Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed


View LightseedVC's Comments BY TICKER:

Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Odyssey Marine Exploration: What's The Deal? [View article]
    Good article Scott. The irony is that even if the 40mm option were to be exercised (which it won't be), OMEX would be sitting on $.47 a share in cash (40mm/85mm shares). So with the stock at $.70, you'd be getting OMEX for $.23 a share ex the cash or 19mm Enterprise Value. OMEX would be sitting on the most cash in years and wouldn't need to raise any money for years. Most of the bear argument that took the stock below $1.00 was predicated on a liquidity crisis and delisting. Well both are now completely off the table (delisting won't happen now with the reverse split). So the 18mm shares short should do the math. Sure they had a good call before but now what is the reason to stay short a stock that would be valued at an enterprise value of $.23 or 19mm valuation. There wouldnt be any risk of bankruptcy as OMEX would be well funded for the next 2 years and would have optionality on its core shipwreck business..I think this is why the stock is starting to run. EITHER SCENARIO IS A WIN/WIN
    Mar 20, 2015. 03:23 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • First The 3-D Space, Next The Fuel Cell Space, Now The SaaS Space [View article]
    George, your analysis and data on CSOD is way off the mark..The stock is now trading at 8.3x consensus '14 revenues and only 6.1x consensus '15 revenues. This for a company this has been growing revenue at 50% and will grow revenues at close to 40% for the next several years…They are the clear leader in the talent management space which is one of the fastest growing segments within enterprise software. On all those metrics, the stock has now become incredibly cheap. Many of the large software co's such as MSFT, CRM, WDAY would gladly pay much higher prices for this crown jewel. Hope that helps
    Mar 27, 2014. 05:13 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Odyssey Marine Exploration: Watching The Detective [View article]
    One of the best articles I've ever read, well done..By the way, its noteworthy that there are over 17mm shares short or close to 25% of the float.
    Dec 12, 2013. 04:25 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Is The Money Real? [View article]
    Paulo, question which bank did Longtop use in China?
    Nov 21, 2013. 09:26 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Investigative Report Questions Odyssey Marine's New Offshore Subsidiaries And Undersea Mining [View article]
    Odyssey has actually produced some solid results over the past few years. 1) Monitized over 75mm of silver bullion 2) Proved out an entirely new business line with commodity wrecks and in so doing has amassed an 800mm backlog. 3) Invested in seabed mining and in the process has valuable stakes in 3 companies (marked at zero on balance sheet but on paper is worth potentially over 150mm dollars).
    Yes Neptune raising 19mm might not be indicative but my point was that the author flat out calls it a zero without any basis. How could it def be a zero if the company raised 19mm at $17.5 a share just last year? The raises have been at rising levels and now they are in discussions with a strategic partner. So there is no basis to just flat out call it a zero
    Nov 3, 2013. 10:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Investigative Report Questions Odyssey Marine's New Offshore Subsidiaries And Undersea Mining [View article]
    Hi, Im not implying a deal will happen, nor am I factoring it into my analysis of the stock. As of now, based upon the language in Odyssey's public filings, it is not a dead deal yet. The actual title of the wreck has been transferred to the Heritage Foundation who technically has control over the wreck and can theoretically give Odyssey the go-ahead. However, it wont happen until all parties agree. I agree its not worth getting excited about or giving it much energy. However, its all upside optionality at this point b/c market consensus is that it wont happen. Should it happen it is noteworthy that historical records indicate there are potentially 100,000 oz. of gold on the Victory. If, in fact, there proves to be 100,000 oz. of gold coins, given Odyssey's 80% share, the potential value of this find is staggering. Odyssey's potential income depends on the quality of the coins etc., however keep in mind that the melt value of 100,000 oz. of gold alone is approximately $2.00 per share net to Odyssey. Odyssey's past recovery of the SS Republic yielded NET realized income to Odyssey of premiums to melt of approx 20x, and the gold coins sold out rapidly (and that was with much lower overall gold prices and a softer coin market). Similar multiples would yield pre-tax $40 per share for OMEX shareholders. Even at 10x melt, that would net Odyssey shareholders pre-tax $20 per share. Hence my comment that if a deal does in fact get the green light, then the stock would then have to factor in the probability of the potential of the cargo which I have outlined.
    Nov 3, 2013. 09:47 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Investigative Report Questions Odyssey Marine's New Offshore Subsidiaries And Undersea Mining [View article]
    Hi there. In regards to the Victory project in the UK, there is no criminal investigation whatsoever. Few points. 1) Odyssey and the UK govt have an incredible, long-standing relationship 2) You are probably alluding to frequent chatter from the archeological community that doesnt want to see this historical wreck pulled up and as a result they are constantly falsely accusing Odyssey of a whole bunch of nonsense. The truth is Odyssey is following exact protocol and has not proceeded on any further excavation until they get clear approval from the UK govt. Nevertheless, current market expectations for a Victory recovery have been completely taken out of the stock anyway so there now is binary upside should a deal actually get worked out. There are actually many reasons to think a deal will happen however I'm not modelling anything until I actually do see a deal. I have written in previous posts about how big the Victory could actually be should it manifest however again I'm discounting it until I see a go-ahead. Should they actually get a go-ahead I would expect the stock to $4 bid immediately and if the cargo is confirmed the stock could be $10-$20.
    I'm glad to answer any other questions you have
    Nov 3, 2013. 08:46 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Investigative Report Questions Odyssey Marine's New Offshore Subsidiaries And Undersea Mining [View article]
    19) Establishing offshore entities is common business practice for corporations that generate revenues outside of the US to manage taxes

