Don't agree MCNABBPA MCN-I respectfully disagree...the "new financials" you talk about were flat in their frontrunner/flagship sectors for growth-present and future growth-for me and I imagine without them disclosing so-this would be an area of great concern and would explain in some cases the reason for divesture announced. When you are padding bottom end numbers near entirely based on tightening line item expenditures/it typicall signfies imo and my investment experience that there is an internal struggle going on to realize the strategic and tactical gains anticipated thru a targeted growth plan based on aquiring others vs generic growth of the existing business enterprise and I cited that i expected this to be shown in the reporting quarter and to a large extent...it was.
This company is in a "show me the money" phase...or "the proof is in the pudding"...there was no "new" coverage initiated by houses that in the past were on the sidelines-and for the existing houses-one or two acting as lead financial managers for MM-not holding the course on ratings or price targets at this point would signify publicly in my opinion a lack of confidence going forward..or akin to a kiss of death.
The smart or professional money-their firms money that is... will be out when they are publicly advising to hold the fort-and already in when they are saying time to back the truck up..they may get their very high net worth "preferred customer list" out with little to no harm from a story they don't like the direction its going in or if stormwinds are prevailing vs clear sailing-afterall being a bull in a rising tide does float all boats...to some extent even those taking on water...but by and large if one follows anything related to how the big money movers operate-they are all to willing to sacrifice their smaller retail guys tied to their hips and investment advice...I myself before starting to do my own investments can recall being told to hold on to my broker advice into Nortel and WorldComm...anybody around long enough to remember those two?
Objectively speaking I don't know why the CEO didn't move his physical being and quarters closer to the company HQ long ago vs managing from a distance. How much his presence onsite will influence them turning some things around remains to be seen and will be interesting.
I believe based on how aggressive they were on their growth strategy thru aquisition...it will take the better part of the rest of this year for them to turn things around and start (if they can that is) to realize the synergies in their enterprise they hoped for...for now I am not convinced their value proposition is that strong.
At some point you begin to be judged on execution as a manager not just on vision.
I remain on the sidelines at this point-IMO the valuations will settle under $1 again by weeks end...the money coming in was from those on the retail side trying to read the tea leaves vs taking a sip from the teapot - stepping back and reflecting on its taste.
GLA
SS