Gregmal

Grabbed a little PCG pre market on the settlement announcement. Gotta figure there's a few % to be had in there given all the volatility.

This part of the piece stuck out "The HEICO that we know today was created in late 1989 when accountant-turned-real estate investor Laurans Mendelson, backed by an investor group, took control of the company’s Board, ousted the management team, placed himself at the helm as CEO and installed his two sons, Eric and Victor, to key leadership positions" What probably looked like a serious case of nepotism and something that many investors immediately see and write off an investment immediately because of, turned out to be just the start of one of the greatest runs of value creation one will ever see...just another instance of why investors should remain openminded and flexible.

Translating much of this and your other comments I get... "if its not a fundamental trade it doesn't count! wah, wah, wah" If you're short, well Im not sorry there was an opportunity to make money while you paid 2.5% this month to suffer paper losses and borrow your shares. If you're not short, then I don't really get why you are so butthurt. The premise of the investment(one he still apparently held as of the close today), was very straight forward. Sure, as has been mentioned, there was some salesmanship to the verbiage. But it was totally transparent and no different than anything you'll see anywhere else, from Seeking Alpha, to Twitter, to the latest JP Morgan analyst report. Ultimately, no one was duped as each and every individual who hits the buy and sell buttons is responsible for themselves. If what you are describing truly upset you so much, I can only imagine the constant state of unease and fury you must be in, I don't know, like, 743 times a day when analysts publish bullshit that investors then chose to act on even though generally speaking, much of it is nonsense...

Translating much of this and your other comments I get... "if its not a fundamental trade it doesn't count! wah, wah, wah" If you're short, well Im not sorry there was an opportunity to make money while you paid 2.5% this month to suffer paper losses and borrow your shares. If you're not short, then I don't really get why you are so butthurt.

One thing I'll add, is that the ATM is inexcusable, and downright tone deaf if your goal is to improve your current situation and attract new investors. I can't find anything that indicates they've used it, but having it there is a real dumb thing if you hope to attract new investors and claim to trade at a fraction of NAV. Look what the asinine and self serving convertible note deal did to CTO. When you trade at a discount, even a whiff of a tiny mouse fart sized inkling that management is thinking of issuing shares is frightening. Its just a big black eye optically and does in a way take away some credibility. Its not stopping me from buying this all day in the mid $30's, but to others it might, and it definitely dampens the enthusiasm in regards to upside knowing you'll likely be competing with management to dump your stock should this thing appreciate.

Citron short report out on this and SEDG.

On paper, yea just hold the short. In actuality, it’s not that simple. A lot can happen that is out of your control or forces you to change direction. What’s unique about some of these perspectives is that the authors are predominantly short biased. So they have a very deep understanding of the mechanics at play here. Rulenumberone, question. Theoretical. You’re short, and the stock goes against you 30%. You’re prime informs you that your borrow is gone. You have 3 days to buy in. Next day you’re notified that they have a few shares to borrow but the neg went from 15% to 60%. Meaning to keep the trade on you’re paying 5% a month to borrow. What do you do?

Got it. Just some fun discussion on a unique name that's worth keeping an eye on.

I don't think it is a secret, exactly .. And second, where I think the analysis is flawed: the short interest is 77% of the free float. Yes, that number, or whatever it currently is, is high. However, I think it is unlikely that Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street, Northern Trust etc. will pull the borrow in an orchestrated short squeeze. They are in the business of tracking indices - not in the business of generating squeezes for short-term profits. Even the founding family is probably happy with the status quo: lend out the shares for a juicy fee while letting others depress the price at which they can buy back shares. What are they gaining from a short-squeeze? Some short term gains (and they'd only be able to sell a small amount of shares), a lot of reputational damage and a pause in their buyback program. You don't think perhaps, lets say a desperate hedge fund manager who's badly in need of some returns and could also benefit from a public "win" wouldn't do such a thing? You dont think David Einhorn(who's long been little more than a trader of the stock) would do such a thing?

