Seeking Alpha

Mark Gomes

View as an RSS Feed
View Mark Gomes' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • dELiA*s Is Poised To Triple [View article]

    I respect your zeal, but I suspect that you haven't read my profile or Methodology. Further, some of your information is outdated and the rest is irrelevant to a story like this. Specifically,

    1) The company just raised $44M and 2) losses are common in startups...and DLIA is a "restart", which is effectively a startup. Re-read my article for details.

    FYI, my Methodology specifically targets companies that most investors have likely misanalysed (because "the numbers" often lie). I have written on this subject before. I recommend that you examine my track record (and how many of my picks looked awful on paper prior to emerging) before responding further. After all, I'm sure an intelligent person like you can agree that researching the analyst is an important part of debating the analysis.

    As an aside, I would respectfully request that you be careful about tossing around "pump n dump" accusations. For 5 years, I have worked hard on Seeking Alpha to establish a stellar reputation for performance and ethics. I very much RESPECT (and ENCOURAGE) your point of view, but let's do it like gentlemen.

    Kindest Regards,

    Mark G.
    Feb 24, 2014. 01:29 PM | 35 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • With Ultra HD Emerging, Is Apple Eyeing Pixelworks? [View article]
    I expect comments like this from short-sellers and novice investors who don't research the information source. However, I would think a Seeking Alpha contributor would do a little checking before disparaging a fellow contributor's work.

    While disconcerting to me, the real harm is to the poster. Such obviously uninformed comments only expose a lack of diligence to a large number of readers.
    Jun 8, 2014. 10:11 AM | 21 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Glu Mobile: 4 Different Insiders Have Sold Shares This Year [View article]
    10b5-1 selling has no correlation with future stock prices (and in this case, the correlation has been steeply reverse). Perhaps that information should be disclosed here, since it's perhaps the most important point in this discussion (but not at all mentioned in your article).

    An article entitled "Explaining the Insider Selling At Glu" would be far more helpful to investors. I did the homework on this and happen to know the answer… and it is certainly not negative (which is why I made it one of my top picks at PoisedToTriple's website before their blowout results…and after the insider selling began). Thus, it is my feeling that your article is misleading to investors, since it rings a negative tone, though not overtly so.
    Feb 9, 2014. 10:36 AM | 21 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Should King's Sour Candy Be Crushing Shares Of Glu? [View article]
    Hi Everyone,

    A lot of stock market volatility would be solved if the market was only open one day per month. Too many people call themselves "investors", but never received a college education on how to value equities (never mind post-graduate work, which is necessary to truly gain equity-valuation expertise).

    As a result, most people get shaken by short-term moves because they have no concept of whether their stock is under- or over-valued. My first step is always to calculate what I think the stock is worth (which takes me SEVERAL WEEKS to do properly).


    After 25 years of education and experience, I require WEEKS to calculate what I think a stock is worth.

    So, what are the chances that most investors REALLY know (and have conviction in) what any stock is worth? Now, the REAL question can investors react properly to any given stock price (or stock price movement) if they don't know what the stock is worth?

    Charts don't tell you what a stock is worth or where it's going. The valuation does. The charts are merely the map...but you have to know the destination (valuation / target price) for the map to be of any use.

    My calculated value of GLUU hasn't changed in the past two weeks because the long-term prospects of GLUU have not changed in the past two weeks. In fact, even when Deer Hunter inevitably peters out, GLUU will still be a company that knows how to create and monetize mobile video games. Some games will be a hit (like Deer Hunter) and some will not (like Robocop)...but the average game will do well, driving the company's long-term growth.

    All they have to do is 1) learn from their winning games 2) learn from their losing games and 3) keep making more games, using what they've learned from their prior games.

    Everything else is just background noise, which can only serve to confuse short-term minded investors. I don't play that game. I seek companies that have the ability to execute over a long period of time. Once I invest in them, I let them work their magic (over time), while I set my sights on finding the next investment.

    If you read what I just said, you'll understand why I believe that fretting over short-term moves is a waste of time and emotion. ;)


    Mark G.
    Apr 6, 2014. 04:01 PM | 19 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Glu Insiders Not Sticking With Their Stock [View article]
    Wow. This article is appallingly unprofessional. I'm usually a positive-speaking person, but this is one of the worst-researched pieces I've read in recent history.

    Folks, please see my articles here on Seeking Alpha and PoisedToTriple for a more complete analysis of the company and its prospects.
    Jan 23, 2014. 09:04 AM | 19 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Danger Zone: Glu Mobile [View article]
    I have respect for New Constructs, as I do for all entities and human beings. However, their thesis on GLUU demonstrates an egregious lack of understanding and research into GLUU's business model and reasons-for-success.

