InvestorsHub Logo

SAMNOTSAMUEL

02/07/11 3:55 PM

#71800 RE: ratobranco #71794

Rato,

Some of your posts prior to today suggested a belief that possibly most Chinese stocks favored by this board are at least partially fraudalant.

No doubt many people are comfortable staying away from these stocks.

I hold to the theory that both U.S. and Chinese stocks hold less risk if sporting towards $100 m marketcap or more. Very tiny marketcaps suggest to me the highest level of risk.

sam

DLouis

02/07/11 4:03 PM

#71804 RE: ratobranco #71794

ccme, rato - the shorts have studiously avoided the heart of the matter...
the cash
everything else is a detail honestly
and although i'm getting tired of this, to your other points:
1. on the advertiser transparency. they issued a very long and detailed response during their most important holiday, and they promised more info later. you are making this into a bigger point than it is and bigger than the company thought. mw's most important argument BY FAR was about the number of buses. that's where they had "hard evidence." the rest of their report was hearsay.
2. i happen to know for a fact that the company authorized their buyback at the beginning of their blackout period. unfortunately, they are in another one now. i have asked global hunter to write a note on this and to further explain when the blackouts start, when they end, and at what price the company says they will buy stock.
3. you have mis-construed the spac, and you don't know how to think like the owner of a company doing a financing
4. honestly, i don't think this is a $50 stock. i think this is a $30 stock until/unless they can project high earnings growth in 2012. the company does have warts. most do. (not just chinese spacs and rto's). but it certainly isn't a fraud, and it's certainly worth a lot more than it's trading at now. i expect $25/share when their audit comes out next month

GorillaGorilla

02/07/11 4:03 PM

#71805 RE: ratobranco #71794

CCME I would also urge people here not to get worked up, and start suggesting that I'm sharing my view just to drive the stock down so I can buy it cheaper.

You could have written your post any time after the response. You wrote it at the point of maximum pessimism - during the bear raid just before 1pm.

I guess I could say, if I was being charitable, seeing the stock going down made you more confident in your negative view of the PR and hence you posted - whatever the reason you posted a negative at the most negative time.

Personally, I'm not bothered what the reason was but the timing was, shall we say, unfortunate to say the least.

rich