I don't really think they have much in common. MW on Burford was basically loud screaming of things people already knew, egregious misrepresentation, and capitalizing on reputational impact in order to more or less move the market. Mox report was pretty straight forward. Its a math trade. DDS as a retailer is kind of crummy, but not the worst out there. To a certain extent, sure; word getting out about short interest and the stock getting squeezed is a bit of self fulfilling prophecy. But its also a play on understanding market psychology. Ive been on the wrong end of short squeezes before; knowing what that feels like helps understand what drives this(it still may get squeezed more btw). So on that front, Pearson was 100% clear what he was looking to do here and I thought represented things in a fairly straight forward manner. Whereas Muddy Waters on the other hand... The home run scenario, again just analyzing the math end of this trade, would have been a repurchase number around what Unemon suggested. Free float is now significantly below shares short. Which then points to the obvious fact that some holders of the stock, that arent part of the free float are lending out the stock. Which if that's the case, you better believe once it is public what the difference between short interest and float is, guess what those holders are doing? Pulling the borrow. Thats where the really fireworks would happen. EDIT: and btw, if you want to see a real short piece. Check out Pearson's Forcefield Energy writeup. Or just check the FNRG chart. Gives new meaning to the term "killing it".

Cardboard don't forget, this is CoBF. The land of make believe. Where MDXG from 2.47-3.90 = ...disqualified!!! You didn't hold it long enough! and 59-70 in 3 days = you're missing something! Them fundamentals are bad!

Bill, dont give yourself an aneurism, worrying about defending this shit. I bought it with my eyes closed for one reason... downside is what? $30 per share?!?! LOL. Give yourself a setup and some time. It's good. Especially if you are young or patient. Personally, I see this as the ugly, forgotten cousin of FRP and CTO. Striking characteristics both good and bad, of both. You're fine here brother.... The real question... you want to team up and pressure a sale of the warehouses? J/K... maybe...

With all due respect Rulenumberone, and perhaps because the thread title was changed, but youre focusing on the wrong things. This was basically a math trade. Short interest was nearly 90% of float, on a stock that’s exhibited certain previous patterns, and that setup the move for a short squeeze, taking this from 59/60 to 70 in under 5 days. It was never represented as anything more.

No problem, glad you made some money. I took much off and whats left is on the house. I'd point out too that the 300K+ is what Pearson projected in his writeup. Unemon's 1M figure from a day ago would have been hard to pull off, and the stock probably would have went to $100 if they hit that. Either way, a lot can happen. Figures were as of 8/31 so I would project perhaps another 50-100K since then, although typically around $70 is where they tone it down. "I expect to see a further 300-600k shares bought back during this post-PR window and that the float will drop further to around 9 million shares. See table below." https://moxreports.com Rick Pearson continues to be a monster. Definitely worth following if you guys don't already.

Looks like they took out a bit over 300K shares. So about 1.5% of class A outstanding and about 3.2% of available float in roughly a month. Bloomberg's most recent equity float shows 9.2M(now 8.9M) vs 8.6M shares short.

Why? I have always thought the dividend is not good capital allocation. Either buying back debt or buying back stock are better capital allocation. At this point, I prefer them to buy back debt. I think management is making the right decision, and actually I am now considering buying the stock. As I said, its more the approach. Its handwaving and seemed designated to draw attention away from the fact that the quarter was pretty awful, and guidance was bad. Even down to the odd mid trading day halt...

Well, guess its not just me. Stock just came out of trading halt with a 4 handle...

Maybe its just me, but this is horrible news on top of horrible results. Anyone who's seen this before knows this move is not about buying back stock, and probably not even about buying back some of the debt; its about cutting the dividend. Just done in a rather sneaky, hand waving, illusory way.

Reduced much of my dollar value exposure and rolled into short dated slightly OTM calls. $70's for instance are a couple bucks. They seem mispriced given that the squeeze largely depends on numbers from 10Q which gets released by tomorrow. The squeeze play is on, and out there, so if it gains traction, it'll happen very soon.

Trimmed ENDP, TEVA EDIT: closed all ENDP, didn't like the price action/reversal.

Surprised I haven't seen it yet, maybe cuz it isn't a free service, and is more a portal to access information rather than prefab pitches on value stocks, but theflyonthewall is a great resource and modestly priced IMO.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4290821-cleveland-cliffs-inc-clf-ceo-lourenco-goncalves-annual-credit-suisse-basic-materials?part=single I wish there were more CEO's like LG.

Took more off a hair under $70. Locking in like 17 years worth of returns compounding 2% bonds. In 3 days.

Yup. Took a bit off at 66 from 59. Not bad for a few days. But I still think if the buybacks numbers are anywhere near what is being projected in the Unemon post, this is a moonshot.

https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/6460311-unemon1/5349958-epic-short-squeeze-dillard-s-inc-nyse-dds-2-days-catalyst-will-surprise-market