"Readers Respond" is a forum where readers run the show by commenting on or adding to ongoing discussions regarding events or companies that have either been covered by VFC's Stock House or are worth bringing to the attention of readers. Remember, you don't have to agree with VFC to contribute - the best discussions are the ones where all angles are covered. All comments are welcome via email: email@example.com, Twitter (@VFCsStockHouse), Facebook or the VFC's Stock House Seeking Alpha page.
I see you are long imsc.pk. What do you think of Ben Sharvy's article?
VFC's Take: The article in reference was posted on Seeking Alpha last week and coincided with a swift, high-volumed drop of the Implant share price. Shares had recovered by Friday afternoon, however, to levels seen before the bear raid struck.
To answer tpim's question, I've really got no opinion one way or another about the article. It's essentially a re-print of an already-published article and the main points have already been discussed, absorbed, debated, re-discussed and then processed into personal investment decisions by both longs and shorts of the stock. While I always recommend entertaining all sides of a story, the case-in-points made by that article's author - and the tone in which he or she makes them - are old, weak and tired to those that have been hanging out with IMSC for quite a while, most of which have already more than doubled their money.
Concerns about financing and debt owed to the DMRJ group are not new and both Implant and DMRJ have already taken actions to ease those investor concerns. Of course, the longs have decided that the potential rewards that could result from the pending TSA certification and the potential of the Quantum Sniffer technology on the global market far outweigh the concerns of DMRJ coming in and shutting them down. The shorts, on the other hand, will continue to play their doom and gloom game until they either can't any more - that's the nature of the beast in speculative investing.
There are some key points to consider, other than personal opinions on the long and short side.
One key item to emphasize is that it is highly unlikely that last week's share price action resulted from the article's publishing. Retail investors are not sheep (the ones that may be should stick with funds, not individual stocks), after all, and are not likely to sell on that scale because of one guy's regurgitated opinion. Longs and shorts alike have long decided how they want to play the upcoming TSA catalyst and - as such - trading volume had trickled down to a mere shadow of what it was earlier in the year. Since it's not likely that the price action resulted from the article's publishing, it's more likely that the price action worked in conjunction with the article. In essence, the shorts concocted themselves a modest bear raid in order to drive the price down to a point where they could cover with a nice profit. Granted, some panic selling will take place by some investors in these instances, especially when stop-loss orders are used, but not enough to explain the notable boost in volume that coincided with last week's price drop.
The truth is - as much as some investors become irate at such attacks on stocks they own, this stuff is the nature of the game and both long and short investors can equally gain from such moves. Remember, it's not about overnight riches - the guys with the cash reserves and a boatload of time on their hands can work on that - for the little guy it's just all about picking up the crumbs while the other guys bake the cake. It's not pretty to watch a bear raid in action, but longs, too, could profit. Those that played last week's dip at any point at or below ninety cents came away with near-thirty percent gains in just a couple of days. In today's volatile market, it's always wise, in my opinion, to play with some trading shares at opportune points while also hanging onto a core group of shares while the full story plays out.
"If you can't beat 'em, join 'em," the old saying goes. In the game of investing that's not necessarily the case, especially since I don't believe in shorting stocks - it's like anti-investing, kind of like going 'nil' in spades, it's anti-spades. That doesn't mean that you can't play along with those who do like that game, however, and therefore you may say, "You ain't gonna beat them, but you can profit from their game, too."
Those that took advantage of the bear raid last week for a quick trade have evidenced that case in point.
At the end of the day, it's all about DD. Those who have done their homework and are confident in the company's potential did not falter last week, while those that are not-so-confident did. Nothing wrong with that - that's the markets for ya.
Implant still has some significant pending catalysts and is certainly an exciting stock to watch, heavy short interest and re-printed SA articles or not.
Hope that answered tpim's question.
Disclosure: Long IMSC.
'Like' VFC's Stock House on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/VFCs-Stock-House/143724412345213