siddharth18

I use https://www.canadianinsider.com/node/7?menu_tickersearch=VB+%7C+VersaBank Just sign up for a free account and you can view data beyond 6 months.

Why are they holding so much cash and have an abysmal 1.3% div yield?

Does not look good at all for Liu. It's also a bit strange though. If someone's in fear of their life do they text their friend abroad or do they call police/911 ? But no matter what the truth is, if they did in fact sleep together, what's keeping Richard from writing a $50M check to the girl so that she recants the accusation and essentially says it was consensual ? $50M is a rounding error in his net worth - so what's he waiting for?

Seems like the random actress in the article was accused of tax-fraud and the evidence was brazen and obvious so the authorities were compelled to act to save face and maintain a semblance of law & order. Notwithstanding the alleged rape, I think Liu has enhanced the image of China by providing employment, bringing technology, progress and foreign investment to China (from WMT & GOOG). Are they willing to take him down based on a shaky allegation that even American prosecutors didn't find credible? Another difference is that JD provides provides direct employment to 150k people, so the economic impact of the JD engine slowing or dying is different compared to a random actress goes down. Also to note is that Chinese government is not a fan of #metoo and feminism, for what that's worth: https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/9/16897048/metoo-china-feminism-activism I'm trying to imagine how flimsy the evidence must have been for the police, prosecutor and judge to allow Liu's (who btw is the textbook definition of a flight risk) to be released earlier than necessary for the sole purpose of letting him fly back to (one of the only few places on Earth) where he's literally out of reach. Seems like the perfect setup to buy LEAPs.

But Richard could have done it in the past, and can in future do it, even if we assume that the sexual assault incident hadn't happened. So in your view does this event, or will an indictment increase the likelihood of Richard doing what you just described? From Richard's point of view - he'd not just be a rapist in the eyes of public, but also a thief which means he can never raise capital again. Plus, the number of investors who would give capital to Richard accused of a shaky sexual assault case is likely larger, because investors only care about execution and return, compared to zero investors who'd give him capital after Richard is accused of theft/fraud. A very likely scenario is him making his wife or a trusted family member or a trusted employee the CEO/Chair but still be involved in leading JD forward due to his substantial economic interest. Also I'm not sure how Chinese government would allow a single and relatively small company stiffing American investors when there are hundreds of billions of dollars invested by Americans in Chinese companies collectively and these companies collectively benefit from having American investors around. The needs of the many (Chinese companies needing American shareholders' trust) outweigh the needs of the one company - JD (that is angry at America). So, logically, wouldn't Chinese government be against JD cheating American shareholders and damaging China's reputation and increase cost of capital for all Chinese companies? I'm not saying Chinese government would send your investment back to you on a silver platter, but there's a chance that Chinese government acts rationally and acts in a way to keep the trust alive and prevent the trust in the ecosystem from plummeting. Based on Richard's previous conduct I think he does deserve the benefit of the doubt as far as integrity involving matters of money is concerned. He refused to sell counterfeits, refused to renege on a verbal promise with Tiger Capital, refused to dilute Capital Today's stake.

As far as stock being an anathema because a fugitive is a CEO...can't he'd just nominate a puppet/proxy, or even his wife to be the chairperson/CEO and still maintain defacto control of the company and execute his vision? I'm not saying him becoming a fugitive would be a good thing for the stock (in the short term)...but long term I don't understand how it would break JD's business or affect their future cash flows. The tailwinds propelling JD's business forward (GDP growth, rise of middle class, increasing demand for authentic products) are so obvious and inevitable. The average consumer is China that's about to order his camera is not going to change his/her behavior because the founder and former CEO is deemed a fugitive in foreign land. If Jeff Bezos was similarly accused in China or Russia would American consumers refuse to shop at Amazon? No, why would they? They just care about cheap prices, fast delivery and great customer service. So I'd like to focus just on the question that ultimately matters: How does this case at all affect JD's competitive positioning, or cash flows or its future success 3 years from now even if he IS deemed a fugitive?

Any idea what's the worst case scenario as far as the case is concerned? Let's say he's charged with rape and doesn't show up to his trial and is found guilty and there's warrant out for his arrest. Then what? There's no extradition treaty between US and China, so he stays in China and lives the good life and denies the accusation. Some believe he's a rapist, some don't, but life goes on for the average JD shopper. I don't see how the average JD consumer, 3 years from now, ordering a camera due to JD's low price, guaranteed authenticity and fast delivery would refuse to shop at JD, because JD's founder was accused of rape in a foreign land few years ago.

Anyone looking at bear put spreads on $TLRY?

This is a really confusing post. Your second sentence sounds like you're only speaking for yourself. But then your third sentence makes it seem like you're speaking for all the longs. The entire post gives a vibe of longs just getting lucky, rather than being right, for the right reasons. So why do you feel it was "far from clear that there was no fraud going on" ? The last sentence you wrote can literally apply to any stock during any time period. Consider this: Maybe the longs invested because it was much clearer to them, than it was to you, where the story was going to go?

I hadn't checked in in a while either, nice. One of the smartest investors I ever met pitched this hard around $12-14 after the deal break and just demolished the short thesis. I never fully got the business model, but I should have just bought given the short thesis was discredited. Regrets! Demolishing the short thesis wasn't too hard tbh. Back then, you could see they were generating real cash, had captive customers and had been vetted by multiple banks, law firms and GS **after** being aware of the short thesis. But the biggest of all - RR was attempting to *increase* his stake in the deal with GS, rather than cash out. It was also hilarious to see ad hominem attacks on RR. I fondly remember a forum member here that was a vocal critic of RR. As it turns out, he has deleted his CoBF profile. But I would love to ask him what (if anything) he's learned in the past 5 years about EBIX, or about himself?

U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani WSJ (paywall) link: https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-files-criminal-charges-against-theranoss-elizabeth-holmes-ramesh-balwani-1529096005 Bypass paywall link: https://outline.com/dUwMC4

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-05-30/theranos-fatal-flaws-were-in-plain-sight

Yeah I was surprised to see an article on CNBC about FinancialSamurai. Almost reads like a thinly veiled advertorial.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/theranos-movie-based-on-bad-blood-book-to-star-jennifer-lawrence