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]
    If the Board of Directors was able to question management about the allegations of fraud and embezzlement and get the proof from management that would be in management's possession if they had it, then Orient Paper would be able to provide this and it would be case closed on the fraud allegations. It would also be a complete waste of time and money for the Board to hire a law firm to investigate and a financial advisory firm to assist and advise.
    The Board can say they firmly believe anything. What the Board didn't say, which is my point, was that it was established to them by management that embezzlement and fraud had not occured, that they had the proof, and that they were willing to share it.
    In other words, my statements are true in my opinion. You haven't established they are not true in any way, shape or form.
    Aug 12, 2010. 03:49 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    I am very impressed that you have figured out a new business concept that has been missed by corporate america. I expect I should start seeing these coffee carts popping up across the street from every Starbucks in the world now based on the competitive advantages of your economies of small scale theory?
    Aug 12, 2010. 03:41 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    Is that the only typo you can find? I am sure if you look harder you can find more typos. Good luck!

    I wish you all the luck in the world with your coffee cart across the street from Starbucks. I hope the profits allow you to retire early. I am sure everyone on will be rushing to invest. When do you plan on taking this lucrative venture public and winning this competitive battle with Starbucks? I am familiar with the advantages of economices of scale (meaning large scale). Are the innovator of this new theory - the competitve advantages of economies of small scale? Do i hear a nobel prize in your future for this breakthrough in the analysis of competition in business?

    Aug 12, 2010. 03:37 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    It is very obvious from the videos of Orient Paper Inc. that the machinery shown can’t produce even a small fraction of the 600 tons a day that Orient Paper is claiming that they produce.
    Orient Paper claims to have to tripled revenue from 2006 to the present, while, in the meantime the information they present shows they are contracting as they have reduced the number of different types of paper they make, they have reduced the number of manufacturing facilities, they have substantially reduced the land they own and/or lease for their operations (used to have 42.95 acres and 133,200 acres – now only have 42.95 acres), they have reduced the number of production lines, and they have reduced the number of employees.
    Could Orient Paper’s ability to triple revenue and increase margins be due to some amazing advance in R&D as Orient Paper apparently seemed to claim? No, despite claiming they had comprehensive R&D facilities, Orient Paper admits they have none. Despite claiming in 2010 on their website and in 2008 in their annual report that they had a 37 member R&D team, they have none. Despite claiming on their new website they have over a 15 R&D member team, they have none. Instead, Orient Paper admits it only had several guys learning how to operate the digital photo paper production line. Remember Orient Paper was claiming advanced technology, cutting edge advancements that resulted in important intellectual property that was allowing them to get a competitive advantage by being more efficient and thereby generate higher margins. Those claims are admittedly false.
    The author makes several clearly false statements. Muddy Waters did provide, and so has Chinese company analyst, the SAIC filings of Orient paper’s operating entity showing vastly different financial statements. Also, Muddy Waters used the Chinese name of the operating subsidiary that Orient Paper published in its SEC filings, so Muddy Waters did not have the wrong Chinese subsidiary. The use of the English translation names to show they had the wrong company is laughable – the same Chinese name was used and, obviously, can be translated differently into English. The different English translations are irrelevant, the fact that it is the same Chinese name is determinative.
    I have detailed many additional problems with Orient Paper in my instablogs. In an effort to avoid disputes over facts, I have relied entirely on Orient Paper’s representations in their SEC filings, in their press releases, on their website(s), and in their statements by management, as well as on videos of their facilities presented by promoters of their stock. The problem – Orient Paper impeaches itself. Orient Paper’s makes representations that are shown to be demonstrably false by other statements they make. They have not internally consistent in their SEC filings or externally with their press releases or websites.
    One simple, easy, clear example; Orient Paper claimed to have 30 year leases a 133,200 acre facility along with a 42.95 acre facility in 2007 and 2008. All of the sudden, in later filings, they have no lease on the 133,200 acre facility with no explanation. Perhaps even worse, all of the sudden they claim to have owned, since 2003, the land use rights for 50 years, to 10 of the 42.95 acres and to be leasing the remaining 32.95 acres.
    I suggest you read my instablogs detailing the problems with ONP based on its own representations. I include cites and references so you can find and verify the information yourself. Then, don’t rely on me or this author, do you own due diligence and reach your own conclusions. I don’t think it should take that long or be that hard.
    The analysts that this article indicates should be relied on, Roth Capital and Hudson Securites, have pulled coverage. Obviously, they concluded that their own due diligence was not sufficient. Indeed, Roth Capital claims that it needs to do further due diligence.
    Eric Jackson’s idea of determining whether embezzlement by management had occurred was to call management up and ask them and to determine that no embezzlement occurred when management denied it and said all the money was still in the bank accounts. I am not kidding – Eric Jackson’s article stated that he confirmed orally with Orient Paper that the money was still in the bank accounts. So we are supposed to conclude they are not embezzling from that? I posted a comment to Eric Jackson’s
    Rick Pearson’s video made it clear that Orient Paper is not what it claims to be, despite his relentless pumping of the stock verbally during the video. Don’t take my word for it, go look at the video yourself.
    Doug of sold the stock after the visit to Orient Paper Inc. that he posted on his website promoting the stock.
    The Board of Directors wasn’t able to dismiss the Muddy Waters allegations as frivolous and, evidently, wasn’t able to get satisfactory answers from management, as they found it necessary to hire an law firm to investigate the allegations of embezzlement and fraud against management.
    Law firms have now filed class actions suits against Orient Paper and other law firms are conducting investigation.
    Orient Papers problems seem to keep growing and growing.
    Aug 12, 2010. 01:46 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Taking Another Look at Orient Paper's Innocence [View article]
    So this is your business acumen, you think you are going to set up a coffee cart across from Starbucks and make a profit? Best of luck to you and let me know how it turns out. Hope you retire early on that on.
    Your comparison of a coffee cart to Starbucks is precisly one of the points. Orient Paper looks like a coffee cart across from Starbucks. In other words, it looks like a very small paper manufacturer that can't make even a small fraction of the "600 tons" a day it claims or the "102 million dollars in revenue" it claimed last year.
    Is there anybody here that wants to argue that your coffee cart across the street from Starbucks would be a good investment? The problem here is that Orient Paper is not positioning themselves as that coffee cart, whie you, as a supporter, are. Orient Paper is claimed that there ability to beat the competition and make higher margins is due to advanced, cutting edge technology giving them important intellectual property rights that gave them an advantage over the competition. That is simply not the case.
    In other words, Mark is not missing the point, you are.
    Aug 12, 2010. 11:55 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper's Top Supplier: An Empty Shell Owned by ONP's CEO [View article]
    Did you not read my post? You did recommend that people buy the stock, so don't say that you did not. A far as arguing in circles, you never respond to my points at all.

    No - I found a small chinese company that makes false statements on its website and continues to do so on its current website.
    Yes - this "small" company claims to have be producing approximately "600 tons" of paper a day for revene of "102 million dollars" last year, claim to be growing at rates way beyond others in the industry, and claims margins way higher than others in the industry.
    How could they be doing this? According to their website, it was due to advanced, cutting edge R&D which gave them important intellectual property rights and allowed them to operate more efficiently and at higher margins than competitors. In other words, the R&D is what allowed them to beat competitors and get the huge revenue and revenue growth they claimed. Was it the truth? No, they have no R&D facilities, no intellectual property, no R&D team except several guys trying to learn how to run the new digital photo paper production line that, even when fully operating, can only produce 2500 tons a year.
    I am trying to imply anything, I am stating directly that the press release was a clear and obvious attempt to pump the stock with knowingly false information. Orient Paper was not, would not, and could not ever be building a 2 metre facility in 2008 that, by 2010, would produce 1.2 million tons, provide revenue of 700 million to 1.3 billion, or provide 160 million to 230 million in net revenue. They simply were no where close to having the financial resources to even consider building a facility anywhere near that size.

