News Focus
News Focus
icon url

stpioc

12/27/15 5:30 PM

#36792 RE: donkschmonk #36784

["The shorts won until today, and they would love to call it quits, except that they still have to cover. So the daily, hourly, smear capaign will go on until they finshed doing so or until the evidence becomes so large and shareholder base so wise, that smear campaigns on share boards wont be able to sway the odd soul despite the evidence in front of their eyes... "]

1) Until you see everyone who has some (entirely legitimate) concerns as part of a smear campaign, you're really not useful here. This good versus evil stuff works in Star Wars, but it's for kids really.

2) The importance of "the shorts" has been blown out of proportion:
- The short number is, considering the financial state the company in, fairly low, not high.
- It has also been fairly stable over the past year
- Most importantly, one doesn't need "the shorts" to explain the share price, the decrease in sales and worsening of the balance sheet and increasing share count do that all by themselves

3) A few people (like myself) simply want to know whether our supposed MSFT backing is based on anything more than just a comment by some MSFT guy, and if yes, what?

Now that would be helpful.
icon url

Hugodrax

12/27/15 5:50 PM

#36795 RE: donkschmonk #36784

Ok let's value GW at 10x sales. 10x what? $50K? New Caney plus Dominion plus a UPS outlet. Let's call it $100K. 10x that is $1M.

The shrinking low margin storage biz does not suddenly earn a high multiple just because the company tries to sell something else supposedly interesting.
icon url

Hugodrax

12/27/15 5:51 PM

#36796 RE: donkschmonk #36784

"Have fun covering". Apparently if you want to cover you just waltz up to management. Not only will they issue you stock in the toilet but will give you 5 year warrants with price protection for you troubles.

I think they had plenty of fun covering.
icon url

Hugodrax

12/27/15 6:02 PM

#36797 RE: donkschmonk #36784

PS I've never used the term vaporware, but if you touts are arguing that only now do we have a real product, one could argue that the GW "launch" years ago right up to now was, indeed, vaporware all this time. Not me though.

One might argue (not me though) that touts can't have it both ways - if it wasn't vaporware then almost nobody has bought it for years. Not good. And if only now in November 2015 do we have a real product, that means 2012 to Nov 2015 were the "vaporware years". I don't argue that but one certainly could and I would not think one foolish.

"We have something that technically functions, now" isn't exactly the strongest long thesis.

Remember this thing now has over $35M in high cost debt. It needs to be a smashing success just for debt holders to have a shot at getting paid back.

IMHO.