    20) The comps you use to comp Odyssey are meaningless and not comparable. Odyssey has a proven business that is now generating meaningful cash combined with meaningful value created off balance sheet. The commodity wreck business alone is worth $3-$5 based on my estimates. They are targetting 1-2 of these wrecks a year at a potential of 50mm recovery each, generating 25-50mm in ebitda annually starting next year! The cargos are known, easier to find, and much less legal risk than tradional shipwrecks

    My last point: In all seriousness, I wish you no ill-will. However, in the future you should be careful about comments you make and how you make them. You used very inflammatory and slanderous language combined with major scare tactics in your report that you caused people to just freak out and sell the stock at the market causing a cascade down. I am very certain that once people truly dissect your report they will quickly buy back what they sold. All the best
    Nov 3, 2013. 07:16 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Investigative Report Questions Odyssey Marine's New Offshore Subsidiaries And Undersea Mining [View article]
    12) Neptune raised over $19mm at $17.50 a share late last year. Odyssey own over 6mm shares of Neptune putting its stake valued at over $100mm based on this last round (again Oddsey has this valued at ZERO on its balance sheet). Noteworthy that 19 million dollars was raised, this is a major amount of money and certainly is a good indication of a true "mark" on Neptune's value. To say that it is a "zero" without any basis of knowledge is irresponsible and not right

    13)Insider buying has been significant while selling has been small

    14) Dorado was a subsidiary of Odyssey and its very normal for management of parent companies (Brad Baker) to be on the board of subsidiary companies

    15) NOL valuation: Valuing NOL's at zero is common accounting practice. Asserting that this is indicative of anything else is just fear mongering the uninformed

    16) Carrying value of Converts: It is GAAP accounting that part of the value of a convertible secruity be allocated to part equity and rest to debt. The result seen all the time is convertible bonds on the balance sheet for less than par. Standard accounting

    17) Your clain that Odyssey will go bankrupt in less than 12 months again is irresponsible and flies in the face of facts. They had 10mm of cash on b/s as of Jun 2013. They just recovered 39mm of silver from Gairsoppa. Net out 9mm in salvage costs, 1mm in smelting costs, and 6mm payment to the UK govt, such should add over 20mm in cash to their bank accounts over the next 6 months

    18) On the cash front, there is a good chance they get paid another 17.5mm from Mako shareholders if they exercise their warrants by the end of 2013
    Nov 3, 2013. 07:16 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Investigative Report Questions Odyssey Marine's New Offshore Subsidiaries And Undersea Mining [View article]
    7) Odyssey's public comments that Oceanica has had positive assay results, is commerciably viable, and looks to be a "world class deposit" is extremely noteworthy. To say that is a "zero" is based on nothing and just a scare tactic. There is no way Odyssey management would make these comments if such werent likely (ironically, their SEC scare from years ago has made them way too conservative and anti-promotional so their public comments should not be taken lightly)

    8) The fraud allegations at Oceanica you allude to are not correct.
    DNA is a minority shareholder of Oceanica. Odyssey is not partnered nor a shareholder of DNA. My research on this indicates that the law firm that set up the DNA entitiy provides some of its staff to act as directors of the various entities established. These directors have no oversight or any involvement whatsoever of any of the companies and if any company should run into ethical behavior, the directors would be removed from the law firm. Again absolutely nothing to do with Oceanica or Odyssey

    9) Your allegations about John Morris are not correct. Mr Morris's three year consulting agreement terminated by the end of 2010 and has not received any compensation since. Neptune was formed in Jan 2011.

