Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Robert Weinstein  

View Robert Weinstein's Comments BY TICKER:

Latest  |  Highest rated
  • F5 Networks: Why the Sell-Off After a Small Earnings Miss? [View article]
    Hello Robert,

    It appears your timing was well done. With an increase of almost $20 from the close of the gap down FFIV is well on the way to make investors happy again. For the new investors very happy.


    Feb 13, 2011. 09:27 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NPS Pharma's Stock Price Is Getting Ahead of Company Value [View article]
    Hello Burt,

    Thanks for the kind words.

    NPSP has indeed been a widow maker for the last week losing almost 20% of the value.

    Longs may be able to take solace in that $7.50 should offer a major support in the price and below that $6.85.


    Feb 13, 2011. 09:16 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • An Options Strategy for China MediaExpress Holdings [View article]
    Hello Andreas,

    Thank you for reading my article and I hope you found it informative. Thank you also for bringing up this important point.

    I understand your point and agree that their is potential opportunity cost with this strategy. This must be weighed out by the investor / trader and decided upon if one is to gain maximum alpha.

    There are no rules that say it must be all or nothing either. For example one could start with options and if appears that the "news event" causing the drop in price is overdone one can sell the options at a gain and buy the stock. This is often the best of both worlds as you get lower risk and still are able to capture the larger move higher if it does "go through the roof".

    It would be a mistake to not include a point about the opportunity cost with options. While true that sometimes stocks will "go through the roof" more often (think in terms of 90%+) they will not even after it is found the news event is not relevant. Stocks that get "wounded" tend to take a long time to heal and this makes options usually the better choice. I will use stocks for intra-day trading due to transactional considerations, options for swing to longer trades when appropriate.

    If you look at some of my recent trades with options you will see what I mean. CCME, V, MTG, MWW, COCO these are all stocks that I have sold puts in within the last month. While this sample size is way to small to use statistically it provides examples of what happens to a stock when it gets beat down. (as the saying goes, stocks move up much slower than they move down)


    Feb 11, 2011. 08:08 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shorting Disney After It Beat the Estimates but Failed to Move [View article]
    Good work. Its always impossible to know what tomorrow will bring but we can say for sure that for right now you did the right thing. (and there are no rules saying you can't buy it again right now)


    Feb 10, 2011. 05:34 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Whole Foods: Management Is Selling and So Am I [View article]
    Hello John,

    Thank you for reading my journal. You may notice that I post my results each day. You may wish to look at my daily results before you comment as an anonymous internet poster if you wish to be taken with even the slightest amount of consideration. Do you really believe people are not going to laugh at you??

    I will make it real simple for you

    You may also see that I have posted my results for years online at another major website along with my blog.

    Best of luck,

    Feb 10, 2011. 07:58 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • An Options Strategy for China MediaExpress Holdings [View article]
    Your welcome

    Your also very correct that the options are still expensive but relative to what I sold them for they are cheaper (due to the IV dropping and the price of CCME moving higher).

    You may want to note that generally IV drops as price moves higher(and higher when price falls). This trips up new option traders a lot when then sell CALLS and find that the price of the stock drops but the calls are still trading for the same or near the same as when they sold them. The fear of losing money in a stock that you own is a stronger response than the fear of losing money that you "could" have if you owned the stock.

    Your also very correct that we don't want to get "too greedy"(lots of money to be made hitting singles and doubles), but we do need to be a little greedy. After all our winners have to amount to more than our losers if we are to achive alpha


    Feb 7, 2011. 09:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • An Options Strategy for China MediaExpress Holdings [View article]
    Hello BTO,

    Thank you for reading my article. Also thank you for giving me a chance to clarify this part. You bring up a a valid question.

    With a put writing (selling) strategy I am substituting options for stock. Because I am not actually trading any shares of stock I also don't buy any stock. PUTS become very confusing to those getting started with options because it is like trying to drive a car looking through a mirror. When one is SHORT a put it is similar to being LONG the stock. Conversely when one is LONG a PUT it is the same as being SHORT a stock. Feels like looking through a mirror doesn't it? Even people that have a lot of experience transpose the terms from time to time.

    If I sell a $13 put (and become short the put) it is the same as writing an insurance policy to someone. If the stock closes on the expiration day* below $13 I will have to buy the stock from the person at $13 regardless of the current price. Taking it to the next step lets assume I sold the insurance policy for $2. If we take the strike price of $13 minus the premium I received of $2 then the maximum I can lose is $11. If at the time I sold the option the stock was trading at $14 then the maximum I could lose is $14. Thus selling the put option lowers the total amount I could lose when comparing the same amount of shares in play.

    Instead of waiting until the options expire I can BUY the option back in the open market in the same manner that I sold it in. By buying the option back that I wrote I "flatten" out my position and end up with a net zero position. If I am able to buy the option back at a later time for only a $1 I would then be able to keep the difference between the sale price and the price I bought it for later (which is what I did do with CCME). So I did not buy the stock I bought the options back that I had originally sold (wrote).

    Does that make sense? if not please feel free to ask again and I will go through it a different way. Plus please note that I will be writing a multiple article series on options starting from the very basics and moving to advanced theory.



    *technically at any time for American style but for simplicity we will assume only on the expiration day here
    Feb 7, 2011. 05:41 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • An Options Strategy for China MediaExpress Holdings [View article]
    Hello 993,

    Thank you for reading my article. I am pleased that you found it important and worth your time to comment about.

    Please note that there is a time delay from the time an author submits an article and the time it gets reviewed, edited and posted on SA. At the time I wrote the article this weekend I was short puts. More than four hours BEFORE the article hit I closed out and became flat CCME. I currently do not have an opinion. I also have a chat room and announced publicly my gain (+468 from this trade) and that I was flat.

    I also record my trading with SA and anyone who actually took the time to read my instablogs and follow up comments with my article about CCME would know this.

    It would also appear that in your rush to share your negative view on CCME that you missed that this article is not about CCME. This article is about lowering risk in trading.

    Perhaps you will write an article about CCME and we will all be able to enjoy your rhetoric further. Best success with your CCME trade if you have one.


    Feb 7, 2011. 02:37 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China MediaExpress Holdings: Investors Crushed in Rush for the Exit [View article]
    CEO issues response
    Feb 7, 2011. 09:19 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China MediaExpress Holdings: Investors Crushed in Rush for the Exit [View article]
    Thanks, I like the messenger reply too.

    I use EF Hutton not Ameritrade. Ok maybe it's Interactive Brokers

    My third grader would not be able to give away all the ice cream. He would eat it first.

    The short interest on NASDAQ is a reflection on both demand and supply.

    We both agree that the sell off on Thursday was largely a result of longs panicking / stopping out in the wake of selling and fear.

    My article is about MWR and CR reports not having merit and while maybe technically within the law I feel unethical. My article is about how I believed the market would digest the MWR and CR reports and the price would recover. From the time I wrote and submitted the article to SA and my buy recommendation via StockTalk near the close on Thursday at < 10.99 CCME price has moved up over 26%. I don't think that is a bad performance for a one day trade. I am still short a small amount of puts.

    GO PACK !!


    Feb 6, 2011. 12:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China MediaExpress Holdings: Investors Crushed in Rush for the Exit [View article]
    Thank you for reading my article. Thank you for also taking the time and thought into posting several comments. I believe you add several key points of discussion and things to think about.

    Your comment:
    "An advanced version of "Shoot the messenger". "
    -When the messenger brings a copy of the National Enquirer that has the name covered up with a cut out of "Wall Street Journal" perhaps it is time to shoot the messenger.