    The problem is that you are criticizing articles and blogs by other people without having read them. That is the problem.
    Aug 12, 2010. 10:36 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper's Top Supplier: An Empty Shell Owned by ONP's CEO [View article]
    Jamz Unlimited:
    I never said your alias name holds you accountable. This seems to be the consistent tactic of people like you responding to me, to completely mistate what I said. At the same time, you ignore my real comments and fail to respond to them. If you want to respond to my comment, why don't you read it and respond to it and not make up something I didn't say.
    Correct me if I am wrong, but the only point I can clean from your post is that I should have to face the consequences of angry investors if the stock does ultimately go down after I post the problems about ONP.
    My question to you is 'What consequences of angry investors are you referring to?" I know that Muddy Waters is facing death threats, threats of bodily harm, posting of addresses and phone numbers of themselves and family members and exhortations that people committ violence against them, and so on. Is that the type of consequences you are referring to that you think should occur? If not, what exactly are you talking about.
    Although I understand you are not necessarily talking about me particularly and are talking about posting anonymously in general, I can tell you two things. One, althoug I call my instablogs articles because that is what they are, they have not been made articles on seekingalpha and they have not shown up in news feeds as far as I know. Of course, that may change, so it is not a very important point but I wanted to correct any misimpression your comment may have caused.
    Second, please read my instablogs carefully. What I did was rely solely on Orient Paper's SEC filings, it's press releases, it's website(s), and it's statements by management, as well as videos of their facilities presented by promoters of their stock. Those representations by Orient Paper are contradictory and I simply pointed it out. I asked questions regarding these which nobody, not even Orient Paper, has addressed or responded to. I will characterize my instablogs as merely presenting facts and evidence, not as making serious allegations.
    I suggest that if you have any issues or problems with my instablog, what you are really saying is that you have a problem with Orient Paper, because it is their representations that I detail.
    You again make a false statement when you say, "You state that the ceo, cfo, auditors and board are conspiring to commit fraud". I have not seen that statement in anything I read. Again, the problems with Orient Paper have been detailed extensively. The detractors of Orient Paper have mainly dealt with issues, detailing problems with the company and have not usually identified specifically who is to blame. Muddy Waters is the only one I remember specifically laying blame on a certain party - in their case it was the CEO. Perhaps the CFO is culpable or perhaps he is merely repeating what he has been told. In any event, he actually admitted a number of problems. The auditors may have been fooled or just done a poor job - their pay was certainly much less than one would expect for an audit of that type by very good accountants. The current board has 5 members and it has not been established which, if any, is culpable. The Board has actually called for an investigation, it is not clear the extent they may be culpable, may have been negligent, or may have been fooled.
    You state that you think it is not true that Orient Paper is committing fraud. To me, that certainly is a hugely controversial and sensational claim, just like I would think anyone claiming that enron was not fraudulent was making a hugely controversial and sensational claim.
    Why do I say that? Because I have detailed a number of specific misrepresentations by Orient Paper (you repeatedly ignore them, by the way). To me, it is fraud to claim that you have comprehensive R&D facilities, when you admittedly don't. To me, It is fraud to claim that you have a 37 member R&D team when you don't. To me, it is fraud to make a representation that you are building a 2 million metre facility when you are not and do not have the resources to do so, and it is further fraud to then claim that you anticipate that, by 2010, that facilitate will produce 1.2 million tons of paper, will generate 700 million to 1.2 billion in revenue and 160-230 million dollars in net profit, when you know you are not, cannot and will not be building that facility. Is that enough for you or need I go on? You can read my instablogs for more.
    Are you unable to understand your own writings? Of course, you recommended the stock. Your own quote of yourself states - "I would give it (referring to ONP) no more than an equal weighting". And, to make clear that what you meant is that you should own it in your portfolio to obtain this equal weighting, you go on to see "if Deloitte clears it you can bump it up a little in your portfolio."
    So, you recommended to own it in your portfolio by giving it an equal weighting, bump it up to more than an equal weighting if Deloitte clears it, but not to bet the house on the stock or go nuts on it.
    Nobody, Loeb & Loeb or Deloitte can clear Orient Paper of the problems with it that I detail because those problems are based on Orient Paper's own inconsistent representations and the videos of its own facilities.