    As I have stated in my extensive research many times, GLUU is NOT about any one game. I said this during Deer Hunter at $3, I said it about Kim K at $5, and I'm saying it now.

    This has been true in the industry as long as I have covered it (1994).

    In fact, New Constructs is CORRECT in saying that one hit wonders should be avoided... but sorely off the mark by lumping GLUU as a company reliant on such an event. They should have focused on ZNGA and KING as shorts, as we have.


    Mark G.
    Sep 8, 2014. 10:42 AM | 18 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Glu Mobile: 3 Different Insiders Have Sold Shares This Month [View article]
    There's nothing wrong with this article. Markus Aarnio does a great job of reporting on insider buying/selling. As usual, it has zero impact on my thesis or thinking on GLUU.

    Investors need to get used to the fact that my articles don't have an expiration date. What I wrote will be how I feel NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS, barring ONE exception -- if the monetization platform starts to fail. So far, the opposite has been true. The platform is performing better than I expected.

    As part of this article, he made it clear that the GLUU selling was part of a 10b5-1 program, an automated selling program generally used by insiders to diversify their wealth.

    As the legendary Peter Lynch (a childhood idol of mine) said. There are many reasons why an insider sells, but only one reason why they buy. In other words, insider selling should generally be ignored. This is particularly true when a 10b5-1 program is involved.

    To me, fearing insider selling (especially 10b5-1 selling) is a sign of weak confidence on the part of investors or a feeble reason for shorts to scare those investors out.

    In my 25+ years of investing, I've seen in a thousand times...
    Dec 28, 2013. 02:33 PM | 17 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Picks To Triple In A Correction [View article]
    My Methodology & Risk/Reward Charts are taught freely on PoisedToTriple. I advertise these two things as being required reading before playing with any of my picks. In the regard, R/R Charts very clearly showed that near-term profits should be taken (by short-term focused investors) when GLUU and PXLW hit the high-end of their ranges. Longer-term holders (including me) are still fine.

    Also, yes, my picks "graduate" at 200% profit levels (including long-term winners like Seagate and Facebook). The most money is made in the early innings before speculation, trough, chasm crossing, and maturity.

    Next, 10% is a MARKET correction. However, MOST long-term winners drop 25%+ MANY times on the way to becoming multi-baggers. Just look at CRM's multi-year chart for one example.

    If you think I'm a bum, I respect your right to that opinion. Either way, I would highly recommend reading up on Buffett's philosophy before condemning picks that get indiscriminately sold off. Investing legends like Buffett, Graham, and Lynch LOVE when that happens to their stocks. Like it at $10? LOVE it at $5.

    Rhetorical Question -- What's more important...the short-term movement of a stock or the performance of the underlying company? The majority of my picks have posted GREAT quarters while correcting. My picks focus on INTERMEDIATE-term stock performance because I admittedly cannot guess short-term movement. It's not my specialty. I focus on predicting companies' future (calling GOOG/HIMX and AAPL/PXLW were either insider info or the result of real stock research). You can decide which.

    If your focus is short-term gains, I RESPECT that and don't blame you for considering me a bum. I don't play for the short-term, so it's very justifiable and you're are entitled to that opinion.

    Kindest Regards,

    Mark G.
    May 19, 2014. 01:10 PM | 15 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pixelworks: Peeling Back The Apple Relationship And Assessing Largest Shareholder's Planned Stock Sale [View article]
    I applaud your initiative and due diligence. However, I too read the SEC docs (long ago) and a few things come to mind: 1) this is not new news, 2) insider selling is a terrible gauge of future price movement...just ask GLUU short sellers, and 3) the evidence you present, while 100% factual and commendable, doesn't provide enough specifics to draw an actionable conclusion, much less a condemnation.

    In fact, Becker Drapkin is a very active investment firm. Such firms routinely (and prudently) trim outsized positions (which PXLW has justifiably become for Becker Drapkin) to right-size portfolio weightings and make room for new positions. Indeed, my Methodology (freely published at lends itself to the same end.

    Thus, I hesitate to connect the dots between your findings and a fundamental justification for shorting PXLW (emphasis on the word "fundamental"). However, according to my company's risk/reward system, our readers could see that going from $4+ to $9 in a day would likely be followed by a partial retracement.

    Regardless of that, PXLW's fundamental merits remain completely intact and continue to improve, based of factors PTT Research has been outlining via my writings.

