top up, page-7

I'm not posting as a job, I'm trading as a job.

If you are concerned as to why I am posting, then please feel free not to read. For others, I explained here:

https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/response-to-glaucus.3340110/#post-23858376

I don't think there's any point in false balance - he said/she said serves no one. I clearly have a very jaundiced view of MSB, for reasons that I can't go into without violating the TOU. Suffice it say that their past behaviour means that when they come out with an announcement, my first question is always 'what are they hiding?' - often it appears that by comparing their statements over time, many things. This was a pattern of behaviour with CDU and SGH as well, and each of them had big rallies before the denouement - but in the meantime it pays to wait for a catalyst.

With QIN, there is a clear catalyst - they haven't been entirely candid about their customers, whilst the MIS accounts don't tally with the company accounts. These things are indisputable. Some might choose to back companies unquestioningly, but because I'm long/short I don't have to. On hotcopper, it means I don't often post about my longs, because there's almost always an overwhelmingly positive attitude towards companies. Sitting around in a circle jerk serves no purpose. But when I'm bearish of a stock, then calling out the rampers when they post things that aren't true serves to provide balance - and chatting with the more sensible longs also helps me to understand the bull case in my shorts. Ultimately, I'm always persuadable by a reasoned argument backed by evidence.​

and here:

https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/celgene-18-months.2970455/#post-19957469

As for shorting, I go short bad companies and long good ones. I don't randomly pick on a company and go "I'm going to short that one!!" - that would be stupid and dangerous. Rather I try to seek out companies that demonstrate some of the following characteristics - questionable business model, large funding requirements/debt, promotional management with large cash remuneration, dodgy corporate governance, unjustifiable valuations and/or outright fraudulent activity. Another massive red flag is any company that complains about short sellers. I usually try to stick to shorting companies that demonstrate several of these characteristics.

Despite MSB displaying several of these characteristics, I'm not currently short them because I also like an imminent catalyst, and I'm wary of a ramp/idiot rally that might provide a better entry point for a short, and there's always the risk that a daft pharma comes along and buys them, like in the HP/Autonomy debacle.

It would be a mistake to equate shorting with stock price manipulation - one of the biggest risks a short faces, especially with unscrupulous management - is a company engineered short squeeze. Stock manipulation almost universally takes place to the upside.​