I noted they're raising (or recently raised) cash at $0.50. When companies do that, stocks tend to head to that price point in the near term and typically a little lower. If it's been less than 30 days since they closed the transaction then the underwriters are likely still supporting the stock and it'll stay at or above $0.50 until 30 days are up.
As always all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted. :)
Yeah but to be clear...
...in that 8/4 post, just after the part you quoted, he did state that if the stock hit 52 week lows he'd be buying more.
Seems like that's an endorsement of the stock which I cannot fathom given the 50% dilution overhang. Dang! 50%! Who in their right mind would hold on to a stock that was facing that?!? That's why the stock keeps dropping. The longer they take the more it'll drop in my view. Buying/holding this stock is just leading with your chin.
Thanks Geo.
I think the new guy is quite a bit more credible than Lynn (tho that ain't sayin' much) he's hosting conference calls, and sheding some assets.
But they've made a couple enormous financing mistakes that have cost them dearly - the last round they raised came at a huge discount right after a previous round of private money. How happy were the first investors when the second one came along. Follow that up by telegraphing enormous dilution and the stock craters even more with no end in sight which makes it ever more dilutive with each drop.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts area sserted.
Wow - go away for a few months and...
...come back to find nothing's changed. This thing just keeps tanking.
That's what happens when you announce a huge dilution event well before you actually do it. Really, who'd want to own a stock where it's value is due to be diluted heavily. The longer they wait the worse it gets. Of course, the delay may not be in their control. Their best solution might be to announce they're pulling it "due to market conditions" and then line up an overnight, if they could.
As always, all of the above are my opinions. No facts are asserted.
You hit the nail on the head, Geo.
While people pump the gold play they seem to think if there actually is gold in dem hills, it instantly turns into cash for TIV. That whole pesky stuff about digging out tons of rock and turning it into an ounce of gold and raising the captial needed to support those operations seems irrelevant to them.
The other thing that cracks me up is that press release about them starting up new wells. Hasn't anyone wondered why they announced that info the morning after they had their conference call? That says a lot...
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are assered.
Nah, I don't buy it.
I'm sure you've got nothing to back up your views and post b.s. excuses to continue ducking the question. You're not credible. You've got no beans to spill.
Oh yes you are.
I called on you to back up your claims and you repeatedly duck the question. It doesn't take a genius to see that by refusing to provide even the slightest credible back up to your claims, you've got nothing.
No I won't.
You're just as I though, full of it. You make bold predictions of a 400% return in 6 months and back it up with something even less credible than "trust me."
My prediction: you won't be posting here by then...
Ok, I'm calling b.s. here.
How do you get to $5? Show us your math. What's your valuation metrics and how do you ge there? Please also include capitalization in your figures because, as you're clearly ignoring it, this company has anoounced, repeatedly, they need to dilute the hell out of the stock to even have a chance at bringing it in.
And that's just for the O&G. You seem impressed with their gold and minerals play. Have you considered how much time and capital it would require to bring those in if they even get to the point they may be economically viable?
People like you are amusing. You read the company's PRs, do some simple math and think you've hit upon a winner. When it fails to work, you wonder why. Here's why - there's more to driving a stock price up than just having potential assets (even assuming they're real which is a huge assumption for this company). Assets are worthless if you can't get them to provide a return and this company has repeatedly shown it cannot. All it seems to be able to do is raise money and spend money resulting in the need to spread around any potential profits to an ever increasing number of shares. Their market cap may go up but not the stock price.
So I challenge you - show us the math to get to your $5 price by years end.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions. No facts are asserted.
A good traders' stock?
Not sure I agree with that - it's a thinly traded microcap.
Nevertheless, I've learned to be short far more often than long. While trading, you rarely want to bet against the fundamentals, which for this company, are horrible.
As always all of the above are my opinions, no facts are asserted.
Mick, I used to be a sizable short on this stock...
... and it has paid off hansomly. Now I'm flat. I think there's limited value in going short here, even if one could (most cant it's an HTB stock). I don't think the stock is going up for a while because besides there being limited drivers to do so, there's a huge overhang of stock out there that'll keep a lid on it which is only to be followed up by management's stated intention to dilute it even further. And just a short while ago they demonstrated they have no problem diluting the hell out of it with a 40% discount offering.
However you should not dismiss one's opinions simply because they disagree with yours and furthermore attribute them as being derived from their position in the stock. There's no difference from you dismissing my opinions because you think I am short (covered/naked is utterly irrelevant, btw) and me doing the same - i.e. you're only posting a positive spin because you're long the stock.
That logic is not credible. I don't dismiss your opinion because you're long. Rather I dismiss you because it's clear you are quite new to the company and have not done enough research on the stock. When you've completed your research you will have learned not to base your opinion on the company's press releases. Since I've followed the stock for the last 5-6 years or so, the company has issued litterally hundreds of press releases with obscenly positive spins and to date NONE has resulted in meaningful operating results. There are many others here who have followed the company for far longer and who used to buy into the press releases, but no longer. Stick around, you will too.
As always all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
Why is it going down...
...with all the supposedly good news on the horizon?
Because a) for this company, the news isn't good until it's actually happened and produced real tangible results, and b) because there's a huge overhang of stock out there in addition to a fair amount of traders incentivized to drive the price down so their warrants get priced more attractively.
As always all of the above are just my opinions no facts are asserted.
Very interesting...
...not the chart, that's ugly (though Jonesie can provide more technical terms) but rather the fact that they're holding an earnings conference call next week. That is, to me, very big news. They're openning themselves up for questioning with no limitations on who can hear their answers. (It'll be interesting to see if they'll block certain people from asking questions.)
I think this is the first time they've done this and in my view is a first step towards credibility. Though they've got a long way to go, transparency is big. More importantly, I doubt they would do this if they didn't have something big to say. Then again, this is TIV with a history of poor management. Perhaps new management is setting the table. Who knows. Either way, I find it very interesting and is perhaps worth a flyer - for the brave.
As always all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
Curious...
...it doesn't state how many opennings they have. I've seen that before but typically for positions that are 100% commission based or from just scammy companies.
Either way, bravo Matson: following Lynn's tried and true(ly poor) management style of spending cash before positive cash flow emerges. Employees better hope he is just as good at finding new investors because this company is clearly on the never ending dilution train.
As always all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
This is why it is important to pay attention...
...to corporate cultures when investing. TIV has a culture of misleading investors, in my view, and regardless of whether Lynn really has no connetion with the company or not (though I believe he still has a strong influence) the culture of "this is how we do things here" is very hard to change even with new leadership. When it does happen, it takes a long time.
Nevertheless this is a small item that would've been very easy to change and do the right thing but Matson chose the old path. Either Lynn is really still in charge or Matson is equally as corrupt as Lynn (ok, or option #3 is he's a coward). Regardless, corruption remains the rule at Tri Valley, in my view.
As always all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
High $1.38s? And for how long?
It always amazes me - stocks that take huge dumps in a very short period, like a day, almost always have a rational reason for doing so and almost never come back anywhere close to as quickly, if ever, as they fell, but there are always a bunch of people out there jumping in thinking it's quick and easy money.
I believe there was a study a while back where after such huge drops, a new short position has a far better probability of excess returns than a new long position.
Wow.
That's some serious discount. Typically the discount for an overnight transaction is 3-4%, maybe 5%-7% for a challenged company. But 40%? Unbelievable. There is just really no demand for this stock. And I doubt any of those investors are still shareholders as of the end of the day. I'm sure they made a tidy profit (at the expense of existing shareholders, BTW) and still hold the warrants but this was truly ugly financing.
I'm not begrudging management for it. They had no choice (well, except cut spending but that means cutting their own gravy train). But sheesh! This company is in it deep and they're betting on someone being able to catch the hail mary in the end zone.
BTW, anyone notice the begining of the focus shift to the new shiny object? Lynn may be gone but his tactics remain: "start-up operations of existing wells and production facilities on its Claflin property..."
If I remember correctly, someone (ok, I'm tooting my own horn here) predicted a new, dilutive, round of financing to come soon...http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=48421872 (last paragragh).
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
Yes, there was too much in the report...
...to comment efficiently. Lots of it was amusing verbiage from the spin doctoring machine known as Tri Valley. It would seem even though Lynn is, at least in theory, gone form the company, the culture of trying to mislead investors continues.
In fact, nothing fundamentally has changed with respect to the "possible" reserves the company has, it is just now able to report it in some way. It is unfortunate the way they chose to report it was to trumpet it as much more than it really is (i.e. very low probability of producing near term, current value enhancing, returns). This company continues to treat its investors as simpleton dolts who chomp at every shiny item that's placed in front of them. Perhaps that works for the three morons and their compatriots on the other site, but even moderately intelligent investors clearly don't buy that b.s.
As for their cash position, note the report is as of 12/31/09 and since then they've raised by my calculations, about $7.5mm through new equity sales. That's a lot of dilution. Expect more. Soon. Perhaps this week. Management does not care about shareholders and the dilution they suffer through it's poor stewardship of corporate resources. They just want to keep this company floating to support their ongoing salaries and stock/option grants.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.
10k late again.
It's due today, anyone surprised that they won't get it out for another two weeks? Not me. Every year they miss the deadline - you'd think one year they'd be able plan ahead and get it done on time. Perhaps it's no big deal for the regulators but it's just another knock on their already dismal credibility. Management credibility has an enormous impact on valuations and the multiples a stock achieves and when management lacks credibility, the market punishes the stock.
As always, all of the above are just my opinions, no facts area ssreted.
They had no choice. Can't keep paying people...
...if you don't have the cash. For a company that burns about $2mm/quarter with about $6mm in the bank, $1mm/yr in cuts ain't gonna do it. But it's a start.
What's remarkable is they had a 'c' level position for compliance in the first place. For a company so small, to have so many chiefs and so few indians (relatively) is a big hallmark of bad management. My bet: it was a payoff for good 'ole Art for something - another shady deal a shareholders' expense.
I think they only released an 8k - which you have to do with changes in senior management (another management mistake that comes back to bite Lynn in the butt).
As always all of the above are just my opinions, no facts are asserted.