User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:22:08 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Osprey61: Thank you, hit it pretty much dead center. There's a personal aspect to it as well that's actually more important than the money. Wife and I are both fed up with watching the chart, and it's inducing some stress. It's also boating season, and a couple of days from now I intend to resume my crusade to wipe the trout and smallmouth scourge from the face of the earth. I have no intention of looking at (my wife's) phone for the next three months unless I get an alert. My financial advisors will be aboard, so I sail with trusted counsel  https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/457055/First_Mate-1955022.jpg We can all support your need to step away for whatever reason you choose. Also, I know a thing or 2 about catching Smallies. Best lake in the world is Crooked, but we ain't going in your boat or mine for that matter. Hard as shit to get to to but worth it in every respect fishing wise. Crooked Lake sits right on the border between Ontario and Minnesota. Paddle and portage in is the only way and it takes a day or 2 to get there. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:22:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: Admiral_Crunch]
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Leisure_Shoot: Ugh... this is the worst time for me. This is where I get anxious. Too many times I have held through highs, when I could have sold, and then bough back in a couple dollars lower. When are we hitting the top? I want to sell soon, so I can buy back in at $13.00 tomorrow. https://media3.giphy.com/media/3oKHWnGeVGBpC981DW/giphy.gif Tell me about it. Whatever I do will probably be the wrong move. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:23:12 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By apexcrusade: Looks like we have us a goer, coming up on $16! Yessir! Muh charts are actually looking pretty good. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:25:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: Admiral_Crunch]
[#4]
Knock, knock, knocking on 16's door...
 |
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:28:33 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jb31: Yessir! Muh charts are actually looking pretty good. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jb31: Originally Posted By apexcrusade: Looks like we have us a goer, coming up on $16! Yessir! Muh charts are actually looking pretty good. Yeah, she's running. The charts are looking nice. I'm going to sit back and enjoy this ride with a big grin. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:28:45 PM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Admiral_Crunch: Tell me about it. Whatever I do will probably be the wrong move. But now, I have to look at my stock screen all day long, and my work screen doesn't get done as quickly. I may be working til 7 tonight. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:31:22 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Leisure_Shoot: Ugh... this is the worst time for me. This is where I get anxious. Too many times I have held through highs, when I could have sold, and then bough back in a couple dollars lower. When are we hitting the top? I want to sell soon, so I can buy back in at $13.00 tomorrow. https://media3.giphy.com/media/3oKHWnGeVGBpC981DW/giphy.gif Right there with you The calls I bought yesterday at $85 are now at $130 Sell now and lock in 50%b or let it run closer to the ASM? I'll let it run and complain later |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:33:05 PM EST
[#8]
Ouch, MAVIS is such a tease
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:35:49 PM EST
[#9]
I actually meant MVIS' (very long term, not specifically last year, which might be considered anomalous) history of appreciating into ECs and ASMs, with an emotional/speculator sell-off and rational recovery on the backside. The small sale I did today just takes a large part of my risk off the table. It wouldn't hurt me to lose $180K (okay, it would hurt my feelings) if the world goes to hell, but I'd prefer to lose just $35K if it comes to that. I can sleep, and fish, on that without a care.
Microvision remains highly speculative, and with big gain comes significant risk. The price action right now reflects that. Did a lot of thinking on the general counsel position last night. It's odd, make no mistake. The incumbent announced his intention to retire two months ago, and said he'd stay on until June. Why would MVIS wait until two days prior to the ASM (and days from June) to run that ad, knowing damn well the entire MVIS investing world is running web crawlers that were sure to pick it up? If you were an experienced lawyer, would you sign on knowing the odds were good you'd be released just months later? I wouldn't. That would seem to reduce the odds of a full buy-out significantly. Or...did Google (et al) pull a last minute walk-away bluff, and Sumit is calling them on it? It absolutely wouldn't be out of character. On the other hand, if MVIS is going vertical sale, reverse merger or minority partner he'd be a very real necessity, and you wouldn't want to test the outgoing guy's patience by pushing his willingness to cover. In either case, IMO the timing signals some heightened degree of uncertainty - if not to MVIS, most surely to the shareholders. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:37:04 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By IceStationZebra: Lord I hope that isn't it. If they are going it on their own, 150k shares are up for sale. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By IceStationZebra: Originally Posted By Kuraki: Originally Posted By IceStationZebra: I'm in to find out what history is repeating. @osprey61 Lord I hope that isn't it. If they are going it on their own, 150k shares are up for sale. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:38:31 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Total53: We can all support your need to step away for whatever reason you choose. Also, I know a thing or 2 about catching Smallies. Best lake in the world is Crooked, but we ain't going in your boat or mine for that matter. Hard as shit to get to to but worth it in every respect fishing wise. Crooked Lake sits right on the border between Ontario and Minnesota. Paddle and portage in is the only way and it takes a day or 2 to get there. Best smallmouth fishing here is actually well down the river that drains Pend Oreille. Please don't tell anyone, though. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:40:44 PM EST
[Last Edit: Kuraki]
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Osprey61: snip On the other hand, if MVIS is going vertical sale, reverse merger or minority partner he'd be a very real necessity, and you wouldn't want to test the outgoing guy's patience by pushing his willingness to cover. In either case, IMO the timing signals some heightened degree of uncertainty - if not to MVIS, most surely to the shareholders. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:42:10 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Osprey61: Best smallmouth fishing here is actually well down the river that drains Pend Oreille. Please don't tell anyone, though. Oh I tell anyone and everyone about Crooked - if you can get there you deserve the trophies you're going to catch 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:44:31 PM EST
[#14]
I just did you guys a solid and sold 1500 in my retirement account at 15.77.
Should cross 16 and minute now. I'll buy back 1650-ish in the $14+ range |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:47:52 PM EST
[#15]
I still can't believe someone was willing to spend $50 million at $20/share in February for that ATM on "we're going it alone."
|
|
|
|
SC, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:49:50 PM EST
[Last Edit: security6]
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jb31: Got it, thanks. I'm not sure that means much. I understand that the General Counsel stepping down looked like a positive sign, but that position is probably pretty important right now with all that is going on behind the scenes in addition to standard business. We use our attorney quite a bit for contract review, NDAs, employment and compensation contracts, distribution contracts and issues, etc. There is a lot of day to day stuff that they would otherwise have to be outsourced. I disagree and think it's an almost certain sign that no buyout is imminent or in the works. By in the works I mean the buyout is being actively negotiated, such as a term sheet or an actual contract being negotiated. Here is why: (1) If a buyout is being actively negotiated, it means they already have a lawyer doing the negotiating. There wouldn't be any reason to change who is doing the negotiating (or calling the shots on the negotiating) on the deal 1 or 2 months into the future (1 or 2 months is the timeline that a new General Counsel would likely start employment). (2) The C-suite is almost always canned, or voluntarily leaves, when a buyout happens. No general counsel that MVIS would want to hire would be interested in starting a job knowing that he/she will likely be leaving within the calendar year. (3) The job posting says experience with publicly traded companies is desirable (presumably to help with annual reports, SEC filings, etc.). Most, but not all, buyers wouldn't keep MVIS under a MVIS ticker, they would bring it under their ticker (i.e. if Apple bought MVIS, MVIS as a company would be dissolved and would become part of Apple). So there is no reason for MVIS to hire a general counsel with publicly traded company experience if they expect to be bought out within the next few months. (4) There are lots of "temp services" for lawyers, and you can hire excellent lawyers this way to serve as full-time general counsel for a short time period. It would make more financial sense and you can get the lawyer working quicker (very important if a buyout is being actively negotiated), to hire a "temp service" lawyer as opposed to hiring a full-time employee lawyer. None of this means that a buyout won't happen, I just think this is a sign that the buyout announcement won't happen with the next month or two. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:50:51 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Osprey61: Best smallmouth fishing here is actually well down the river that drains Pend Oreille. Please don't tell anyone, though. I have fished that river more than a few times and will confirm the smallmouth fishing is epic. And so is the Pike fishing 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:50:56 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Admiral_Crunch: Pretty sure he's making a comment about the people who don't understand. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Admiral_Crunch: Originally Posted By SurfAnimal: Originally Posted By DetrhoytMAK: [captainobvious]Derpity doo dah, taxes, IRS, derpity day, taxes, derp derp derp...[/captainobvious] You DO understand that you only pay taxes on MONEY YOU MADE, correct? Pretty sure he's making a comment about the people who don't understand. Ah, yes. I saw his derp, and I herped. ..., |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:54:04 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By security6: I disagree and think it's an almost certain sign that no buyout is imminent or in the works. By in the works I mean the buyout is being actively negotiated, such as a term sheet or an actual contract being negotiated. Here is why: (1) If a buyout is being actively negotiated, it means they already have a lawyer doing the negotiating. There wouldn't be any reason to change who is doing the negotiating (or calling the shots on the negotiating) on the deal 1 or 2 months into the future (1 or 2 months is the timeline that a new General Counsel would likely start employment). (2) The C-suite is almost always canned, or voluntarily leaves, when a buyout happens. No general counsel that MVIS would want to hire would be interested in starting a job knowing that he/she will likely be leaving within the calendar year. (3) The job posting says experience with publicly traded companies is desirable (presumably to help with annual reports, SEC filings, etc.). Most, but not all, buyers wouldn't keep MVIS under a MVIS ticker, they would bring it under their ticker (i.e. if Apple bought MVIS, MVIS as a company would be dissolved and would become part of Apple). So there is no reason for MVIS to hire a general counsel with publicly traded company experience if they expect to be bought out within the next few months. (4) There are lots of "temp services" for lawyers, and you can hire excellent lawyers this way to serve as full-time general counsel for a short time period. It would make more financial sense and you can get the lawyer working quicker (very important if a buyout is being actively negotiated), to hire a "temp service" lawyer as opposed to hiring a full-time employee lawyer. None of this means that a buyout won't happen, I just think this is a sign that it the announcement won't happen with the next month or two. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:58:58 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By security6: I disagree and think it's an almost certain sign that no buyout is imminent or in the works. By in the works I mean the buyout is being actively negotiated, such as a term sheet or an actual contract being negotiated. Here is why: (1) If a buyout is being actively negotiated, it means they already have a lawyer doing the negotiating. There wouldn't be any reason to change who is doing the negotiating (or calling the shots on the negotiating) on the deal 1 or 2 months into the future (1 or 2 months is the timeline that a new General Counsel would likely start employment). (2) The C-suite is almost always canned, or voluntarily leaves, when a buyout happens. No general counsel that MVIS would want to hire would be interested in starting a job knowing that he/she will likely be leaving within the calendar year. (3) The job posting says experience with publicly traded companies is desirable (presumably to help with annual reports, SEC filings, etc.). Most, but not all, buyers wouldn't keep MVIS under a MVIS ticker, they would bring it under their ticker (i.e. if Apple bought MVIS, MVIS as a company would be dissolved and would become part of Apple). So there is no reason for MVIS to hire a general counsel with publicly traded company experience if they expect to be bought out within the next few months. (4) There are lots of "temp services" for lawyers, and you can hire excellent lawyers this way to serve as full-time general counsel for a short time period. It would make more financial sense and you can get the lawyer working quicker (very important if a buyout is being actively negotiated), to hire a "temp service" lawyer as opposed to hiring a full-time employee lawyer. None of this means that a buyout won't happen, I just think this is a sign that the buyout announcement won't happen with the next month or two. Unless the prospective buyer wants a turnkey subsidiary, that would continue its separate corporate existence as such. But as I said before, I think your line of thinking is more likely. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 12:59:51 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By security6: I disagree and think it's an almost certain sign that no buyout is imminent or in the works. By in the works I mean the buyout is being actively negotiated, such as a term sheet or an actual contract being negotiated. Here is why: (1) If a buyout is being actively negotiated, it means they already have a lawyer doing the negotiating. There wouldn't be any reason to change who is doing the negotiating (or calling the shots on the negotiating) on the deal 1 or 2 months into the future (1 or 2 months is the timeline that a new General Counsel would likely start employment). (2) The C-suite is almost always canned, or voluntarily leaves, when a buyout happens. No general counsel that MVIS would want to hire would be interested in starting a job knowing that he/she will likely be leaving within the calendar year. (3) The job posting says experience with publicly traded companies is desirable (presumably to help with annual reports, SEC filings, etc.). Most, but not all, buyers wouldn't keep MVIS under a MVIS ticker, they would bring it under their ticker (i.e. if Apple bought MVIS, MVIS as a company would be dissolved and would become part of Apple). So there is no reason for MVIS to hire a general counsel with publicly traded company experience if they expect to be bought out within the next few months. (4) There are lots of "temp services" for lawyers, and you can hire excellent lawyers this way to serve as full-time general counsel for a short time period. It would make more financial sense and you can get the lawyer working quicker (very important if a buyout is being actively negotiated), to hire a "temp service" lawyer as opposed to hiring a full-time employee lawyer. None of this means that a buyout won't happen, I just think this is a sign that the buyout announcement won't happen with the next month or two. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:06:10 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: He's reducing his exposure by liquidating his least profitable shares with the longest timeline for shifting to LTG. If you have 100 shares that are already LTG and you bought for $1 per share, and 10 shares that are months away from LTG that you bought for $10 per share, and you want to reduce how much of your net worth is exposed to the market while the share price is $11, but not eliminate your position entirely or even the majority of it, it makes sense to eliminate the 10 shares at $11 and pay STG on the $10 profit, rather than selling 10 shares of your early position and paying LTG on $100 profit. His exposure is reduced by the same amount, and he pays ~$3-4 of income tax vs $15 or 20. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: Originally Posted By MrZeat: Originally Posted By Osprey61: For transparency...I just sold 10K shares for $15.22. Had a good reason, they were my most expensive (and STCG, for several more months) shares, and reduced my ACB from roughly $1.80 back to $0.52. Now holding 66,038 shares, with another 10K sale laid in at $20. Not a loss of confidence, just wanted to take some of my exposure off the table. It looks like some of the old history is repeating, and speculators are doing some loading against the ASM. If we don't get anything of substance I'll probably turn around and reload on the drop. I'm confused, were you selling any for a net loss? Or why would you sell a STCG lot when it will turn to LTCG in a several more months? Everyone's situation is different, but LTCG are way more tax favorable, you'd think you'd sell LTCG now and then the rest would hopefully also be LTCG by the time you sell? I'm not trying to call you out or anything, I'm just trying to understand your strategy here. Yes you'll pay less taxes now as you're pushing off your tax liability, but you're paying a much higher percent on those gains. The taxes on the LTCG will be paid by you eventually regardless unless you die with the shares. Unless you're trying to stay under a certain threshold for this calendar year, just doesn't make sense to me to pay the higher percentage even if it means taking your tax liability this year instead of pushing it off. For many I'd think this would be a 22 or 24 vs 15% or worse a 32 vs 15% if you're higher income. Even at the best case of someone who keeps their income in the 22% marginal ranges that's still a 7% difference and it only goes up from there. Not peanuts. I guess in a high inflation environment maybe if you plan to hold many many years pushing that tax difference further in the future makes sense? I try and make a clear distinction on LTCG can STCG investments and really try and push my long holdings to LTCG wherever possible before selling, it's a huge difference in taxes to do so. I usually follow the Schwab Tax Lot optimizer, take losses in short term first, take gains in long term first and I don't really see a reason to make exception to that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:10:24 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: I kinda agree with you. The exception would be a reverse merger with Waymo though. Particularly point #3. Whichever ticker they fly, there's no one currently at Waymo (probably, not their CLO anyway) with that kind of experience and that individual would likely stay on regardless of how the org structure shook out. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:15:30 PM EST
[#24]
Quote History
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:17:45 PM EST
[#25]
I called schwab and exercised my chance to buy 5k HCMC shares at a 25% discount. Will cost me about $7 for this particular lottery ticket so what the fuck, right?
|
|
|
|
SC, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:22:50 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: I kinda agree with you. The exception would be a reverse merger with Waymo though. Particularly point #3. Whichever ticker they fly, there's no one currently at Waymo (probably, not their CLO anyway) with that kind of experience and that individual would likely stay on regardless of how the org structure shook out. That seems unlikely given that the position for the new GC is in Redmond, and Waymo is in California. But then again, Waymo seems to do things differently. What other company has two CEOs? LOL! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:29:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: Kuraki]
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MrZeat: Yes you'll pay less taxes now as you're pushing off your tax liability, but you're paying a much higher percent on those gains. The taxes on the LTCG will be paid by you eventually regardless unless you die with the shares. Unless you're trying to stay under a certain threshold for this calendar year, just doesn't make sense to me to pay the higher percentage even if it means taking your tax liability this year instead of pushing it off. For many I'd think this would be a 22 or 24 vs 15% or worse a 32 vs 15% if you're higher income. Even at the best case of someone who keeps their income in the 22% marginal ranges that's still a 7% difference and it only goes up from there. Not peanuts. I guess in a high inflation environment maybe if you plan to hold many many years pushing that tax difference further in the future makes sense? I try and make a clear distinction on LTCG can STCG investments and really try and push my long holdings to LTCG wherever possible before selling, it's a huge difference in taxes to do so. I usually follow the Schwab Tax Lot optimizer, take losses in short term first, take gains in long term first and I don't really see a reason to make exception to that. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MrZeat: Originally Posted By Kuraki: Originally Posted By MrZeat: Originally Posted By Osprey61: For transparency...I just sold 10K shares for $15.22. Had a good reason, they were my most expensive (and STCG, for several more months) shares, and reduced my ACB from roughly $1.80 back to $0.52. Now holding 66,038 shares, with another 10K sale laid in at $20. Not a loss of confidence, just wanted to take some of my exposure off the table. It looks like some of the old history is repeating, and speculators are doing some loading against the ASM. If we don't get anything of substance I'll probably turn around and reload on the drop. I'm confused, were you selling any for a net loss? Or why would you sell a STCG lot when it will turn to LTCG in a several more months? Everyone's situation is different, but LTCG are way more tax favorable, you'd think you'd sell LTCG now and then the rest would hopefully also be LTCG by the time you sell? I'm not trying to call you out or anything, I'm just trying to understand your strategy here. Yes you'll pay less taxes now as you're pushing off your tax liability, but you're paying a much higher percent on those gains. The taxes on the LTCG will be paid by you eventually regardless unless you die with the shares. Unless you're trying to stay under a certain threshold for this calendar year, just doesn't make sense to me to pay the higher percentage even if it means taking your tax liability this year instead of pushing it off. For many I'd think this would be a 22 or 24 vs 15% or worse a 32 vs 15% if you're higher income. Even at the best case of someone who keeps their income in the 22% marginal ranges that's still a 7% difference and it only goes up from there. Not peanuts. I guess in a high inflation environment maybe if you plan to hold many many years pushing that tax difference further in the future makes sense? I try and make a clear distinction on LTCG can STCG investments and really try and push my long holdings to LTCG wherever possible before selling, it's a huge difference in taxes to do so. I usually follow the Schwab Tax Lot optimizer, take losses in short term first, take gains in long term first and I don't really see a reason to make exception to that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:30:35 PM EST
[#28]
Look MVIS, quit rubbing my leg and get to 16 or just start watching the movie at 14, the tease is killing me lol
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:31:15 PM EST
[#29]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:32:14 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By security6: That seems unlikely given that the position for the new GC is in Redmond, and Waymo is in California. But then again, Waymo seems to do things differently. What other company has two CEOs? LOL! Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By security6: Originally Posted By Kuraki: I kinda agree with you. The exception would be a reverse merger with Waymo though. Particularly point #3. Whichever ticker they fly, there's no one currently at Waymo (probably, not their CLO anyway) with that kind of experience and that individual would likely stay on regardless of how the org structure shook out. That seems unlikely given that the position for the new GC is in Redmond, and Waymo is in California. But then again, Waymo seems to do things differently. What other company has two CEOs? LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:33:59 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: The reason to make an exception to that is when you never planned on holding that lot until it reaches LTG. In the interim if you want to reduce exposure, do it for the least amount of cost possible, in this case paying STG on the least profitable shares. Just like you were eventually paying LTG regardless, in this case you're eventually paying STG regardless, but the priority is to reduce exposure -now- vs increase profit -then-. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: Originally Posted By MrZeat: Originally Posted By Kuraki: Originally Posted By MrZeat: Originally Posted By Osprey61: For transparency...I just sold 10K shares for $15.22. Had a good reason, they were my most expensive (and STCG, for several more months) shares, and reduced my ACB from roughly $1.80 back to $0.52. Now holding 66,038 shares, with another 10K sale laid in at $20. Not a loss of confidence, just wanted to take some of my exposure off the table. It looks like some of the old history is repeating, and speculators are doing some loading against the ASM. If we don't get anything of substance I'll probably turn around and reload on the drop. I'm confused, were you selling any for a net loss? Or why would you sell a STCG lot when it will turn to LTCG in a several more months? Everyone's situation is different, but LTCG are way more tax favorable, you'd think you'd sell LTCG now and then the rest would hopefully also be LTCG by the time you sell? I'm not trying to call you out or anything, I'm just trying to understand your strategy here. Yes you'll pay less taxes now as you're pushing off your tax liability, but you're paying a much higher percent on those gains. The taxes on the LTCG will be paid by you eventually regardless unless you die with the shares. Unless you're trying to stay under a certain threshold for this calendar year, just doesn't make sense to me to pay the higher percentage even if it means taking your tax liability this year instead of pushing it off. For many I'd think this would be a 22 or 24 vs 15% or worse a 32 vs 15% if you're higher income. Even at the best case of someone who keeps their income in the 22% marginal ranges that's still a 7% difference and it only goes up from there. Not peanuts. I guess in a high inflation environment maybe if you plan to hold many many years pushing that tax difference further in the future makes sense? I try and make a clear distinction on LTCG can STCG investments and really try and push my long holdings to LTCG wherever possible before selling, it's a huge difference in taxes to do so. I usually follow the Schwab Tax Lot optimizer, take losses in short term first, take gains in long term first and I don't really see a reason to make exception to that. That makes more sense if you are anticipating on selling all of your tax lots before STCG lots would mature. Just didn't seem to fit in with the long hold and turning off following the market for a few months statements, but that would make sense to me if you anticipate the possibility of a surge and selling off everything before it would mature. I don't mean to challenge the strategy, just trying to understand so I can make the best decisions for myself. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:36:42 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: I dunno. I'm just spitballing. Lawyering is one of the easier things to do remotely. I'm not saying it's likely, only possible. I really have no clue The job posting asked that the candidate had passed the bar of a state, it did not list the specific state, therefore you can assume any state will do  And that right there is the extent of my lawyering 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:41:23 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By security6: I disagree and think it's an almost certain sign that no buyout is imminent or in the works. By in the works I mean the buyout is being actively negotiated, such as a term sheet or an actual contract being negotiated. Here is why: (1) If a buyout is being actively negotiated, it means they already have a lawyer doing the negotiating. There wouldn't be any reason to change who is doing the negotiating (or calling the shots on the negotiating) on the deal 1 or 2 months into the future (1 or 2 months is the timeline that a new General Counsel would likely start employment). (2) The C-suite is almost always canned, or voluntarily leaves, when a buyout happens. No general counsel that MVIS would want to hire would be interested in starting a job knowing that he/she will likely be leaving within the calendar year. (3) The job posting says experience with publicly traded companies is desirable (presumably to help with annual reports, SEC filings, etc.). Most, but not all, buyers wouldn't keep MVIS under a MVIS ticker, they would bring it under their ticker (i.e. if Apple bought MVIS, MVIS as a company would be dissolved and would become part of Apple). So there is no reason for MVIS to hire a general counsel with publicly traded company experience if they expect to be bought out within the next few months. (4) There are lots of "temp services" for lawyers, and you can hire excellent lawyers this way to serve as full-time general counsel for a short time period. It would make more financial sense and you can get the lawyer working quicker (very important if a buyout is being actively negotiated), to hire a "temp service" lawyer as opposed to hiring a full-time employee lawyer. None of this means that a buyout won't happen, I just think this is a sign that the buyout announcement won't happen with the next month or two. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By security6: Originally Posted By jb31: Got it, thanks. I'm not sure that means much. I understand that the General Counsel stepping down looked like a positive sign, but that position is probably pretty important right now with all that is going on behind the scenes in addition to standard business. We use our attorney quite a bit for contract review, NDAs, employment and compensation contracts, distribution contracts and issues, etc. There is a lot of day to day stuff that they would otherwise have to be outsourced. I disagree and think it's an almost certain sign that no buyout is imminent or in the works. By in the works I mean the buyout is being actively negotiated, such as a term sheet or an actual contract being negotiated. Here is why: (1) If a buyout is being actively negotiated, it means they already have a lawyer doing the negotiating. There wouldn't be any reason to change who is doing the negotiating (or calling the shots on the negotiating) on the deal 1 or 2 months into the future (1 or 2 months is the timeline that a new General Counsel would likely start employment). (2) The C-suite is almost always canned, or voluntarily leaves, when a buyout happens. No general counsel that MVIS would want to hire would be interested in starting a job knowing that he/she will likely be leaving within the calendar year. (3) The job posting says experience with publicly traded companies is desirable (presumably to help with annual reports, SEC filings, etc.). Most, but not all, buyers wouldn't keep MVIS under a MVIS ticker, they would bring it under their ticker (i.e. if Apple bought MVIS, MVIS as a company would be dissolved and would become part of Apple). So there is no reason for MVIS to hire a general counsel with publicly traded company experience if they expect to be bought out within the next few months. (4) There are lots of "temp services" for lawyers, and you can hire excellent lawyers this way to serve as full-time general counsel for a short time period. It would make more financial sense and you can get the lawyer working quicker (very important if a buyout is being actively negotiated), to hire a "temp service" lawyer as opposed to hiring a full-time employee lawyer. None of this means that a buyout won't happen, I just think this is a sign that the buyout announcement won't happen with the next month or two. I haven't been through many, but I was working in a tech advisory role for a group of companies that went through a series of mergers and acquisitions. They had 2 attorneys that were full time just for that. That process took over a year and a half and during that time they went through 3 general counsel. During that process they also did a tenant refinish of the office, adding another suite, upgraded tech hardware to the tune of around 300k, and brought in a 10Gb fiber at 10k/mo. Once the dust settled, there was one larger company, 3 smaller ones that remained separate, 2 dissolved, and everyone moved out of the recently finished office, starting a legal battle over the lease. While this was a weird situation, they didn't stop normal business or growth and several of the proposed mergers fell through. What you said is not unreasonable or unlikely, but I think it is equally likely they need another counsel for day to day operations. They have to assume, to some degree, that the merger may not complete, even if it was in negotiations. Either could be right, but as complex as everything is, we just have no idea and I don't think this move sheds much light on it unfortunately. I do agree that if you knew the position had a limited time frame, it would make obvious sense to outsource that position, but who knows. |
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:44:56 PM EST
[#34]
Go AMC Go!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:53:10 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jb31: I haven't been through many, but I was working in a tech advisory role for a group of companies that went through a series of mergers and acquisitions. They had 2 attorneys that were full time just for that. That process took over a year and a half and during that time they went through 3 general counsel. During that process they also did a tenant refinish of the office, adding another suite, upgraded tech hardware to the tune of around 300k, and brought in a 10Gb fiber at 10k/mo. Once the dust settled, there was one larger company, 3 smaller ones that remained separate, 2 dissolved, and everyone moved out of the recently finished office, starting a legal battle over the lease. While this was a weird situation, they didn't stop normal business or growth and several of the proposed mergers fell through. What you said is not unreasonable or unlikely, but I think it is equally likely they need another counsel for day to day operations. They have to assume, to some degree, that the merger may not complete, even if it was in negotiations. Either could be right, but as complex as everything is, we just have no idea and I don't think this move sheds much light on it unfortunately. I do agree that if you knew the position had a limited time frame, it would make obvious sense to outsource that position, but who knows. And this is why we like this guy  
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 1:55:51 PM EST
[#36]
Seems like there's a wall at $16
|
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:03:09 PM EST
[#37]
No nooo MVIS, go back up!
Up is the way!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:07:23 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RASuperlight: No nooo MVIS, go back up! Up is the way!!! SPY and the Qs selling off making new lows for the day. Going to be hard to get much traction if that keeps up. |
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:14:16 PM EST
[Last Edit: RatherBeLifting]
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RonGonzo: SPY and the Qs selling off making new lows for the day. Going to be hard to get much traction if that keeps up. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RonGonzo: Originally Posted By RASuperlight: No nooo MVIS, go back up! Up is the way!!! SPY and the Qs selling off making new lows for the day. Going to be hard to get much traction if that keeps up. That was strange...I was watching muh MVIS charts really closely and it was like the bottom fell out. I looked at my watchlist and started watching the market ETFs selling off...I pulled the trigger on selling my options. I won't hesitate to take 15% profit. Nobody every went broke taking profit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:18:19 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Gerkyn: Seems like there's a wall at $16 It almost seems like we can't get through the $16 barrier... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:31:50 PM EST
[#41]
Anyone watching SBFM?
I just jumped in at $0.22. |
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:32:17 PM EST
[#42]
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:38:08 PM EST
[#43]
 Yep
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:43:03 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RatherBeLifting: https://media.tenor.com/images/b56630cb724434b27cbb5e8e59bb58c9/tenor.gif 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:56:28 PM EST
[#45]
You guys and gift horses...and especially on low volume. Sheesh.
Wall Street will trade for several hours before the ASM tomorrow, I'm just looking for a good, stable valuation. BTW, the first release of the Russell re-balance is next week...June 4. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:56:47 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Total53: We can all support your need to step away for whatever reason you choose. Also, I know a thing or 2 about catching Smallies. Best lake in the world is Crooked, but we ain't going in your boat or mine for that matter. Hard as shit to get to to but worth it in every respect fishing wise. Crooked Lake sits right on the border between Ontario and Minnesota. Paddle and portage in is the only way and it takes a day or 2 to get there. What makes Crooked the best? I like the boundary waters and my cousin and her husband used to guide up there every summer so I have access and equipment...but man it's hard to beat what northeastern SD is kicking out for smallies the past few years. Easily accessible, low pressure, and a shot at proud anglers every day. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 2:57:48 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Osprey61: You guys and gift horses...and especially on low volume. Sheesh. Wall Street will trade for several hours before the ASM tomorrow, I'm just looking for a good, stable valuation. BTW, the first release of the Russell re-balance is next week...June 4. Damn...I banged right by 10,000 posts today and never even noticed. Guess I'm bona fide now, huh
|
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 3:01:14 PM EST
[Last Edit: RatherBeLifting]
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Osprey61: You guys and gift horses...and especially on low volume. Sheesh. Wall Street will trade for several hours before the ASM tomorrow, I'm just looking for a good, stable valuation. BTW, the first release of the Russell re-balance is next week...June 4. I just like funny gifs. That second run up today I thought she was going to blow through 16 and find a new support line. There appeared to be a lot of profit taking in the 15.75-15.99 range but she shrugged off that blow and then came back for more. I do like the fact that she seems to have stability in this range. I'm curious to see what transpires out of the ASM tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 3:01:56 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Osprey61: You guys and gift horses...and especially on low volume. Sheesh. Wall Street will trade for several hours before the ASM tomorrow, I'm just looking for a good, stable valuation. BTW, the first release of the Russell re-balance is next week...June 4. Volume was just shy of 14M - that really isn't that low 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2021 3:05:10 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Total53: Volume was just shy of 14M - that really isn't that low Huh, you're right...ramped up pretty hard in the last two hours. Last time I looked we were barely over 7M. Tomorrow's first couple of hours will be interesting, no doubt. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
