+- ShareholdersUnite Forums (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb)
+-- Forum: Companies (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: InterOil Forum (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: Cap Re held Fido added (/showthread.php?tid=2707)
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - bertl05 - 02-03-2013
'jft310' pid='16986' datel Wrote:For the record I never stated Bert was short.Nor did I imply such proferssor What I stated was Bert was posting the short arguements which no longer were true. For a fact the shorts contact longs and pose as longs and then pass along some true info to win confidence and then pass along garbage. One person you and I both know and that is Kevin. He has been so contacted. Maybe the same person contacted Bert also.???? The facts are what I stated in my post. Some longs have more current information than others is my point. The PPS today has nothing to do with the assets, nor their value, nor is any indication of what the prices may be. Some understand what a CA is and others don't. The shorts info provider is deballed, thus they have old info and thus they don't know whats going on. Retail shorts short more. Many funds are waiting for the SM name, the price, the project type, dates etc. Those longs will pay quite a bit more than a today long.Or the early bird gets the worm.
Incorrect. I have no idea who Kevin is, and the only people I communicate with are 1) Long and have very large positions or 2) are experts in Asian LNG business and have no position. Sorry Ken.
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - ebster123 - 02-03-2013
"As long as the buyback price per share is lower than the NAV price per share such action is beneficial to the shareholders because of the leverage effect on the NAV value per share. So, we must be grateful that shorters are lowering the instep-price for a share buyback. "
Interesting comment and if you expand on this might Phil and the other members of the board possible stockholders who old lend out shares. If they did the ST discount on the price could prove well for tue longs. Haven't there been continual comments about "rewarding longs"? .....time will tell
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - jft310 - 02-04-2013
Bert-I will expand on this so all know exactly what the shorts do. It may not reflect on your experieces and this is far from a Bert issue and not personal . The Kevin comment was directed at STP not you Bert.
One the shorts used to work for yahoo. This person still has access to yahoo data. Scary we can agree, This person uses their yahoo contacts to get personal emails addresses from yahoo. They also find out where you work and your contact information. . I know personally of 3 persons who have been contacted by the shorts. Its a friendly email and some non public info was disclosed in time. The friendship builds in time. Then the short starts what the shorts do this person sends out the distorted version of things.The negative twist the Bonk type arguement. The attempt is to discredit IOC and its management. Further they state they are selling some IOC shares and state are you selling some shares???? The idea is to get weak longs to cave.
The story seems to change person by person and this short is quite clever at finding your weakness.
One person has been threatened strongly. He may respond to this post as he reads many posts. Another person was threatened he would talk to this persons employer about them and their yahoo posts. They will do anything to slam IOC and its management. At one time they will go Long IOC. Its why they work for a Hedge Fund they can play both sides of the arguement.
Again this has nada to do with Bert but has everything to do with what the shorts do and how they do it.
Bonk and Eric both work for a Hedge Fund that is betting against IOC. Their names are listed along with Whitney Tilson names on this website.Boston based Hedge Fund.
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - cybersssss - 02-04-2013
All these people are all smoke and mirrors....especially Tilson.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/t1-not-t2-goodbye-whitney-tilson
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - trans - 02-04-2013
Okay people, help me out...on the stock loan info.
1. Some of our BIGs are loaning their stock out, seems quite reasonable with the high short interest.
2. When the stock is loaned, a receipt is issued at the price the stock was loaned to the long holder by the brokerage house.
3. The short is "marked to the market" daily, so as to hold the broker risk free.
4. Who is owning with any equity gain if the stock trades higher, the broker or the person loaning the stock to the broker? This is a key question to be answered by someone out there.
5. I am hearing that a stock loan by a long to a broker puts the long at risk of not receiving a gain from the point of loan til he recalls the stock loan, at which he is then long the stock again at the recall price. Am I reading this correctly?
5a. If so, it appears our BIGS can yank the rug out from under the shorts by recalling their stock loan and forcing buy ins. And they can do this when they so choose?
6. If so, then the shorts in this situation are the highest risk situation in IOC if our mgt. information is correct, as I believe it is.
7. So, the decision to cover a short is mostly in the hands of the long stock holder and occurs mostly when the stock starts a run higher. Or, the broker, if he sees undue risk to his position, can also force a cover of the shorted stock.
8. This should infer that the real stock squeeze, if it occurs, should be mostly when the long stock holder fears losing out on a move higher on bona fide good news. At this point, a short faces the possibility of losing control of the short stock, in this case IOC.
9. For now, this situation depends on NEWS to trigger a noticeable move higher. Or beforehand, our BIGS get wind of bullish news ahead, and want their stock back. Is this the correct way to view this situation?
10. If so, the shorts control of IOC price behavior is quite short term, til some of them decided to get to the front of the short covering line.
11. If I were IOC, I would periodically this month be releasing news that builds the probability that the shorts are wrong on IOC.
I SEE THE RISK IN IOC, IF THE ABOVE IS CORRECT, ON BEING SHORT THIS STOCK!
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - Libtardius Maximus - 02-04-2013
Seems to me you have it right. #9 is the key imo, a signed PA with lease extensions.
