Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Business Economics Analyst  

View Business Economics Analyst's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    You are posting anonymously. So I will ignore your nonsense criticism concerning my or others posting anonymously. Clearly, it is hypocritical and you are talking out both sides of your mouth.
    Posting anonymously helps avoid wasting time on "ad hominen" arguments, that is, arguments that attack the person rather than deal with the substance of the argument. That is a recognized logical flaw in argumentation and you appear to be a proponent of it.
    Why do I saw that? Because you argue from the inverse, talking about trusting more repultable investors. As I explained, that is a specious argument. I am not aware of any officers at Orient Paper having any reputation, nor these other investors. And, I don't care. Why? Because they can say anything they like, I am going to look at the evidence.
    I don't expect and don't want anyone to "trust" me. That is one of the reasons I provides cites to evidence in my articles. I believe in people doing they own due diligence, looking at the facts and evidence and using sound reasoning therefrom to come to their own conclusions. If you want to "blindly" trust, what you believe are "reputable" whoevers, that is your choice. Good luck to you.
    As far as my analysis of the production, who has provided any analysis of what those machines produce? How about Orient Paper? No. Why not? They would be shredded. Believe me, I would do the shredding at that point and provide an article, with cites.
    If you have a dispute with my analysis of the production, why don't you first do some research into paper production lines. Let me give you some hints - look at paper production lines for the type of paper that Orient Paper claims to make. Survey the different manufacturers and the different types of machines. Look at the rates of production for those machines. Look at the prices. Look at videos and pictures of those machines. Find the fastest machines that are built. Find the machines built with the lowest production. Look at new machines, look at old machines. Look at the machines of paper manufacturers and their produciton rates.
    Now, after you have familiariazed yourself with the new and used paper production lines, you may have some knowledge. You may actually have more current knowledge about the types, production rates, and prices of paper production machinery than many people that work or have worked in the paper industry.
    What you will find is that the the production capacity of the machinery is almost always specified by a manufacturer when the machines are built. By surveying a number of machines and their production rates, you will be able to get an idea of the production capacity of a line merely by looking at it. On a simpler scale, it is much like looking at printers for a computer. If you familiarize yourself with all the types and the speed they print at, you can roughly estimate the minimum or maximum number of pages per minute that a particular printer can print at.
    Now, you disagree with my analysis? Well, provide some facts. Show me pictures of production lines that look that Orient Papers that can produce more than my estimates.
    The "expert' criticism is much like the "reputation" criticism. I trust experts the same as i do those with "reputations". That is, I apply the Ronald Reagan quote, "trust but verify". I need to see the facts and evidence and listen to the reasoning and I will come to my own conclusions, thank you. You can rely on "experts" and "reputations". Good luck to you!
    In the meantime, I do welcome any actual worthwhile facts and evidence concerning the production lines shown in the videos of Orient Paper. If I am wrong in my analysis, I am happy to be shown it. But I need to see the evidence. I don't need some conclusory announcement of a person who is deemed an 'expert' or deemed to have a 'good reputation'. Spare me that excuse for not laying out facts and evidence.
    Sadly, your comment is bereft of any facts or evidence pertinent to analyzing Orient Paper's business.
    And, yes. I am short ONP.
    Aug 13, 2010. 11:16 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper's Top Supplier: An Empty Shell Owned by ONP's CEO [View article]
    Orient Paper is the only one making sensational claims and is the only liar I have found here.
    Orient Paper is making the sensational claim that they have tripled revenue and quadrupled net profit while contracting by substantially reducing the land they own and/or rent (losing 133,200 acres and left with only 42.95 acres), reducing the number of manufacturing facilities, reducing the number of production lines, reducing the number of different types of paper they are making, and reducing the number of employees (by more than 30%).
    Here is another sensational claim by Orient Paper - in 2008, they claimed they were building a 2 million square metre facility that they estimated, by 2010, would have a 1.2 million production capacity, bringing in approximately 700 million to 1.2 billion dollars in revenue and making approximately 160 million to 230 million dollars. A compete fabrication - Orient Paper was not building that facility, and could not as they did not have the resources to do so.
    People like me are merely pointing out these sensational claims by Orient Paper.

    People like me are merely pointing out these sen
    Aug 13, 2010. 10:43 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper and the Unfortunate Shady Corners of Wall Street [View article]
    You claimed you didn't insult anyone on this board. That was a lie. I showed it was by citing your calling Muddy Waters parasites. I already explained how you insulted me.
    Your conduct is reprehensible concerning Muddy Waters, particularly your attitude towards the threats they received.
    Orient Paper is the one that is perpetrating the fraud. Muddy Waters merely exposed it. Your anger is misdirected.
    It is utterly mystifying to me why you think Orient Paper can blatantly make false statements to pump their stock and you have no anger towards them. Yet, Muddy Waters can come and provide facts about Orient Paper and you vilify them.
    Actually, maybe it is not so mystifying. You were long Orient Paper. You perceive that Orient Paper's stock price went down because of Muddy Waters. You lost money. You don't accept responsibility for making a bad investment decision. You get mad at Muddy Waters, instead of yourself and Orient Paper. It is called denial and projection. You don't care about the truth, you are only upset because you lost money.
    Aug 13, 2010. 10:35 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper: Key Pieces of Evidence for Fraud [View article]
    When you actually do some work and provide some data, why don't we talk. You clearly don't know anything about Sears Holding. I am gathering you didn't bother to read their SEC filings or look up the data. That is why you didn't provide it.
    The merger did'nt occur until 2005, so 2006 was the first full year for which there was data for Sears Holding, that it why I started with the data from that year.
    Sears Holding was supposed to be your brilliant example of a company that did what ONP claims, more than tripling revenue while decreasing profit more than 30%. Didn't happen with Sears Holding. It is not happening with ONP.
    Next time, why don't you provide data and cites like I do, instead of just talking about that which you do not know.
    Aug 13, 2010. 10:24 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper and the Unfortunate Shady Corners of Wall Street [View article]
    Did you read what I wrote? I never called you a "parasite". I said you called Muddy Waters a parasite and you definitely did do that.
    Did you read the part where I explained that Muddy Waters was receiving death threats, threats of bodily harm, publishing of the addresses of them and their families with exhortations of violence against them. Are you out of your mind suggesting they or anyone should face that and insulting them by suggesting they are chicken? I can't figure out what possessed you to make such comments - I mean really, are you part of this group that wants to do them bodily harm? I suggest you immediately retract these very insenstive and insulting statements, suggesting they face these threats and are chicken if they don't.

    Can you read? I never said you called me a "parasite". I said you called Muddy Waters parasites and you definitely id do that.
    Are you out of your mind? Why would anyone face people who are threatening your life, threatening
    Aug 13, 2010. 01:59 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper: Key Pieces of Evidence for Fraud [View article]
    Lets take a basic financial course, please. You were talking revenue and number of employees. I gave you those numbers. Now you are talking stock price and net profit.
    The stock prices chart you give is all over the place, the stock is up, then down, then up, then down. Stock prices go all over the place for all kinds of reasons, including many crazy and irrational reasons, as well as even sometimes due to stock manipulation or even phony trades. I don't intend to explain short term stock prices, other than to say that eventually over the long term a stock tnds toward reflecting its return on equity although it may vary widly at any given time.
    I didn't look at net profit of Sears. They may have improved net profit even though revenue was reducing by reducing expenses. This is not what Orient Paper is doing. Orient Paper is claiming tripling revenue while decreasing employees 30%. Sears, on the other hand, reported decreasing revenues while decreasing employees in close to the same proportion.
    IN other words, your analogy doesn't fit. I am gathering that you haven't looked at ONP"s financial statements and don't really understand much about it, correct?
    Aug 13, 2010. 01:47 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper's Top Supplier: An Empty Shell Owned by ONP's CEO [View article]
    Maybe the final tally would be to vote you off and keep China Company analyst on!
    Aug 12, 2010. 09:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    The last statement by Mark is only reached by assuming the accuracy of the quote from the article, which it appeared to me he disagreed with. So his point was the article is supposedly supporting ONP, but it actually made points disagreeing with ONP. That is what you appear not to understand.
    There were two videos and the second one was much longer. They showed the production lines in those videos. Those production lines are only capable of a certain amount of production.
    For example, in the second video by Doug at wallstreetmedia, we the production line for the digital photo paper. That production lines has a capacity, according to ONP of 2500 tons a year, that is 6.8 tons a day. That is not disputed, that is according to ONP.
    Now, take the production line we see making the white paper in the first video by Rick Pearson. What is the production capacity of that line. My comparison to other production lines would say maybe 10 tons a day, being generous in my opinion. Now, is someone going to claim that producion line is producing 100 tons a day? even 50 tons a day? I wouldn't believe it if an auditor or anyone said so. I don't believe it is possible.
    Now, take a look at production line supposedly making brown paper, looks like it may be corrugated paper, in the Pearson video. Is someone going to claim that production lines is making 100 tons a day? Nonsense, I don't believe it. It appears capable of producing only a small fraction of that as well.
    Now, Doug from claimed that the Chairman said he was giving him a complete tour of the entire facilities and Doug was taking pictures of everything. Where are the other production lines? How are we going to get from the meager output of the production lines we see, where a very generous estimate of there output might be 50 tons a day, to the claimed about 600 tons a day the company is producing.
    Again, this is not a hard exercise. You just take it step by step. We can go in and analyze a particular step in more detail to get more precision. I could produce a report with pictures of the ONP production lines and compare it to pictures of a variety of other production lines making the same types of paper with the capacity of those production lines.
    However, in this case, the production capacity displayed is so far off the production capacity claimed that it is not necessary.
    The exercise is not much different than you would do with any machinery.
    Hopefully, this is helpful for you and you can begin to see what the problems with ONP are. Perhaps this will help you be able to make such an analysis yourself. If you familiarize yourself with cement mixers and you find out the output capacity of certain sizes of mixers, along with their speed, and someone shows up with a mixer that is similar to those that mix about 1 ton of cement a day, you are probably in a pretty good position to be pretty certain that it is not mixing over 10 tons a day, especially if you have familiarized the mixers that mix over 10 tons a day and the mixer you are looking at is an old, dilapidated mixer. Guess what? You don't even need to have any experience mixing the cement yourself to figure this out.
    Aug 12, 2010. 09:15 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    No, that was not Mark's original point. Mark was merely quoting the article "So it is very obvious that it does not make any sense for Muddy Waters to compare ONP’s equipment to those companies". Then he was pointing out that ONP lists them as main competitors and it was absolutely right to look at companies ONP claims as competition. Mark was merely pointing out a discrepancy between what the article claimed and what ONP was saying in their SEC statements.
    I don't believe it was a mistatement to include those companies as competitors. I do believe ONP's small, dilapidated equipment puts them at a competitive disadvantage. I also believe that failing to include the fact that International Paper has a cardboard box plant in the same city as ONP is a problem. I don't believe that is Mark's point either, his point is that would be the logical conclusion of the article's point.
    Well, if it is beyond your abilities to make a rough assess ONP's production capabilities based on viewing videos of their production lines, then I don't really understand why you are commenting.
    I certainly know that it is within my abilities to make a rough assessment of whether the production lines in the videos of Orient Paper are capable of producing the amounts claimed. Since the disparity is so large, it is easy to say that the production lines only have a small fraction of the capacity claimed. It is quite a simple exercise. I don't understand why you don't have the ability to do this, but I accept your representation that you don't. It certainly does not make me think highly of your ability to analyze any business at all. You certainly have no basis to claim that I don't have the ability to make such a relatively simple assessment. I make these types of assessments all the time.
    Do you think the Loeb & Loeb attorneys have to have worked in the paper manufacturing business to investigate Orient Paper? How about the people at Deloitte and Touche, do they need experience in the paper business to assist? If Orient Paper hired attorneys or a finance advisory service personnel that had experience in the paper business, would this mean they did a better job?
    Let's see, the reputable audit committee. Are we supposed to believe them just because they are Deloitte and Touche or because, after they do the work, we can see and verify it? For example, the SEC recently prosecuted a Deloitte and Touche ex partner and his son for insider trading in company's they were auditing. If true, does that mean we shouldn't trust Deloitte and Touche because they are now not reputable?
    The answer is no, of course not. Lets see what Deloitte does and then we can evaluate it. They may do a great job, mediocre or poor job - i don't know and neither do you.
    The flaw that you have is focusing on who you should believe based on same alleged "reputation' that may or may not exist. My point is look at the evidence and facts and take them where they lead you with sound reasoning.
    A stock's price is usually just the last price it traded at. After that, there is usually a bid - usually the last highest offer to buy some shares is usually referred to - and an ask - the last lowest offer to sell some shares is referred to. The public isn't doing anything, just the people interested in transacting in the stock.
    I don't care who is giving anyone any benefit of the doubt. All kinds of fraudulent companies had allegedly 'reputable' auditors (hard for me to view the way accounting is allowed to be done as reputable at all).
    Aug 12, 2010. 07:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper: Inconsistent Record Keeping Raises Red Flags [View article]
    I didn't twist anything. I asked a question. I have a very good basis for believing that when making an oral complaint to the SEC they inform the complainant not to publicly reveal the complaint. Perhaps it is because, subject to the Freedom of Information ACt, the SEC cannot disclose the existence or non-existence of an investigation and any information gathered unles made a matter of public records in proceedings brought before the SEC or in the courts. see
    Aug 12, 2010. 06:41 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    Also, by the way, just because the SEC charged the Deloitte ex partner doesn't mean he is guilty. The SEC may be reputable too but they also may make mistakes. I have no idea - I haven't examined the facts of the case myself. That is my point, don't make up your mind based on reputation, look at the evidence and facts to see if you can reach sound conclusions yourself.
    Aug 12, 2010. 05:50 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    I think it is a better idea to see the report on any investigation that Loeb & Loeb does and Deloitte assists in, rather than to assume the report will be done well, poorly or average. Should we rely on alleged "great reputations". I think that it a bad strategy. Take Deloitte for example, they may do a great job or not. Probably depends at least partly on who at Deloitte does the work. Sterling reputation - maybe, I don't know. I do know that a former partner at Deloitte and his son were recently, on 8/4/2010, charges with insider trading in companies that they were auditing. see
    Could that have affected the audit results? This is not an indictment of Deloitte, they may or may not be great. Most large organizations, no matter how good, will have a few bad applies. That is one of the many dangers on just relying on "reputation".
    Aug 12, 2010. 05:45 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    Mark's point was that your argument was based on an implicit premise that ONP was not competing with larger manufacturers because you were arguing that ONP shouldn't be compared with these larger manufacturers, particularly with regards to their equipment. Thus, if that were true, then ONP was lying by saying it was competing with those manufacturers. Your response and the analogy did not even address this point and showed you did not even understand it.
    I still think your analogy was great in comparing Orient Paper to a coffee cart and comparing Orient Paper's competitors to Starbucks. As far as responding to Mark's point, it makes no sense at all, probably because you didn't understand his point.
    I don't have any experience counting sheep, but I am confident of my ability to do so. I look at many business that I didn't work in and analyze them. I have no reason to think that I am unable to obtain the necessary information and make the necessary analysis.
    Maybe you don't have the ability to research paper production lines, find out the capacities of these paper production lines, and make a rough assessment of whether ONP's production lines can produce anywhere near the amount of paper they claim. I don't think it is a difficult exercise. On the internet alone, there are plenty of sites selling production lines, providing pictures, describing the capacity and the cost. It may be beyond your capabilities, but I certainly don't believe it is beyond mine.
    Aug 12, 2010. 05:30 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    Well, my point is that your analogy is apt, only in the opposite way that you intended. I agree with you that Orient Paper, inc. is like a coffee cart across from a Starbucks trying to compete with it. Of course, that is directly contradictory to Orient Paper's representations - they are claiming to make about 600 tons of paper a day, with revenues of $102 million dollars for the last year, and continuing to grow production capacity and revenue rapidly. They were claiming to do this with advanced, cutting edge technology making them more efficient and allowing them to have greater margins than competitors.
    The analogy to a coffee cart across from Starbucks is that Orient Paper's real production and revenue is more likely closer to what one would expect from that coffee cart than what Orient Paper claims. It is also apt because I think Orient paper has a much chance competing in the better industry with its competitors as does the coffee cart with Starbucks.
    In other words, I think you do a very good job with your analogy. It just means something very different from what you think. If your still pitching Orient Paper after this, you may want to re-think comparing it to a coffee cart competing with a Starbucks across the street. That works better as an argument against Orient Paper than as one for it.
    Aug 12, 2010. 04:43 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper: Inconsistent Record Keeping Raises Red Flags [View article]
    If you complained to the SEC, did you not get an explicity instruction stating that your report was confidential and you should not be reporting publicly that you made a complaint with the SEC?
    Aug 12, 2010. 03:57 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment