Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Business Economics Analyst  

View Business Economics Analyst's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • $1.50 Target Price for Life Partners Holdings: Ponzi Scheme, Catch-22 or Both? [View article]
    An A for efforts but the answer is . . . Tad M. Ballantyne. He is a director of LIfe Partners (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) and of American Lorain Corp (seekingalpha.com/symbo...), a chinese small cap reverse merger. Perhaps the future of both can be foreseen in the present of Capsalus Corp. (seekingalpha.com/symbo...), where Mr. Ballantyne is the Chairman of the Board and whose shares last traded for $.02.
    Mr. Ballantyne has quite an interesting history. Hi bio said that he has been in the business of acquiring and operating troubled companies. Certainly, LPHI and ALN appear to be right in his wheelhouse of "troubled" companies.
    And, by the way, as I explained in my previous article on Life Partners, they were committing fraud in underestimating life expectancies and overestimating the returns to investors (regardless of whether the court finds them guilty of fraud or not). It appears that LIfe Partner's life expectancy will be much less then the maximum of 5 years I gave it and my prediction is that the share price will go to much less than $1.50, it will eventually go to zero, or maybe just to pennies like WELL.
    Of course, that won't stop a fraud from being re-pumped. Look at ORS. Trading for pennies less than just one month ago, they did a 1-12 reverse stock split, thereby increasing their share price 12fold to avoid delisting. They have gone from $.70 to $3.06, up about 26% today and about 150% the day before. Prognosis: the stock will go back to trading for pennies in the near future.
    May 25, 2011. 12:48 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Silver Correction Is Over, Next Stop $62 [View article]
    Oilfinder:

    I think you are describing yourself regarding dishonestly, not those you are criticizing.
    If you had any legitimate criticism, you would be pointing out, for example, a single time I was wrong about a company being a fraud.
    Because you have no such information, you make up this nonsense in an attempt to be derogatory.
    What is fraudulent is your statement.
    May 4, 2011. 01:36 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The End of CCME's Fairy Tale [View article]
    Eberndorfer should be barred from posting here period. He is just churning and copying and pasting nonsense posts repeatedly to waste everyone's time.
    May 2, 2011. 12:05 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Checklist for Safe Investing in Chinese Stocks [View article]
    Let me start this way by challening your theme that you have established the company is not fraudulent. You are promoting this company. You admit that many of the companies in this space have been shown to be fraudulent. So, what due diligence have you done to make sure the company is not fraudulent? Nothing as far as I can see. I'll address the 3 points in your comment and the 4 points from your blog post.

    1. Big 4 auditor - meaningless, there have been tons of frauds with Big 4 auditors (and you are just dealing with the local chinese firm that is an independent member of the "alleged" big 4 audit firm);
    2. Deal with a large automobile corporation - what are their dealings and have you verified those dealings?
    3. Mr. Guo - quite famous - who cares if he is famous? What is he famous for and how does that matter?
    4. HSBC is the underwriter for the ADR. Who cares? Plenty of big banks, that are supposedly reputbable, have underwritten many fraudulent companies. Some would say that describing a "big investment bank" as "reputable' is an oxymoron. While I wouldn't say that, I certainly wouldn't trust whoever does whatever alleged due diligence at the bank to have done the job well or correctly, assuming they really care about much other than their large fees.
    Have you dealt much with large investment banks? If so, I would doubt you would make such a naive statement.
    5. Lentuo is an ADR - well, you admit that this is basically meaningless.
    6. Lentuo needing capital is not a reason to think that it is not a fraud. Some might argue it provides more incentive to be a fraud.
    7. Who care about Newman investment Limited and why should they care? The make good agreement is terrible in my opinion and is certainly not evidence there is no fraud. In fact, a great deal of companies that had make good agreements with investment firms appear to be fraudulent.

    If you want to claim that a company is not committing fraud, you need to actually do some work. For example, CVBF is a bank that was accused of failing to write down properties sufficiently and a number of examples, supposedly the worst offenses, were given. A check of these properties made it clear that they were worth much more than the short sellers claimed (they claimed they were basically worthless) and were worth much more in line with what the company claimed. I checked out the properties and made my own valuations. See my article on CVBF if you wish.
    Apr 20, 2011. 02:43 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China Integrated Energy: Investigators and KPMG Begin Sorting Through Evidence [View article]
    Rdavis2013:

    Let me try to explain it to you really simply. Just because someone has provided one truthful statement, doesn't make them a truthful person. The biggest liars of all time made many truthful statements during their lifetime.
    Consequently, your logic is terribly flawed to conclude to imply that one truthful statement makes someone an honest person. Get it?
    Apr 13, 2011. 11:44 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Top 10 Stocks to Own in China [View article]
    You should learn how to detect fraud before writing these articles. You have managed to include quite a high number of frauds for such a short list.
    Apr 5, 2011. 03:17 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Seller Attack on China Integrated Energy Is Different [View article]
    CBEH has either committed fraud or it has not. It is a current fact, not a future event. Therefore, it is not to early to make a call that CBEH is a scam.
    Mar 28, 2011. 05:11 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Seller Attack on China Integrated Energy Is Different [View article]
    This author is a notoriouis pumper of Chinese fraud companies, particular ONP. He is clearly part of the co conpiracy to pump these frauds.
    No one but a dishonest crook would tell you that it is meaningless that a company file a document, here the SAIC, with the government that contains financial information that is inconsistent with other filings or incorrect, as the author claims. The author provides no reasoning why the company would file incorrect financial information in the SAIC filing. Obviously, the company filing false or incorrect information in any filing is very important for anyone analyzing the company.
    JAMZ is similar to Michael Anderson, Glenn Bradford, Kurt Shrout, and a number of other authors who are clearly pumping this fraudulent companies. I have complained to seeking alpha about them. They are committing securities fraud, in my opinion, and should be arrested and jailed. I don't know why seekingalpha continues to publish their articles.
    Mar 28, 2011. 01:15 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The End of CCME's Fairy Tale [View article]
    CSMhater:

    ebern won't stop pumping this fraud. Phinance101 hasn't figured it out, but Ebern is one of the co conspirators on this one.
    Mar 28, 2011. 12:52 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The End of CCME's Fairy Tale [View article]
    bad terminology is the enemy of good thinking. Whether or not ccme was misreporting their financials was an issue of fact, not opinion. As you admit above, you did not know the facts, but you posted here as if you did, claiming that the financial reporting was real, when you had no basis whatsoever to make that factual representation. On the other hand, I explained 53 different ways that they were misreporting their financials, pointed you to where you could find the facts, and laid out the reasoning.
    On issues like this, you should not be making claims that you do not know to be true. If you don't know how to reach a certain conclusion, you should pretend that you do and have.
    I still am not quite sure whether you are being honest now.
    Mar 15, 2011. 02:50 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China MediaExpress Holdings: All Eyes on Deloitte [View article]
    Go back and review my comments, I explained it to you many times. As I told you, it took me 15-30 minutes reading the 10-k to conclude the company was a fraud, because the business model/plan was a joke. They don't own or lease the buses. They were doing the buse owners a service by putting tv's and hard drives on the buses, but the bus owners were not paying them. Instead, they were paying the bus owners. Makes no sense.
    The only possible sense it could have made was if they owned a live teleivion station, which they played on the tvs (still not enamoured by that), but they were claiming to play recorded content. Then they claimed to get the content for free - that made no sense unless it was horrible or already free.
    Nothing about CCME's story made sense.
    Just go back and read all my post, it should be educational.
    Finally, Charlie Munger said that if someone tells you a story that sounds to good to be true, you will save a lot of money by immediately turning around and walking away, and not listening to another word. So, that can be a good litmus test as well, so i wouldn't pooh, pooh that.
    Mar 14, 2011. 04:48 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The End of CCME's Fairy Tale [View article]
    CCME has already been proven to be a serious fraud. Where have you been?
    Mar 13, 2011. 03:08 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The End of CCME's Fairy Tale [View article]
    yeah, unfortunately, unlike the author, you haven't visited the company and you don't know what you are talking about.
    Mar 13, 2011. 03:06 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 6 Stocks to Capitalize on China Trade Worries [View article]
    Come on, there is no way to know that, unless you have inside information.
    Mar 11, 2011. 10:57 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China MediaExpress: Groundwork, Research, And Videos to Disprove Allegations [View article]
    Michael Anderson again pumping a fraudulent company, must mean that he wants to dump his shares as he pumps the company - very transparent.
    Mar 10, 2011. 12:44 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
2,562 Comments
1,693 Likes