LookingConfident's  Instablog

Member Tim Eriksen makes what is an interesting comment on the Looksmart Is Worth More Than Its Cash article, when he says:

"I think your understanding of how companies can repurchase shares is flawed. -- It is my understanding that they cannot push up the bid price. It is considered illegal in the U.S. for the company to do so. They can buy at the last posted price but could not just go out and set the bid at $1 or higher"

He's referring to John Gilliam's thought that, the recently authorized $1m share buyback authorization [allows Looksmart] to push the stock higher than the existing $1 price-making a proposed PEEK Shareholder Consortium offer, all but moot. [And] Given the relatively low volume usually traded each day,-- they [Looksmart] could just put in a limit order to buy 200,000 shares at up to $1.00.

But who makes any decisions as to when do they decide, on what to buy - when it comes to any such 'buy-back' situation?

Today a 10,000 shares bargain presented itself and was one that I felt Looksmart should have 'snapped up', but appears to not have done so? Nor, did the PEEK shareholder consortium.

Bid: 0.90 x 1700
Ask: 0.92 x 10000

My question, is why?

The irony of it all would seem (to me), that anyone who places their 'faith' in others to purchase shares for them (be it through a proven corrupt market making 'system', brokers, etc), virtually become "owned" by those very persons who are making any buying decisions, for them.

Can someone tell me that this isn't so? That we (Looksmart, PEEK, et al) are not allowing others to make and influence (buying) decisions, for us?

Or, that we continue to allow them to "make markets", to suit who?

To further understand what I am alluding to you need to read this following short story, as linked below.

<"Old man, old man, tell me: Is the bird alive or is it dead?"

The wise old man looked at the boy, thought for a moment and said, "The bird is as you choose it to be." >

http://michaelhyatt.com/it-is-as-you-cho...

Both LookSmart (as linked) and the PEEK Shareholder Consortium (as linked) are both 'in the market' to buy shares in the company.

Yet NEITHER (it appears) got to snap up that 10,000 shares parcel, as was being offered.

Looksmart has told us of having allotted $1 million to spend. - And in spite of the company seemingly is under attack from at least two fronts (PEEK and a threat of being delisted) the management of Looksmart is (as the above story goes) clearly allowing itself to be hijacked (or, is it being controlled?) by someone else?

Just who are the 'real' hijackers could well be a thought to entertain, no? Who actually "runs this shit" (Looksmart), may well prove to be an even better question to ponder on a reasonable answer for?

**********
(click to e

**********

As always, only my own opinion being expressed.

LOOK: At 3:47PM EDT: 0.90 0.01 (+1.58%)

LC

Disclosure: Long LOOK

.