    10) In terms of Oddsey's relationship to Neptune, Odyssey is a passive shareholder of Neptune's non-voting shares (it became a stockholder as a result of the sale to Neptune of Dorado Ocean Resources, in which Odyssey was a stockholder). Odyssey has provided Neptune with exploration services and as a result, has been a key strategic partner for Neptune. The terms of payment of such services has been disclosed in Odyssey's filings. Odyssey has not paid any fees to companies managed by John Morris and the relationship between Neptune and Odyssey has been made completely transparent by both companies and such included in Odysey's audits

    11) Your article mistakenly contrasts Neptune Minerals Inc with one of its predecessors, Neptune Minerals PLC. Neptune Minerals Inc is a transformed company that has a diversified model with tenement prospecting licenses and applications in seven jurisdictions. They currently hold licenses covering thousands of square kilometers of seafloor and applications for thousands more. Their tenement positions are unique, scare and non-reproducible. Odyssey has publically stated that Neptune is in talks with major strategic partners
    Nov 3, 2013. 07:15 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Investigative Report Questions Odyssey Marine's New Offshore Subsidiaries And Undersea Mining [View article]

    1) Using a phrase like "Investigative report" incorrectly gives people the sense that there is an "investigation". This is not the case. The truth is you are a hedge fund that is short a lot of stock and has an agenda to drive the price down

    2) The company's cash position has never been greater, and I believe they will end the year with min 20mm of cash, and given all the future cash generating catalysts on the horizon, its my belief they will never have to raise money again

    3) OMEX has a backlog of 800mm in commodity wrecks, following their success (not failure) with monetizing over 75mm of silver bullion, with government cooperation. This business is now replicable for years to come and the backlog gives them a huge runway of cash generating opportunites

    4) The Unesco argument holds no water. A) less than 10% of the world's coastlines are even covered by Unesco are B) Large countries such as the US, UK, Columbia haven't even signed Unesco C) Even if in effect, Unecso doesn't prohibit the sale of artifacts and cargo D) There are hundreds of valuable wrecks in international waters (non-Unesco) that won't have black swan like controvery E) There are many countries that are increasingly looking to monetize their wrecks, for example, Columbia recently passed legislation to this effect and is home to some of the most valuable wrecks out there

    5) Odyssey's investments in Neptune, Oceanica, Chattem are all carried on their balance sheet at zero, despite private market values significantly higher. A lot of money has been raised within those company's at significant valuations, by sophisticated investors. Odyssey, in its sec filings, correctly notified investors where the latest transactions for those company's has taken place. That equates to value close to 175mm or over $2.00 per share. However, again Odyssey conservatively carries them at zero on its balance sheet

    6) The SEC issue is not an issue (and an old non-issue at that). When the SEC case was presented before a judge in 1997, the judge dismissed the case in one day and ruled that it was so egregious that the SEC reimburse the defendants legal costs
    Nov 3, 2013. 07:13 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile: Clearing Up The Muddied Waters Means A Short Squeeze On The Horizon [View article]
    Someone should send this to Ichan
    Oct 30, 2013. 05:17 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile: Behind Smoke And Mirrors Lies The Truth, Part 2 [View article]
    Wow, this is incredible
    Oct 30, 2013. 04:18 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile: NQ Live Is A Game Changer [View article]
    Great article! one suggestion: for the comps would be interesting to see a dedicated China comp list including YY, VIPS, QIHU, BIDU etc..
    Oct 23, 2013. 08:12 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile: A Suspicious Chinese Stock [View article]
    Also the CCTV allegations were completely false and fabricated by one of NQ's competitors prior to NQ's IPO. 100% not true and its been independently verified by multiple reliable sources that that did not occur
    Oct 1, 2013. 10:14 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment