100 bagger ?, page-588

Well after much soul searching I’ve finally decided to top up based on the asymmetrical risk reward proposition.

I’ve been keeping a growing list of factors that sit as my investment case (I titled it ‘GSW investment case - despite the scandal’). I’m normally a prolific lurker on this site and rarely post but figured I would share this list in case anyone finds it interesting / helpful:


- Major contracts wouldn’t yet show revenue so not fair to mark as a negative
- We’re going to make you rich (Amazon)...
- ...either (a) disgracefully unconscionable and reputation-damaging comments (for senior people with serious reputations - Bane) or (b) well-founded
- significant lead time to escrow release
- paying themselves more. On surface very ill-considered (ultra cynical view: making best of a terrible situation by skimming out what cash they can), though would have been board approved pre-scandal and more likely is an indication of the board’s internal faith in BAU.
- multiple languages comment supports amazon
- significant tech development hires since ann indicating busily working on implementations? (Or cynical view: rescuing cr@p tech?)
- well-resourced institutional investor bought in at $4 - who surely did detailed DD and had verbal insights from management. Couldn’t have just bought on gut feel without an investment and internal approval process. Ditto for Weislitz earlier investment.
- well-reputed new hires to board. Any prudent, self-respecting and experienced executive / director would DD the company / role and stay miles away from something that has suffered such obvious ‘scandal’ unless the facts on the ground ran contrary to this.
- note governance review / enhancement by top 4 accounting / consultancy firm, plus top tier legal oversight since ‘scandal’ - which gives important context to recent activities, or more to the point, lack of disclosures of further bad news
- recent Amazon developments on last mile delivery tech (may not be there long term or might buy out the tech cheap if they love it, but nevertheless rerates current SP base)
- The Lowdown on Seeking Alpha: quality of his/her thinking and analysis is irrefutably excellent in my view. His/her various updates include noting making direct contact with numerous clients validating announcements and quality of the tech
- other thorough, clearly intelligent posters confirming quality of tech (Sirocco, Gan Gans, MaryJane). Also I should credit these individuals with articulating almost all of the points at various times that I’ve mapped out here
- NA Williams clients referencing technology / initiatives of this nature in their quarterly reports; being included on GSW website
- persistent institutional buying / retail selling recently.

It’s easy to be cynical / critical of GSW for different reasons. But in my opinion, when you combine all of the above points it becomes too hard to ignore. And if it drops to 0.0 cents, I lose a few bucks. If NAW and /or Amazon are really there; if Fidelity did appropriate forecasting based on insights from their meetings with GSW, well... GLTAH.