given2invest

Yah his first book is probably the best value book in the last 20 years.

Can't do that with billions under management. His current goal is to probably manage a trillion. In his defense, he is probably doing it for the public good - not to get richer.

:bangs head against the wall: I never said TRE was a fraud! I never said TRE was a fraud! I never said TRE was a fraud! But all we need to know about this situation is your first line: And that's my only point.

Not sure how that will change anything. Just because this turns out to be a fraud or not a fraud, how will it make a difference next time as the situation won't be identical, no? If you ask a person what he learned and he responds that he will know in a couple of months, than I personally completely agree with him. There are only a handful of people out there that do know all the facts. All the facts are not yet out. You/given2invest and Hester are basically responding to every single post on this topic, it seems within 15-30 minutes of posting (what is that about, why are you two so passionate about TRE and telling everyone else they are fools? If you think everyone else are fools, than let them be fools...you two will not change them), that it is a foregone, virtually 100% conclusion that Sino-Forest is a bogus company and a lousy investment at any price AND that everyone else, except for you two, the shorts, and Muddy Waters, are absolute fools if they think otherwise. It is impossible to say that Sino-Forest is a complete fraud and it is impossible to say that Muddy Waters is mostly correct. The truth will come out one way or another...eventually. Therefore, in a few months or more, when the truth is much more certain, cwericb will know whether or not his personal analysis is correct or not. How can you confirm that you have actually learned anything without knowing the truth? Whoa, relax. I think I went a week without even posting in this thread. Hyperbole much? Isn't the purpose of this board to exchange ideas and information and thoughts? Would it be better if this was only a one sided conversation or if people just posted less? You are free to not read the thread. In regards to "lessons learned", you completely misinterpreted my point. I have no idea if this is a fraud or not and I have no idea if it will end up going back to 20. My point is there will be little "lessons learned" here as in either situation, fraud or no fraud, you can't approach the next "short attack" and say it's going to come out exactly or even closely like this will end up. The only lesson to be learned here is if you can't do your own due diligence and prove something is legitimate after serious doubts have been raised, it's probably best to stay away. But isn't that the first lesson in investing anyway? Doing your own due diligence and not relying on anyone else?

What about Enron? Worldcom? Hasn't it been proven very very very large and established companies can be rife with fraud? It doesn't have to be a complete fraud for you to completely lose your money.

Not sure how that will change anything. Just because this turns out to be a fraud or not a fraud, how will it make a difference next time as the situation won't be identical, no?

Thanks. We rock!

"If nothing else this whole episode should be a bit of a learning experience." What did you learn?

nice analysis, agree

You should totally contact cmattporter and exchange ideas!

Still kind of absurd. Here's 5 cents a quarter! In 75 years we will have returned today's stock price!

this guy is the worst. RIP

Very good article on the matter. DEXO is surely a long term zero. The business model makes newspapers look like it's on the cutting edge of technology. I still get a yellow pages occasionally delivered to me. What a waste of trees/paper. Hopefully DEXO and Supermedia will emerge from chapter 11 2.0 with enough debt that makes the equity a good short again. Agree on all fronts. This has been a perennial value trap.

Lol If you call the tail of a dog a leg. How many legs does a dog have? BeerBaron :D

yes, been having problems

The oddest part of this is MS and GS advising. I wouldn't touch this on either side.

What is this in english? Last I checked, there was only one way to compute ytd returns. I'm not exactly sure what you are saying here. I'm up 25% but that's largely due to one position, CLUB, which is my largest and more than doubled.

first pharagraph: That valuation report by Credit Suisse is garbage. "I'm just gonna slap on a random percent to my NAV calculation to get it a ballpark figure that Sino could trade around." What is 20% of a number that has a huge probability of being made up? Also, it seems like they already had a neutral rating on the stock when it was trading around $20+. Now they are still neutral when its a fraction of that? This is the exact reason people SHOULDN'T have faith in RBC, Dundee, or any other major bank. Their numbers are garbage. Can you honestly tell me that any of these guys sitting in their Toronto office have spent any credible time on the ground in China to the same extent someone like Block who lives there has? And yeah, Block released his report for free. He made money off his position rather than through subscription. He got paid one way or another for his work. How is that any different from the BB analysts who get paid relative to how well their Ibanking arm can market shares of Sino Forest? What a post! Well said, sir.

That's not a spinoff but an IPO of a subsidiary where the current shareholders do not receive new shares in the IPO'd subsidiary. In that scenario, you're correct. In the event of an actual spinoff, you end up with options in both companies. I'm not sure how they calculate new strike prices but it can't be that hard. It probably is calculated based on first day close or something. No idea, but I'm certain you get new options in newco and a new strike in oldco.

It's a CEO letter to shareholders!!!

Off topic, but this could be the funniest line in a CEO letter I've ever read: http://www.tanzanianroyaltyexploration.com/s/ChairmansCorner.asp?ReportID=454152&_Type=Chairmans-Corner&_Title=Loaning-Shares-to-Opposition-Will-Only-Hurt-Yourself April 29, 2011 Loaning Shares to Opposition Will Only Hurt Yourself Dear Friends: Many of you have received solicitations to borrow your debt-free TNX/TRE shares. This request has come from brokers for a fund that had sold (shorted) over 6,000,000 shares - without the immediately ability to make delivery. At the same time another fund has purchased over 9,000,000 shares. As your company's trading volume grows, some hedge funds play a short junior/long major OTC derivative without discrimination (other than volume) with respect to the situation they short. You can review the accomplishments of TRE/TNX by checking out the web presentation of our Annual General Meeting, followed by the Question & Answer period, on our corporate website at: www.tanzanianroyalty.com. There are FOUR specific things I would like to emphasize in this particular missive: 1. First of all, I want to encourage you not to lend your shares to the opposition who is frankly being pressed to borrow. You will only hurt yourself by doing so. 2. Next, I strongly recommend that you go to our corporate website to obtain an update on what your company has become. 3. Everyone should be grateful to the Geier Fund for their confidence in our future prospects and their investment in us which is formidable to say the least! 4. Although technical analysis can be read differently between analysts, I would like to call your attention to a 5 year Cup & Handle that has been building in our stock. Respectfully, Jim Sinclair

TRE (NYSE) is a total joke of a company, actually

/thread

I can sue you for $6 Billion. Let me know how much SAC ends up paying out. And people can get a little bit paranoid? LOL. That's the one time you should have used hyperbole. Where did I say it's ok to manipulate markets? Where did I say that market manipulation doesn't happen? All I am saying is the hyperbole on this website is absurd, especially when it comes to attacking short sellers, SAC, and the like. I am in no way saying Steve Cohen is a good man or that he has not done anything illegal or immoral in his life. I can assure you the federal government has been spending years and millions trying to nail him and thus far has gotten nowhere. But to damn the whole firm and it's 90 portfolio managers and 600 employees because of one event seems a bit extreme to me. Further, I think many on this board are doing themselves an extreme disservice dismissing all short reports immediately just because of who the author is or who the author is associated with. Why not look at the content of the report and dispute it there? If I must state one more time: I am not short ANT STOCKS WHATSOEVER, let alone a china stock. I use SPY and IWM to hedge my portfolio. Shorting is very difficult and I have found it to be a waste of my time and prefer to look for longs. I do not manage money professionally anymore so I have the luxury of ignoring shorts, though professional hedge fund managers usually don't have that luxury.

"Step 1 - Infiltrate message boards. Become someone that noone suspects and create multiple aliases. The more influential the message board the better." Wait, you think people on here either work, support, or are in cahoots with muddy waters? :D :D :D :D :D :D Sorry buddy, the 10 guys on this board with funds that manage $10 Million aren't exactly the people who are going to move markets in TRE. The conspiracy theorists on this board are hilarious. Can't anyone take the other side of your arguments without being evil?