The bang you would hear would be the back door being slammed shut. New buyers would show up as well in the form of big tutes.
All hell could break loose.
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - MRP - 02-04-2013
trans,
Regarding your point 5. When you loan shares out, you loan a specific # of shares not the value. For example, I lend out m 100 shares and whenever I decide to call them back in I get a 100 shares back so there is no lost upside or downside. The broker agrees to cover you and ensure you get the shares back. For larger transactions, you get a letter of credit from a third party major financial institution (ex. Wells, Chase, Citi etc.) this letter of credit is market to market every day so that you are always "insured" against the then current value of the shares in case they are not returned.
Basically they do there best to make sure there is as little chance as possible of a loss (the fund and major financial institution goes bankrupt on the same day and your broker says they won't cover it) and you get a small % interest for lending it out while still getting all the benefits of owning the stock.
The holders lending out the shares have the ability to cause a squeeze but only if enough of them decide they wont lend out shares such that some shorts are forced to buy them back. In most companies this situation never arises bc the short count is a relatively small amount of the float and holders of the stock are willing to lend shares since there is very little risk to them. IOC is unique in that 10-15 holders could say they won't lend the shares out and a major squeeze would happen, which is a very rare event. Who knows if this level of coordination or agreement is practical or even likely but the fact that its even possible is rare.
Hope this helped a bit.
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - SamAdams - 02-04-2013
'trans' pid='17010' dateline='<a href="tel:1359920 Wrote:Okay people, help me out...on the stock loan info. 1. Some of our BIGs are loaning their stock out, seems quite reasonable with the high short interest. 2. When the stock is loaned, a receipt is issued at the price the stock was loaned to the long holder by the brokerage house. 3. The short is "marked to the market" daily, so as to hold the broker risk free. 4. Who is owning with any equity gain if the stock trades higher, the broker or the person loaning the stock to the broker? This is a key question to be answered by someone out there. 5. I am hearing that a stock loan by a long to a broker puts the long at risk of not receiving a gain from the point of loan til he recalls the stock loan, at which he is then long the stock again at the recall price. Am I reading this correctly? 5a. If so, it appears our BIGS can yank the rug out from under the shorts by recalling their stock loan and forcing buy ins. And they can do this when they so choose? 6. If so, then the shorts in this situation are the highest risk situation in IOC if our mgt. information is correct, as I believe it is. 7. So, the decision to cover a short is mostly in the hands of the long stock holder and occurs mostly when the stock starts a run higher. Or, the broker, if he sees undue risk to his position, can also force a cover of the shorted stock. 8. This should infer that the real stock squeeze, if it occurs, should be mostly when the long stock holder fears losing out on a move higher on bona fide good news. At this point, a short faces the possibility of losing control of the short stock, in this case IOC. 9. For now, this situation depends on NEWS to trigger a noticeable move higher. Or beforehand, our BIGS get wind of bullish news ahead, and want their stock back. Is this the correct way to view this situation? 10. If so, the shorts control of IOC price behavior is quite short term, til some of them decided to get to the front of the short covering line. 11. If I were IOC, I would periodically this month be releasing news that builds the probability that the shorts are wrong on IOC. I SEE THE RISK IN IOC, IF THE ABOVE IS CORRECT, ON BEING SHORT THIS STOCK!
Loaning out shares would not impact the performance of the fund. They would benefit fully from any appreciation. I do not believe you can vote shares that have been loaned however. That would be a real reason to call in shares. No portfolio manager who had full say in what shares were loaned out would take 5% for IOC, IMO.
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - ArtM72 - 02-04-2013
How about a special dividend? Wouldn't that become the responsibility of shorts to pay? How about their guarantors? I suspect an announcement of same would give shorts until the record date to unload, or payout date to cough up the cash, but in either event the dynamics would be fun to watch.
RE: Cap Re held Fido added - Gator - 02-06-2013
(02-04-2013, 02:12 AM)cybersssss Wrote:All these people are all smoke and mirrors....especially Tilson.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/t1-not-t2-goodbye-whitney-tilson
Tilson closed T2 after it "lagged badly over the last 2 1/2 years" and reopened under KASE Capital. Guess what, he is still short IOC.
"Beginning in July, I reestablished my favorite short positions and added a number of new ones over the course of the fall, resulting in 20-25 positions and exposure in the 30-40% range. While this is far lower than the level of recent years, I concluded that it is still too many positions and too much exposure, so I have adjusted the portfolio accordingly. Today the fund currently holds only eight short positions (excluding a number of tiny ones that I haven’t covered to avoid realizing substantial taxable gains) and total short exposure is 14%.
When I set the target last June of 25 short positions, I thought this was a manageable number – but I overestimated my bandwidth. Managing so many positions spread me too thinly, which had two effects: our fund suffered losses that should have been avoided and, less visibly but perhaps more importantly, the amount of time I spent on shorts impacted my ability to find great longs.
To rectify this, going forward I plan to only invest in my absolute highest conviction 10-15 short ideas, with the sole goal of making money. My focus is on flawed or broken businesses whose stocks I think are likely to suffer precipitous, permanent declines. Good examples are InterOil, Nokia, and K-12, three of the four largest short positions in the fund."