    That being said, regardless of the circumstantial nature of your findings, the timing was impeccable, so kudos for that and kudos for your dedication to due diligence.

    Kindest Regards,

    Mark G.
    Mar 8, 2014. 06:33 AM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Blackberry (After It Doubles) [View article]
    The liquidity comes from day trading, not institutional buying/selling. The stock turns over its entire float every 3 days. Institutions (including fast-money minded hedge funds) hold their positions (long and short) much longer than that.

    If the stock breaks out, as it appears to be doing right now (also see how GME turned out), agnostic day traders will act by focusing on the long side of the trade (ala one of our other picks, HIMX).

    At that point, the liquidity will only be there for longs who wish to take profits. This is how/why many squeezes have been so violent of late. NFLX is another that comes to mind, but neither NFLX, nor GME had as much pent-up power s BBRY -- those stocks take 12 and 40 days for their floats to turn over, respectively.

    Seriously, I don't recall seeing a stock with such a high combination of short interest and share-turnover. I'm not the type to tell shot-sellers that they're in a position to get their "faces ripped off", but I would strongly suggest taking the aforementioned facts into consideration.

    Kindest Regards,

    Mark G.
    May 5, 2013. 10:33 AM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Should King's Sour Candy Be Crushing Shares Of Glu? [View article]

    If you know KING well, then obviously you know that Candy Crush 1) can't last forever and 2) is not a hard game to replicate.

    What they did was GENIUS (basically taking Bejeweled and putting it on steroids, with absolutely BRILLIANT monetization characteristics). I LOVE the game and play it daily. However, I won't be surprised to see wannabes sprout up, forcing KING to find other avenues for continued growth.

    I think the company will continue to thrive, but can they thrive enough to justify a $6 billion valuation? Much more of a challenge than GLUU has to justify its $300 million market cap. Keep in mind that both companies spent their first 8 years on a similar growth path. In other words, KING didn't become bigger or faster growing until Candy Crush.

    Also, just to correct you on one thing, GLUU made a profit last quarter and I suspect that continued in Q1. Every company begins as an unprofitable entity in one way shape or form. KING was founded in 2003, but didn't turn a profit until two years ago, when they developed Candy Crush.

    I respect your opinions, but your abrasive style isn't necessary. Just because we disagree on KING vs GLUU's valuation, doesn't make us enemies. Tis better for investors to work together, because in the stock game it is possible for everyone to win.

    As you can see from the other readers' responses, your form of rhetoric is discrediting you, which thus discredits your thesis. I'm always happy to be shown the error of my ways, because my goal is not to be right -- it's to make money. If you provide info that convinces me that I'm wrong about KING and/or GLUU, you're not "winning"'re doing me a favor.

    That's how everyone can win.

    Best Wishes and Kindest Regards,

    Mark G.
    Apr 6, 2014. 08:13 PM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Glu Mobile Set To Owe Kim Kardashian $85 Million? [View article]

    With all due respect to a smart stock analyst like you, despite Cowen & Co's $200m assertion, my firm's estimate is a VERY conservative $60m. Our bullish outlook for GLUU is based on that number. We derived it from some services (costly ones) that do nothing but provide accurate revenue stats from App Stores.

    As a smart stock analyst you obviously did your homework and built your revenue / profit model (as we did) to find the flaw in my analysis. I very much appreciate that. Though I've been covering video game companies since 1994, I still make mistakes occasionally. Pointing out a miscalculation will save me from a loss.

    Of course, you also watched / read my research and compared my model to yours to uncover the discrepancies, since we both know that only a fool would underestimate the whims, follies, and spending patterns of young American girls)... and I'm sure you know this because you have daughters or nieces and asked their them (and their friends) about the game.

    And you also know that the game (currently ranked #5, as even amateurs know) is more than doubling the $27M that Deer Hunter generated in Q1 (which makes sense, because DH was only ranked #10)... and all experts know that #5 games generate 2-3x a #10 game.

    But that confuses me, because $27M x 2 = $54M per quarter = $100M+ for 2014. So, I would expect you to admonish me for being conservative.

    Have I made a mistake is assuming that you are a smart stock analyst who has done everything I described above? Because smart investors know that people who don't are not smart stock analysts.

    But I don't believe that. There must be an explanation. An "anomaly" if you will.

    I don't know where the whims of the stock market will take this stock next, but my earnings math is accurate... and earnings determine the ultimate destination of any stock. In this case, the company is quite clearly undervalued, barring an error in my model, which you will surely point out for us all.

    How it will achieve a fairly-valued level remains to be seen, but it will get there no matter what misguided investors assume. I thank you in advance for your clarification(s) regarding my miscalculation(s).

    My Kindest Regards,

    Mark G.
    Jul 18, 2014. 08:15 PM | 12 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ignore The Downgrade - Glu Is Still Poised To Triple [View article]
    Hello Gentlemen,

    The insider sells are part of a normal 10b5-1 program. Not bearish.

    In my opinion, GLUU has been quickly moving to the upside as investors learn how well the monetization platform is working. I believe short sellers are trying to keep it down so they can cover. 25% of the shares are short and I believe the stock is going to $10.

    As for nonsense, I respect every man's opinion. However, my track record is 100% documented here on Seeking Alpha. Most of my picks have doubled, tripled, or been acquired. Each time I make a new pick I have doubters. Making the call that HIMX would be in Glass (at $3, four months before the deal was announced) was a particularly notable example. ;^)

    Personally, I love the bearish comments. My methodology is to pick unloved stocks and ride them until they are loved (HIMX, FB, etc.)!


    Mark G.
    Dec 27, 2013. 12:26 PM | 12 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Should King's Sour Candy Be Crushing Shares Of Glu? [View article]

    Thanks for the more-intellectual response. I concur with your assessment to a large degree. However, let's assume that you were made the CEO of GLUU for a year. What would you do?

    If that scenario happened to me, I would strongly consider developing a Candy Crush clone. While it's true that I couldn't match KING's number of levels, I could create more than enough to offer a viable clone. Then, as the game started generating profits, I could add to the game.

    In fact, that is what KING did. Remember, KING was smaller than GLUU a couple years ago, but still has enough resources to make Candy Crush.

    Regarding your other points, YES, Candy Crush is very sticky and probably has more time in the sun ahead. However, Farmville and Angry Birds were also sticky...and both eventually petered out.

    I LOVE Candy Crush. I'm hooked! But that won't last forever. KING needs to show its ability to develop new successful games. Until Candy Crush came along, GLUU proved to be better than KING at that. In fact, if we exclude Candy Crush, GLUU has generated far more revenue since inception than KING.

    Finally, I 100% agree with your final statement. KING, like ZNGA before it, now holds the driver's seat in the mobile gaming arena. It has the top game, it knows what makes the game successful, and it has the cash to replicate its success. KING has more cash than GLUU has market cap.

    So, the key question is, can they avoid the same fate that befell ZNGA? As stock investors, the goal isn't to own the biggest company, it's to own the best-performing stock. To illustrate this, take note of the fact that ZNGA's market cap is STILL 10x that of GLUU. However, ZNGA's STOCK has fallen 50% since its IPO, while GLUU's has RISEN by the same amount (50%).

    So, while ZNGA is the bigger (and perhaps better) company, GLUU has been the better choice for investors...and it's not even close. I'm making the same case for GLUU versus KING (whose market cap is nearly 20x GLUUs).

    Now, this is the most important point -- here, I am credibly comparing KING to GLUU. However, GLUU's market cap is $300 million and KING's is $6 billion. Think about the potential growth that each can provide from those respective levels. Then, think about how far each one might decline when their top game peters out (as ALL games eventually do). Now, tell me, which company provides the better risk/reward ratio?

    If you considered the question carefully/honestly and still say KING, I can respect that opinion, though it will differ from mine.

    Again, thanks for the intellectual debate. You have demonstrated that your intellect can supersede your emotional response to my opinions. Regardless of how KING and GLUU wind up, that's the sure mark of a winning investor.


    Mark G.
    Apr 7, 2014. 08:59 AM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ignore The Downgrade - Glu Is Still Poised To Triple [View article]
    Ah, now I understand. You made this negative comment before. Thus, I suspect that you are a short seller...but that's ok :^)

    Be my guest. Nothing that you (or I) say will make the value of this company go up or down substantially. Only the company can do that. All I do is make turnaround predictions regarding bashed, shorted, unknown, and hated stocks. FB, HIMX, STX, ATTU, TPCS, etc were all hated when I picked them, but they all tripled nonetheless.

    As for your negative comments, I'll have one of my interns write a positive comment for every negative one you write. We'll see if you believe your time is worth more than that of an unpaid intern. ;^)

    Kindest Regards & Happy Holidays,

    Mark G.

    p.s. My track record is on display here and on I encourage everyone to confirm my claims and decide for yourselves. Cheers!
    Dec 27, 2013. 07:21 PM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment