Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Richard X Roe  

View Richard X Roe's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • China XD Plastics: False Claims Don't Stick, Over 200% Upside [View article]
    Jan Martinek: The link is KPMG, China XD's auditor. KPMG knew the conflict between China and US laws and regulations, and nevertheless took the audit engagement. The administrative judge wondered whether KPMG was deliberately planning to exploit the regulatory uncertainty in order to facilitate the frauds.
    Aug 20, 2015. 09:20 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Energous: More Reasons To Be Dubious [View article]
    ronrohkal: I am unaware of anybody that has actually seen any wireless charging done by Energous. All the "demonstrations" to date have actually charged devices from BATTERIES, not wirelessly. And in many cases, the devices were actually discharging, despite 1) the extra battery, 2) the supposed wireless charging, and 3) the apps claiming the devices were charging.

    So, if you know of a person who has actually witnessed ANY wireless charging done by Energous, please point that person out!
    Aug 19, 2015. 10:07 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China XD Plastics: False Claims Don't Stick, Over 200% Upside [View article]
    Jan Martinek: Yes, the Securities and Exchange Commission earlier this year imposed sanctions against KPMG for refusing to turn over documents related to investigations of potential fraud: http://1.usa.gov/1J2922y
    Aug 13, 2015. 10:35 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China XD Plastics: False Claims Don't Stick, Over 200% Upside [View article]
    GrowthGeek: It is not a red herring. The point is that 1) all those contracts are fake, and 2) the company's SEC filings are a complete fiction. All the company's customers appear to be undisclosed related parties.

    Since you love to assume, can you name even one customer of China XD and explain what it does (other than "distribute" China XD products, that is)?
    Aug 12, 2015. 09:17 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China XD Plastics: False Claims Don't Stick, Over 200% Upside [View article]
    Alvaro Ferrand: How do Morgan Stanley, Fidelity Investments, UBS, HSBC, KPMG, Scott Black, or Shearman & Sterling LLP explain the fact that all China XD's customers, I repeat, ALL the company's customers, sign their contracts with China XD on Christmas Day, year after year, as disclosed in an SEC filing? Do you know?
    Aug 12, 2015. 12:31 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • UniPixel: A Tragic End Or A New Beginning? [View article]
    Matt Margolis: It is not true that first half of the year is typically a slow period for XSense sales. Atmel was shipping XSense and announcing actual devices with XSense in early 2014. But in H2 2014, all the announcements ceased and Atmel started talking publicly about getting rid of the business (or maximizing shareholder value of whatever).

    Atmel reported $1.4 million in XSense revenue for Q1 2015. Atmel also reported $0.1 million of XSense revenue for Q2 2015 and UniPixel reported $1.3 million in XSense/Xtouch revenue in Q2 2015. Combined XSense revenue comes to about $2.8 million in H1 2015. As I already explained, the majority (if not all) of the $3.7 million XSense revenue in 2014 was generated early in the year, that is, H1 2014 revenue was close, if not equal, to $3.7 million, so there is no evidence that the XSense "pace" has accelerated between H1 2014 and H1 2015. However, here is some actual evidence that you missed:

    1) UniPixel was very aggressive in revenue recognition in the quarter. 100% of the revenues from the second largest customer in the quarter are sitting in receivables. 70% of the revenues from the largest customer in the quarter are sitting in receivables. Expect severe "disappointment" for Q3 2015!!! UniPixel already knows what the revenues will look like in Q3, and that is why Hawthorne and Russell are quiet as mice.

    2) Gross losses have severely worsened. For the whole 2014, the reported XSense gross loss was $0.6 million. Just for the H1 2015, the reported XSense gross loss was about $3.3 million. A nice pace! And that's not adjusting for the inventory marked as "free" that XSense acquired from Atmel.

    3) CIT planned for 1 million sqft of coated film for the 6 months between April and September, according to the 8K/A. Assuming 1.2 sqft for a 10-inch sensor (yes, I know that a 10-inch sensor covers just 0.5 sqft, but all that extra area is needed for handling and test circuitry) and a very generous 80% yield, we get about 700,000 10-inch sensors. Using Hawthorne's $5 fantasy ASP, we get less than $3.5 million. So, UniPixel's 2015 revenue is at best $5 million. But, of course, HP and integrators are not crazy enough to pay $5 to UniPixel when there is no bundled controller, yield is nowhere near 80%, and CIT can send 100% DEFECTIVE product and all UniPixel can do is replace 10% of it at no cost, according to the agreement.

    4) Both Atmel and CIT wrote off the XSense/FLT businesses essentially to zero in late 2014, based of forecasted cash flows. You think they knew less than Hawthorne about the XSense business then?

    Nope, there are no chances that UniPixel will get to $10 million in revenues in 2015. I mean, really, do you even try?
    Aug 8, 2015. 12:01 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • UniPixel: A Tragic End Or A New Beginning? [View article]
    Matt Margolis: Atmel/CIT pricing for the 10-inch XSense sensors shipped to HP starting in late 2013 was about $10, or $1/inch, according to Atmel, and the majority of the $4 million in XSense revenue in 2014 was generated early in that year, at that price. Does the math work out for you now? Of course, figuring out the precise "price" for XSense was never possible (KPMG were very brave when they signed the audited statements for XSense), because Atmel was bundling the controller and the sensor when "selling" to ELK, HP's module integrator for the 10-inch Omni tablet. No such difficulties for UniPixel, which has nothing to bundle with (and therefore, the OEMs and the module integrators are no longer interested).

    The advent of free (embedded) sensors in touch-enabled displays produced at high yield has already been cited by CIT/Atmel as one of the reasons why XSense (aka XTouch) is a failed product with no prospects.
    Aug 8, 2015. 12:12 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • UniPixel: A Tragic End Or A New Beginning? [View article]
    Matt Margolis: From the call on which you asked your inane questions about the DiamondGuard (have you even seen the curling, brittle film?) and the 10% XSense gross margins (did you even read the May 6 Atmel press release?) : http://seekingalpha.co...

    According to the transcript: "But I will answer the question this way, that we do believe that, that's going to be on diagonal inch pricing of about $0.50 a diagonal inch."
    Aug 7, 2015. 11:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • UniPixel: A Tragic End Or A New Beginning? [View article]
    Matt Margolis: LG and AUO, for example, are offering free (also called embedded) sensors for phones, tablets, and notebooks - up to 15.6 inches diagonal. As far as all-in-ones are concerned, UniPixel has no ability to produce such sensors, as its equipment (that is, Atmel and CIT's equipment) can handle only 30cm-wide film, which can accommodate up to a notebook-sized sensor, at best.

    Atmel did attempt to ship for a cell phone in 2012 (3.2-inch one, according to Shahin Sharifzadeh, Atmel's senior vice president of worldwide operations, which contradicts Hawthorne's picture of a 5.5-inch ZTE phone in the May 2015 presentation) - but the sensors were rejected by the customer - the same thing happened with the "few" thousand XSense tablet sensors shipped to Asus (and promptly discarded) in early 2013.

    BOE was offering free touch MODULES, not sensors, earlier this year. Translated for you, this means that BOE was offering a touch-enabled phone display at the same price as the equivalent display with the same specs (resolution, size, etc). There is no cost absorption here - the beauty of embedded touch sensors is that they incur virtually no cost to the display manufacturers once the production equipment is set up - it is just an extra step or two in a long series of steps that are needed for an LCD or OLED display.

    But even if you ignore the free embedded sensors, touch modules for 7-inch tablets from regular module manufacturers now sell for $2 a piece. That's $2 MODULES. According to Mr. Hawthorne, who rarely tells the truth, this is impossible, because he claims UniPixel is competitively offering its tablet sensors for $0.5/inch, or about $3 for a 7-inch SENSOR (meaning, the MODULES made with UniPixel's sensors will be at least $12 a piece, or at least 6x the prevailing price).

    Someone didn't do his homework here. Just like with GTAT. And the stock price is starting to reflect it.
    Aug 7, 2015. 10:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • UniPixel: A Tragic End Or A New Beginning? [View article]
    Matt Margolis: There has been absolutely no progress "to move manufacturing to Colorado Springs and to grow their customer base." How do I know? The coating machine (the exact same model as the one used by CIT in UK) was already installed in Colorado Springs in November 2013 - it was never turned on by Atmel, because using it would have increased costs even more! The customer base is also not growing, as evidenced by the lack of announcements of ACTUAL products using XTouch. But even if it were growing, it would be at SEVERELY NEGATIVE gross margins (in excess of 100%!!!) - no more benefits of the FREE work-in-progress and finished goods inventory acquired from Atmel. And the revenue recognition was "rushed" in the quarter - did you notice that 100% of the revenue from module integrator B has not been paid?

    Obviously revenue will not be anywhere close to $10 million in 2015 - the 1 million sensors scheduled for 2015 (ordered in 2013 when prices were non-zero) cannot bring more than $5 million in revenues, by Hawthorne's own admission. And UniPixel cannot ship even 1 million sensors in 2015! Which is good, because every sensor shipped drains cash and generates gross losses. Again - touch sensors are now free. Selling millions of free touch sensors still gets you zero revenues!

    Did you try to ask a question on the call?

    Finally, remember GTAT? UniPixel is a fraud managed by scam artists - everybody knows it, but you. The stock hit a new all-time low today, by the way. Chapter 11 by mid 2016, at the latest. End of story.
    Aug 7, 2015. 02:46 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • China XD Plastics: False Claims Don't Stick, Over 200% Upside [View article]
    GrowthGeek: China XD is severely overvalued, actually. It is a fraud.
    Aug 6, 2015. 01:40 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • UniPixel: A Tragic End Or A New Beginning? [View article]
    bullchin: No, the convertible financing was not for about 25 million. No additional money has been raised with the S-3 yet. The number of shares is increasing, because UniPixel is 1) repaying its debt with stock (the definition of toxic convert), 2) paying off the class action lawyers, and 3) generously granting shares to management.

    Hudson knew exactly what would happen and everything is proceeding according to plan. Profiting from toxic convert relies on 1) (more than doubling) the number shares, and 2) stupid shareholders. Both conditions hold for UniPixel.
    Aug 6, 2015. 08:07 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Uni-Pixel misses by $0.19, misses on revenue [View news story]
    vishone: No, they don't.
    Aug 4, 2015. 10:46 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • UniPixel: A Tragic End Or A New Beginning? [View article]
    bullchin: You don't understand the terms of the financing and you don't understand how toxic convert "investors" make money shorting the stock to oblivion.
    Aug 4, 2015. 10:20 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Uni-Pixel misses by $0.19, misses on revenue [View news story]
    JoeNatural: They are not bozos - they are cold, calculating techno-Ponzi schemers. They knew exactly what they were doing - nobody else would have lent them money (at any interest!) nor would have bought their shares even close to the then-prevailing price. The whole UniBoss/InTouch thing was a scam. XSense/XTouch, on the other hand, is simply worth zero.

    Chapter 11 was inevitable - but instead of end of 2016. now it will come by mid 2016, at the latest.
    Aug 4, 2015. 06:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
1,313 Comments
449 Likes