    Your comment:
    "Borrows on CCME have been next to impossible for several months and I can assure you that neither MW nor Citron is anxious to divvy up whatever positions may be available between themselves."

    Sometimes people will say things that give away their level of knowledge and/or understanding of the subject matter. I believe how much value should be placed on your comments will be appropriately applied, as your expertise comes out in your comments.

    Please note that I included as part of my article the short interest for CCME. This comes directly from NASDAQ but if you have a better source that should be examined I am willing to look at it.
    I asked my third-grade son to look at the information on the image and explain to me what he noticed about the numbers in the short interest column and the settlement date column. What my third-grade son told me was that the numbers were getting larger as time moved on.
    For example the amount that we begin with the settlement date of June 15, 2010 is approximately 900,000 shares. Approximately 2 months later the amount of shares shorted grew to 2.4 million shares. Two months after that the amount grew to 4.3 million shares. Two months later again the amount grew to 4.8 million shares. Finally we see the last settlement date of January 14, 2011 displays a short interest of 6.4 million shares.
    How someone is able to look at the data and conclude that borrows have been next to impossible is behind my comprehension.
    Additionally I asked members in my chat room to let me know who was able to borrow shares on Thursday of the crash. Several members of different firms responded that they had shares available. So even in the middle of the drop in price not only were shares not "next to impossible" but were actually relatively easy to borrow considering the price action. Furthermore options for CCME were liquid with rich premium. I traded over 200 contracts between Thursday and Friday so I have first-hand knowledge of the liquidity. Creating a synthetic short position with options would not have presented anyone with an actual understanding of the mechanics of the market with a problem.

    You write:
    "The cogent takeaway from the work MW and Citron are doing is "Fore"."

    Then further in another comment:
    "I didn't write a word of the MW report. As a matter of fact I have only skimmed it because the opportunity to short the company is limited and excessively rich at the moment. I have seen the SAICs. I have seen earlier research that I am sure was relayed to MW"

    I believe you intended "read" instead of "write". Here is my question though?? How does one criticize an article (backed up with links and sources) when the commenter has not even read the subject matter and not expect to look totally irrelevant? I am not saying you are obtuse. I will say my first grader knows to not try to give me a book report on a book he did not read (In all fairness to you my first grader just learned this very lesson about a week ago. So previous to a week ago I would have to go back to using my third grader as an example)

    You wrote:
    "1. Implying collusion on the issuance of the reports reflects a complete unfamiliarity with the game or the players."
    Again you demonstrate your lack of game theory knowledge. There is more than one type of collusion. For example there is one type of collusion that you refer to that may be simply described as two people talking on the phone to strategize and work together. But there is also another form of collusion which is sometimes referred to as "implied collusion". In this form of collusion participants do not actively strategize with one another directly. For example using what happened with CCME. After the CR report came out and was successful in creating a level of uncertainty and fear in the market the window of time to get the maximum impact of a negative “report” is obviously either Thursday or Friday. It certainly appears based on spelling and grammar errors that the MWR report was rushed. Had the MWR report waited until next week I believe the impact of the CR report would have diminished due to the many errors(along with event risk such as a dividend announcement, earnings etc..). While CR may or may not have known about the upcoming MWR report, MWR clearly could see the impact of the CR report and acted accordingly. The net effect of the implicit collusion to the price of the stock is the same as explicit collusion. Implicit collusion happens every day in the markets and can be easily witnessed watching the actions of market makers on a level to screen. Implicit collusion is one of the most fundamental building blocks of technical analysis.

    "Last I looked CCME is represented by a US based PR firm"
    While this may be true but I think it's safe to bet that most people reading the article understand a PR firm is not about to start issuing statements without approval of top management. In fact and as I already stated previously CCME did issue a press release refuting the articles and committed to a further press release providing more detail. The timing of the events is equivalent for an American CEO receiving a phone call on Christmas morning at 3 a.m. advising that the stock price is falling due to a negative Internet posting.

    CCME may ultimately be shown to be a fraud but I believe it's very clear CR and MWR "research reports" would simply be coincidence. I also believe that fraud and corruption in Chinese accounting is rampant and many companies will implode large and small. There is no rule of law and I am unaware of any one of significance who has been prosecuted for defrauding a foreigner. It's basically the wild wild West and if you don't do your homework you can get your head handed to you very quickly. The same environment that creates this high level of risk also creates very great opportunities for those that are able to filter the good from the bad. After extensive research the CR and MWR papers carry as much weight and credibility to me as the average pennystock pump e-mail I receive daily.


    Feb 6, 2011. 02:36 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China MediaExpress Holdings: Investors Crushed in Rush for the Exit [View article]
    Hello Mike,
    Thank you for reading my article and I hope you found it of value.

    I would like to address your comments and hopefully shed some light.

    I use EDGAR Online for my source which SA recommends and I feel is a very useful and reliable tool. Most of my work used to be done by reading over SEC filings and I have found that EDGAR does a great job of making the information clear and more easily accessible.

    Yes, technically your accurate that Vanguard, Goldman et al. could have already sold as of this post. On the other hand, had you done the research you would have been able to find the publicly available disclosures (either on EDGAR or on the SEC website of the amounts bought and held. As the MWR and CR papers clearly demonstrate there is a lot of mud flying around with many shorts hoping some will stick. You can also see that I made a lot of money with CCME and at this time while still short put options I don't have enough to care. I will however follow up your comment for those investors in CCME as a courtesy. According to EDGAR Online:

    During the quarter ending 12/31/10 there are seven filings and the net result is that Institutional Holders INCREASED holdings by almost 124K shares net. This includes new investors of CCME and some that increased their holdings. 4 out of the 7 filings increased and three including one for 48 shares decreased. None that I listed decreased the number of shares held including GS and Vanguard. Is it possible that they sold since the 12/31/10 filings? Yes, but it is also possible they increased. Given that the trend of Institutional Holders is going up over the last year not down I believe it would be reasonable to assume that the trend will continue. You give the appearance that the data I used is old but this is all public information. I am not sure if this part of your comment is a result of your lack of knowledge and understanding or if your trying to twists the facts around like MWR and CR did. Maybe a little of both.

    Moving to the issue. It is highly obvious that it was a poorly done (that is open to debate as it does appear that it aided in the price destruction of CCME) hack job of twisting words in my opinion. Notice how the word "OR" is used with AAPL or distributor. This simple word is the difference between losing a legal battle and being able to say "technically correct". Normally I see this type of quality in the daily emails about penny stocks. Take away the emotion and the logic becomes clear. does appear to sell apple products and one has to assume that a public company of this size is going through proper channels to source the product. Especially so if they are announcing it. Announcing that your offering aaple products and issuing a statement that your buying the product from a distributor is in my opinion the same as written by MWR as "CCME says they have a contract with AAPLE or one of their distributors". This on its face appears to only suggest that CCME is claiming a AAPL partnership but technically they get away with it by adding in smaller print "or distributor"
    You must ask yourself why put that in there? what purpose is it? its easy to see that has aapl products on the site. I believe CR and MWR are hoping that it will not matter and that people will hit the sell button and ask questions later.

    It would appear that your not very familiar with Chinese and/or language. If you are than I would once again stand up and say that your twisting words to arrive at a pre-set conclusion instead of letting the fact bring you to where they may. I happen to have lived in Asia, studied Asian history, been to countless cities in China and have done business with many Chinese companies. In short I believe I am qualified to respond to the wording of your comment. Please note to those reading this comment that I have not looked into the accuracy of the wording of Mike's comment and will purely go on what is in quotes assuming that they are correct and in context.
    From the comment - 'advertising contract with Switow magazine, an online platform...". Why is it not What is Switow magazine? ' This is no more or less than a simple translation difference in terms. Many Chinese learn British English due to Hong Hong, Australia and New Zealand as well as American English.
    What Americans often call an "online catalog" means the same in Chinese as "online magazine" from a Chinese translation point of view. I often hear/read about American companies pointing out their "online catalogs". If you Google the term you will have 17.7M results. Picking apart a translation is a useless endeavor at best. We have words and meanings they do not and vise-versa. I feel like I am beating a dead horse on this one as it appears very obvious. I understand how to understand what a Chinese person is trying to say probably better than 90% of Americans so maybe it is just easier for me.

    Anyone can sell basically anything on Amazon so i don't really think your example supports your argument. In fact I have sold products including name brand products (not AAPLand I never attempted to sell AAPL products) on the Amazon site.

    Management did respond late in the afternoon on Thursday. Looking at the afterhours trading you can pretty clearly see when the response hit the wire. I wrote about it with StockTalk on SA and anyone who follows me would have seen my update that included the price was rising rapidly.

    I do agree that your last statement is accurate. Or at least I hope that this answer was "soon".

    Lastly, my motivation. I could care less what CCME does. Other than having a very few put contracts written to capture the sky high time decay that is more related to the IV of the options than it is to the company I have no interest in CCME. In fact just a few days ago I was short the stock as I felt it was overbought. What surprises me is why so many people that are invested (and did their homework so they know what is going on when crap like this hits the wire) are so upset. This in my opinion gave a great short term opportunity to buy shares on the cheap. For long term investors this is a non event and will amount to nothing more than a tiny blimp on the chart that you can point at and say "I bought some more of this temporary dip" to your friends.
    One thing that I have not read about much is that even if the write ups are designed to open the window to let the shorts out before earnings and or an announcement of a dividend, there could be an even better way to make money. Perhaps shorts used the sell off to cover the shorts but MAYBE they also used the extreme dip to buy cheap. Think about it. You cover your short and then you buy and in doing so you double your gains as apposed to just covering shorts. It would be so perfect. You know that people will put holes and find that the paper is without merit but not until after the price drops. Later the price recovers and you get to go out twice for celebration as you cover your long. (maybe I should do the research on this and write an article on how this could be done)


    Feb 5, 2011. 02:30 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China MediaExpress Holdings: Investors Crushed in Rush for the Exit [View article]
    Hello SOS,

    Thank you for reading my article and posting your comment. I had some trouble finding the release date but here is my source. Please reply with your source as well as I would like to have the correct date displayed. www.earningswhispers.c... they list 2/7/11

    There is also another date I looked at but I dismissed it because it appears to be wrong. shows a reporting of 3/23/11

    Please feel free to reply.


    Feb 4, 2011. 04:43 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Barnes & Noble: Has This Stock's Story Ended? [View article]
    A quick follow up to the article.
    I shorted BKS calls today from the spike of the BGP news. I am also short BGP and will hold the short until Monday (assuming the BK filing will happen late Friday) when I believe the stock will be half the price it is today.

    Evidence suggests that BKS will have the same fate at BGP. BKS is are not known first in the online book space and their operations are losing money. The dividend is a big issue obviously and will likely be in the news soon (in a negative way).
    Feb 2, 2011. 04:41 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Robots Controlling the Stock Market Strike Again [View article]

    My point was that your opinion was not backed up with any facts in support. You very well may be correct but it appears to me that this article is more of a rant than anything of value. Perhaps others get value from this article and if so great.

    You comment on my trading and future results confirms my original thought that you put nothing into your research. I am known for being a short. Indeed I am short stocks over 98% of my trades. I also have a track record in both up and down markets. You would know this if you had done even the most minimal due diligence (google and I come up on top so not real hard to find) as my trading results are public in my journal and I mod a chat room where I make live calls. So you didn't need to guess you could actually know.

    Best of luck 'dude'

    Feb 1, 2011. 11:38 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment