Well reasoned and intelligent thoughts postyle, much like always.
Greed and fear are powerful things. They often cause normally rational people to become a little irrational, much like we have witnessed first hand in this very forum today.
In light of the price degradation, all while the company continues to incur what most would say is a long stream of favorable developments, not really anything adverse to speak of, it's only natural that some would begin to second guess their investment thesis.
I think some would be well served to consider the simple fact that Marathon has a pretty tight capital structure with a fairly limited float. We know that not a single member of management is responsible for the sizeable selling of recent months. Not Croxall, Knuettel, Spangenberg, Crawford, Jani or Sanchez. No insider selling whatsoever by a single one of them, same can be stated for current board members. Those who know the most have not sold a single share, some having been with the company since its infancy, better than 2 plus years. Not a share despite a nearly 5 fold increase in share price from low to high.
We do know a few small funds sold a few shares, but not nearly enough to account for the pressure. None were ever influential in the name and they were small positions to begin with relative to what some funds might eventually want to own in a name.
One must wonder, the list of potential owners of size is fairly small and defined. What if it eventually turns out that the depth of shareholders who have sold considerable shares in recent months is really fairly narrow? Perhaps only a few may ultimately be responsible for a large chunk of the recent supply? Selling begets selling and that's clearly what has happened, but the truth is that only a few had a large enough position to have effectuated the pressure of recent months and we know who it's not.
Who was it? I really don't care because ultimately it shouldn't matter. Whoever they are, they don't have an infinite supply, it will run out. Logically one could presume that perhaps they have sold the majority of their position already. Regardless, if someone wants to sell and move on, isn't it better that they do it here at these prices as opposed to higher levels where many of us believe the stock ultimately could trade to? Levels like what both recent analysts at Roth and Northland have put as price targets, ($12).
Frankly, all companies at this stage will inevitably see some turnover from early shareholders to newer shareholders. Where shares essentially transfer from weaker hands to stronger hands. It's a process that must occur in order to enable the shares to eventually trade to higher price points.
While all admittedly painful in the short term, none of us like to see our account values erode, despite the belief it only temporary, I can't isolate anything with the story or the company's underlying fundamentals that has changed whatsoever. In fact, most would argue both have improved.
Simply looking at the calendar of Markman hearing and trials for the balance of the year, and just learning of a near term trial in just 2 weeks against Schrader here in the US, "54% of global vehicle platforms carry Schrader TPMS technology off the assembly line, with over 160 million Schrader sensors on the road today," while they already have won an infringement ruling in Germany, I find it hard to believe that Croxall and company aren't exactly where they had always hoped to be at this point.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
