Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cica!iuvax!rutgers!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!cmm1 From: cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Atari Stock Update (hit n now if you don't want to read this) Message-ID: <1990Aug23.160044.25447@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> Date: 23 Aug 90 16:00:44 GMT References: <1990Aug23.032316.2096@chinet.chi.il.us> Sender: news@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Daily News) Reply-To: cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) Organization: Columbia University Lines: 143 In article <1990Aug23.032316.2096@chinet.chi.il.us> saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Steph\ \ en Jacobs) writes: >I've really tried to keep a cork in it over this. Awww, God bless you for being so considerate. After all, this group does exist to exchange ideas. Why not exchange em? >Approximately 82% of the >common stock of Atari Corporation is in the hands of insiders. Big deal. There are a lot of closely held companies out there that haven't dumped half of their value in the last week or so. BTW, ATC is trading at **2 5/8** as of 4pm Wednesday. What's your point? >The action of >the stock price is not comparable to the action of the price of a broadly held >stock. You are full of it. I suggest you reread your correspondence course text of stock analysis. The shares held by insiders are not really a consideration in this context. You may as well imagine that they don't exist. If the insiders hold them, there is no net effect on the AMEX price of the stock. IF they sell any shares, the increase in publicly held shares with the same basic fundamentals will cause the price to fall. Again, what is your point? >The who decided he didn't like Atari and is now a I guess that is me. It sure is nice to be so loved. And you are right, I do not like Atari Corp. I like their product, but the company is on very shaky financial ground. I don't think you will be able to find a single financial analyst who will disagree with that. They are cash poor and have no hope of raising reasonably priced funds due to their crappy bond rating. They can't raise fund in the stock market because nobody wants to touch their stock. It dropped 1/2 point yesterday to 2 5/8 on 3.5 times its normal volume. >cheerleader for the (groundless) idea that Atari is about to fold claims to ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hehe, pull your head out of the sand and accept the numbers pal. >know something about securities analysis. If his employers believe that, we >can expect a large bank to fold its US operations before Atari folds. This Well, that is one aspect of my job. I have received a lot of training for this. What do you claim to base your knowledge on? Did you find a Stockbrokers Guide to the Universe inside a box of cracker jacks? >He has also beamishly repeated predictions of disaster for Atari after being If by "disaster" you mean that I said that they were in trouble, then you are correct. They are. I have said several times that I don't think they are iminently going Chapter 11. >shown that basically, Atari must inevitably show several good year-to-year >earnings compariasons (which, by the way, probably has a lot to do with why Who showed me? Where? When? Show me again! I must have missed that brilliant piece of analysis. They haven't earned a respectable profit in years. Who are you kidding? >people who didn't own Atari stock didn't scramble to buy it: the smart ones >expected the improvement). No, it goes more like this: The people who owned the stock before took such a viscious paper loss that they are reluctant to sell and realize their loss. People that were smart enough to stay away from the dog are sitting back and laughing to themselves at those who are too pig headed to admit they've been bitten. The stock market is generally pretty efficient about discounting future earnings potential and this is now showing up with the historic lows for Atari stock. >This forum is a convenient place to swap information about STs and programs fo\ r >them. One plausible-sounding jerk can give new readers a badly distorted >idea of what's going on. Sure I could hit 'n', but this guy's a menace. Well, who is the plausible jerk? It is interesting that you are resorting to name calling. The is the normal tactic for a person with no grounding in reason. I guess that is apparent when you say that a person who is presenting hard fact is a menace. That is certainly the kind of "menace" that Atari needs to get their act together. >A little of what I consider the truth: Atari had a decent quarter. They seem ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Ah, another pearl of wisdom. I can't wait. Decent quarter??? Hahahaha! Yeah, maybe decent because their profits have been practically non-existant for so long that anything seems an imporvement. This is NOT a sound basis to say they had a "decent" quarter. They had a BAD quarter. It just doesn't look SO bad because the ones before were horrid. >to have finished putting the losses from the Federated catastrophe on the No, I don't think they are even close to putting the Federated mess behind them. They are trying to stretch it out as long as possible. Believe me, Wall St. is not stupid. If the stock is trading as such a tiny price there IS a reason for it. The stock market is a VERY efficient market. If people were interested in the stock and wanted to buy it, the price would go up. BUT THEY AREN'T!! Are you saying that all these investors are "menaces" and that they "don't know what they are doing", ad nauseam... >The stock is very narrowly held, which makes it EXTREMELY volatile. For Atari Actually, until recently I hasn't been volatile at all. It has been following a nice long steady curve in the downward direction. It hasn't made any big movements up or down until very recently. If you had been studying the stock you would have noticed this. There have been no big surprises with this stock (until recently obviously). >to have another decent quarter, they don't have to do anything new. They have >several opportunities to generate good rather than decent results: any reason- >able TT introduction, any reasonable 'Christmas ST' package, a second generati\ on >Portfolio or major Christmas sales of Lynx could be REAL helpful. I don't >expect any of those, but again: Atari can have decent results without them. This has all been discounted by the market already. People take this into account when they value a stock. > >So anyway: whatever you think of the ST or of the way Atari Corporation deals >with people, they are staying in business as long as the chairman wants them >to stay in business. Which is probably going to be a long time. I'm sure it makes a hell of a tax shelter for the Tramiels. > Steve J. Chris Mauritz p.s. Let's see what happens if/when shooting starts in the Middle East. The Japanese Yen will take a nose dive. What does this have to do with Atari you ask? Plenty! Atari's main trade facility is denominated in Yen. ------------------------------+--------------------------- Chris Mauritz |D{r det finns en |l, finns cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |det en plan! (c)All rights reserved. | Send flames to /dev/null | ------------------------------+---------------------------