    Your only point appears to be that I should have to face angry people if, after my posts about the problems with Orient Paper Inc., the stock does
    Aug 12, 2010. 01:39 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper's Top Supplier: An Empty Shell Owned by ONP's CEO [View article]
    Jamz Unlimited;
    I have to agree with Arrow Hendrick that you, as well as the mass number of people pumping this stock, seem not to address the evidence at all. They seem to just make conclusory statements without evidentiary support and, at the same time, ignore all the evidence that shows a track record of prevarication by ONP and demonstrates that their claims regarding revenue are questionable.
    As far as your points, you have assumed that the articles by people shorting the stock are causing the price to go down. This is a the logical fallacy known as "post hoc ergo propter hoc" or "after this, therefore because of this. See
    The speculation on the reasons for a stock going up and down are endless in the media and other places. Unless you survey all the people transacting in the stock and get them to tell you truthful reasons why, then why a stock went down or up on a short term basis is speculation. I do believe that, in the long term, we can show that a stock price will roughly follow its return on equity, although the fluctuations away from that may still be extreme.
    Just to be clear, I am not saying that perhaps some of the evidence, particularly the verifiable kind, has not influenced the stock price. However, that information may have been previously discovered in the due diligence by those transacting in the stock or have been circulated through other people or sources. Certainly, there are a lot more people looking and analyzing ONP than those posting on Seekingalpha. Of course, seekingapha articles may be influencing stock prices, but without actual evidence, it is speculation to conclude it definitely is.
    I don't believe that your reasons against anonymity in posting are persuasive. One reason for anonymity is to allow a writer to share their view while being shielded rrom unwarranted personal attacks. This is necessary bacause, as you have observed in this case, is that when someone short a stock post information that reflects poorly on a company, even if it is from the company themselves, they can be subject to death threats, threats of bodily injury, vitriolic insults, posting of personal and family addresses, phone numbers and encouragement of violence against them, and so on. All of these things, and much more, have occured to Carson Block and Sean Regan of Muddy Waters. Some of the abuse a short seller who goes public may be subject to is detailed in David Einhorn's book "You Can Fool Some of the People All of the Time".
    As far as accountability, how would you plan to hold an article writer accountable if you knew their identify? Has anyone held any of the posters who are not anonymous accountable for anything they wrote on seekingalpha?
    As far as tracking someon's record over time, you can do that with the anonymous authors - their articles, instablogs and comments are on their page just as it is on the indentified authors.
    As far as making better decision about investing, I caution against merely relying on the identity of the author to do that. First of all, many fraudulent scams have relied on that tactic - need i remind you of the largest fraud in history just pulled by Bernie Madoff, who was tauted as being as reputable as they come in order to garner many billions of investor money. No, to be a good investor, I recommend not relying on the opinion of others as that has been the path to the loss of a great deal of money by a great number of people. Instead, you must look at the evidence and you must do you own due diligence and apply sound reasoning. That approach, combined with practice and the necessary ability, is the way to becoming a good investor, not relying on someone because of their name or reputation.
    Good luck to you!

    We simply appear to have different approaches and theories regarding investing, so there is not much to discuss. I am not an advocate of the investing approach you espouse and/or recommend. You may have similar feelings about my approach. Good luck to you as well!
    Aug 11, 2010. 10:58 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper's Top Supplier: An Empty Shell Owned by ONP's CEO [View article]
    Jamz Unlimited:
    I have no position in CFMO and never have had one. I am short ONP.
    Stock prices mean nothing to me, particularly in the short term. In fact, last year I invested in NEP, sold out, and made a 130%. Did I do a good job? I did at the time. I thought I was a genius, but now I think the company's financials were fraudulent and I was a lucky fool. So I think I did a terrible job, even though I got very lucky and the result was very good.
    In other words, you argument based on the stock price is ridiculous to me. If one continues to make good picks, they may still do poorly on some picks, but they are likely to do well overall. Likewise, if someone makes poor picks, they may still get lucky and do very well on some picks, but they are likely to do poorly overall. My goal is to make good picks but, of course, every investors occassionally will make a poor pick.
    If you believe in the seafood jerky and algae drink story of CFMO, and their story on the construction of a building for refrigeration, good luck to you. I hope you get the result you deserve. If you are right, I hope you do well. If you are wrong, I hope you do poorly. I hope the same for my picks, to do well on the one's I was correct on and poorly on the one's I was incorrect on.
    Aug 11, 2010. 05:52 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper's Top Supplier: An Empty Shell Owned by ONP's CEO [View article]
    You think CFMO is actually making all that money and growing that much selling seafood jerky and an algae drink?
    You think ONP is making all that paper with some of those small, dilapidated production lines? You think ONP has, since 2006, tripled revenue and quadrupled profit while reducing the number of types paper it makes, reducing substantially the land its rents and/or owns for its operations, reducing the number of production lines, reducing R&D, and reducing the number of employees it has?
    Aug 11, 2010. 05:30 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Muddy Waters Requires a Leap of Faith they don’t Deserve [View instapost]
    People are creating names with seasaw and other numbers on the end and saying they are long the stock. I was originally long the stock. After seeing the Muddy Water's report and redoing my own due diligence, I concluded I was fooled, sold the stock, and then, after more work, went short the stock several days later. I have been short ONP since. Just wanted to make sure there was no confusion with these other posters who have adopted the name seasaw.
    Aug 11, 2010. 03:16 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Muddy Waters- ONP: CONNECT THE DOTS [View instapost]
    The problem with this article is that it presumes its conclusion. The author claims that there have been misrepresentations and misleading evidence presented to manipulate the stock price of ONP. However, the author is unable to identify a single misrepresentation or a single misleading statement. Indeed, my articles on ONP are based on its own misrepresentations in its SEC filngs, in press releases, and on its own website(s).
    Aug 11, 2010. 10:41 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Muddy Waters Requires a Leap of Faith they don’t Deserve [View instapost]
    disclosure: I am short ONP.
    Aug 11, 2010. 02:18 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper: Key Pieces of Evidence for Fraud [View article]
    What are you talking about? Are you being deliberately dishonest or is there some other explanation?

    The percentage by which Sears revenue dropped was similar, in fact slightly higher, than the percentage by which the number of employees dropped:
    2006 revenue: 53 mil
    2007 revenue: 50 mil
    2008 revenue: 46 mil
    2009 revenue: 44 mil

    Employees as of Feb. 3, 2007: 352,000
    Employees as of Feb. 3, 2008: 337,000
    employees as of Jan. 31, 2009: 324,000
    employees as of Jan. 30, 2010: 323,000

    this data is directly from the 10k's of Sears.
    Aug 11, 2010. 02:17 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Orient Paper: Key Pieces of Evidence for Fraud [View article]
    first, you changed my question to an easier one. But second, ONP does not report any decrease in their price of production that would account for it being able to triple revenue while suffering the contraction I referred to. Not even anywhere close.

    (apprentices - do you mean parenthesis?). Your appear to abandon your point that Sears reduced employees while increasing revenues and you didn't even claim that they did that anywhere near the scale ONP claims to have done. Anyway, seems like I put this issue to bed and you have conceded. Good luck to you!
    Aug 10, 2010. 04:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment