Category Archives: Value

Drum Beats Grow Louder for EcoSynthetix Bio-Adhesive Commercialization

EcoSynthetix PlantWe continue to believe Ecosynthetix (ECO.TO or US OTC: ECSNF) is VERY close to an inflection point for the commercial adoption of its DuraBind bio-adhesive for the wood panel market which consumes $Bs in adhesive per year. Their eco-friendly adhesive is intended to replace the industry standard  which contains formaldehyde and has come under increasing critique for its health dangers, starting with regulations in California.

Yet investors are currently paying only a modest premium to ECO’s US $57M in net cash to participate in this long term growth opportunity. ECO is not a client of our investor relations consultancy, but we would love to represent them, and given the compelling nature of the story – this author established a position starting about a year ago (too early it now seems, but happy to be Long Term!)

These recent developments support our view:

1) July 27th the EPA finalized a rule to reduce exposure to formaldehyde vapors from certain wood products EPA Formaldehyde Rule Summary

2) Cannacord Genuity recently launched a Sustainability & Special Situations Watch List that highlighted Ecosynthetix – the report should help to expand awareness of this very compelling special situation. (To its credit, ECO has neglected its IR outreach – other than good quarterly update – in favor of focusing all resources on the one thing that really matters: commercialization, and therein lies the valuation discrepancy relative to its rapid potential revenue ramp).

3) Ecosynthetix reported excellent progress in its commercialization efforts, which involve industrial testing, in its Q2 reporting:
ECO is currently live with 10 customers, representing over 50 manufacturing lines. ECO estimates each line could account for US $500k – $3M in annual revenue. Further, to put this in perspective, there are more than 1,100 wood composite lines in the world. Canaccord estimates ECO’s current production capacity of 235M pounds per year as equating to approximately  C$190M in revenue, or less than 2% of the total global adhesives market.

ECO’s longest trial has been proceeding over a year or more and accounts for 5 million square feet of produced and sold. One of the company’s customers started its process to be formaldehyde free two years ago and looked at 217 chemistries, eventually short-listing three solutions and performed industrial testing on their products and is currently evaluating only EcoSynthetix. ECO stated on its Q2 call that 10M square feet of board have now been produced using its adhesive.

ECO is very active in raising awareness and driving adoption of its bio-based polymer. Its products are being evaluated by 7 of the top-15 global wood-based panel manufacturers, resin technology providers that provide the PMDI resin used in chip boards, furniture manufacturers as well as big box retailers. EcoSynthetix has indicated that it hopes these tests could lead to commercial orders in the near term.

ECO defines commercial success as running continuously on one line for 30 days. It has run continuously for one or two weeks (and produced 10M sq feet of panels for sale), but for various reasons (largely due to the logistics and processes learning curve involved in bringing a new adhesive into the production process) it has not yet hit its stated benchmark for commercial success but importantly there have been no issues that are not reasonably rectified – and the testing has enhanced ECO’s ability to bring new lines on line expediently.

4) Major retailers are also helping to lead the adoption trend, as both Ikea and Walmart have publicly announced plans to embrace No Added Formaldehyde (NAF) production for the wood products they offer.

5) Putting their money where their mouth is, CEO Jeff MacDonald recently bought 34,200 shares at C$1.65 on 8/24/16 and ECO’s chairman Paul Lucas bought 10k shares on Friday, 8/19/16 for C$1.72 View ECO Insider Activity Here

While it’s taken a year longer than I first expected for the adoption to transpire – in retrospect is was naive to think large companies would move so quickly, particularly during a period of very robust demand for their existing products – and no real impediment to selling those containing Formaldehyde other than in California.  Trialling new adhesives takes time and disrupts production, which impacts the top and bottom line, so it’s understandable in a period of strong demand that the conversion process would get pushed out a bit.  

From our dialogues with those focused on the ECO story – November/December are typically the slowest periods of production in the wood panel industry – where inventories are being worked down and the ability to convert lines to a new methodology is much less disruptive. 

To be continued.

 

Wireless Infrastructure Microcap Turnaround: Not the Westell You Knew > Decade Ago

Full disclosure – wireless telecom equipment co. Westell Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: WSTL ) is a new client of our our parent, investor relations firm Catalyst Global, but we wouldn’t write this if we didn’t think this idea would reflect well on CG Focus List

Westell Technologies, Inc. (WSTL) is an attractively valued, well funded turnaround story in wireless telecom infrastructure solutions. With the rapid growth in mobile devices & content access – Westell seems well positioned to help infrastructure providers meet this growing demand by better leveraging their existing resources in a cost effective manner.

Catalyst Global’s charge is to raise WSTL’s profile amongst small and microcap investors and as part of that effort, Westell will be presenting at the LD Micro “Main Event” Conference on Dec. 3rd in Los Angeles and at the Benchmark Company Micro Cap Conference in Chicago on December 10th.

Further, Westell will report Q2 results on Weds. Oct. 28th and host a call Thurs., Oct 29th at 9:30 a.m. ET: Q2 Call/Webcast Details – October 29th @ 9:30 am ET

Westell is progressing through a turnaround let by a talented and wholly new senior management team most of whom joined in 2015, including:

  • CEO – Tom Gruenwald (Tellabs & AT&T) – Feb. 2015
  • CFO – Tom Minichiello (Tellabs, United Technologies & Andrew) – 2013
  • SVP WWide Sales – Brian Brouillette (HP, Juniper & Net Optics) – 2015
  • SVP WWide Sales – Chuck Bernstein (TeleCommunication, Tellabs) – 2015
  • CTO – Mike Moran (Alcatel, Netscout, MacAfee & Tellabs) – 2015

Westell’s new team put up a solid performance in the June quarter (their Q1) and are working to achieve further top line and bottom line operating improvements – moving toward a breakeven revenue range of $25-$27M.

Westell’s new team is refocusing the company on new products, new customers and additional markets. They are also making significant headway in cost reductions and margin enhancements in an effort to return to profitability.

  • 
+16% sequential sales growth to $21.6M in Q1’16 (June) with improving gross margin vs. March sales of $18.6M but down from year-ago sales of $27.8M
  • Coming launch of new distributed antenna system will expand product offerings for rapidly growing market for in-building wireless solutions. In-building solutions involve improving the efficiency and quality of wireless service in buildings and other venues to better leverage the existing wireless towers & infrastructure. In-building addresses user experience as well as operator costs – making it a win-win area of opportunity.
  • Existing intelligent cell site management, cell site optimization and rugged outside plant cabinet product lines also offer solid growth potential.

One potential demand stimulus for WSTL could be phase 2 of the Connect America Fund (CAF) The second phase of CAF provides funding for ongoing support to deploy and maintain fixed-location broadband and voice services in high-cost areas at rates comparable to those offered in urban areas. Connect America Fund Background

Valuation: Westell FY 2015 revenues were $84.5M and its enterprise value is $33M, net of $37M in cash, for an EV/sales multiple of 0.4X compared to the average telecom equipment group multiple of 1.1X EV/sales.

Westell’s market cap is $70M with 61M shares outstanding [46.9M Class A & 13.9 Class B] based on recent price of $1.15 (with $0.61 cents per share in cash). WSTL also has $39M in deferred tax assets.

Institutional Ownership: WSTL has attracted solid value-oriented institutional interest with Cove Street, Heartland and Royce owning respectively 15%, 2% and 1.4% of shares outstanding, the latter two funds reflecting well on the underlying investment value of Westell.

Coverage: Just one analyst covers the Company currently – Mike Latimore of Northland Securities in Minneapolis. His report is available on Westell’s IR website.

Changes at Westell Remain Unknown: In closing, while we have found that the Company name has good investor recognition, it’s clear that investor perceptions are generally based on old news – often a decade or older when he Company was much more wireline focused and a major provider of DSL modems.

The prior team sold off the legacy businesses – except the outdoor equipment business – and through M&A built a portfolio of products focused on wireless. And now an entirely new team is rebuilding the sales & marketing effort while also investing in R&D for in-building wireless solutions, in an effort to rekindle growth, and honing in on efficiency and cost reduction opportunities to drive bottomline. The transformation so far in 2015 seems to remain a fairly low profile development.

Now it’s up to the team to execute and like most small companies, it’s probably more of a bumpy ride forward than a linear progression – but they do seem to be focused on the right things have have a solid set of initiatives that make sense for driving improved financial performance, all with a balance sheet that provides the company with as much time as it needs.

Should you have questions or wish to speak to management, please call Tanya Kamatu at Catalyst Global at 212 924 9800 or wstl@catalyst-ir.com

Thanks for reading.

CG Focus List

October 23, 2015

 

Good Looking Falling Knife that Grows Life Saving Organs – BSTG

This is a first look note on Biostage, Inc. (Nasdaq: BSTG) which was spun out of Harvard Bioscience (HBIO) Nov. 2013.  We started taking a closer look at BSTG last week and what we saw seemed very intriguing indeed. Impressive, life saving organ growing technology that has been successfully transplanted into several patients yet their stock is currently getting crushed based on negative investor sentiment, largely retail it seems, following the sudden departure of the CEO a few months ago and persisting negative commentaries regarding a surgeon who had been closely associated with the company and completed the initial transplant surgeries.  The stock closed at $1.67 yesterday for a $17M market cap, despite a $12M cash position, which even burning $1.7M in Q1’15 places a very low valuation on technology with such substantial potential.

Screen Shot 2015-06-02 at 9.57.44 AM

 

 

 

Our non technical explanation of what they do is that BSTG has developed systems and technology that allows them to grow organs/tissue from your own cells which are from your bone marrow.  Like in vitro fertilization but different, instead of an embryo, they are able to provide you with a new trachea or other wind passage (under development).

So far trachea have been grown & transplanted successfully on a compassionate use basis. The BSTG method addresses the problem of replacing critical breathing organs that have been damaged by injury or disease, and it addresses the rejection issues of transplants.  The procedure/organs are not yet approved but they have put forth a clear plan to seek such approvals in the US and Europe and they are publicly affiliated with the Mayo Clinic on their  Hart Trachea product.  Hart plans to file an Investigational New Drug (IND) application with the FDA & similar European body by June 2016 and the Company recently confirmed they are on track with this goal for the BSTG Trachea product which has been granted orphan status by the FDA (Sept 2014). This status provides market protection for 7 years. [Note focus is now Esophagus – with FDA IND filing targeted for end of 2016.

So what’s the business we asked, as the Company was spun out by a medical equipment company. While BSTG has developed an array of products to enable the growth of these organs, the business is to grow and sell organs at prices roughly in the $100-200k range depending complexity, etc.  The gross margin should be easily in the 90% range at normal production levels as the actual Costs of good sold are modest, it’s just the know how, personnel & equipment that’s required to make the magic happen.

And what’s wrong with the picture / driving the stock downward:

1) The pioneering MD closely associated with BSTG and who performed the initial transplants has some credibility issues in the medical world.  For this reason he was removed from the company year and a half ago and the BSTG program was moved from Russia to US & Europe (sounds like a good idea for market credibility), however the perception and stigma remain – probably because the vacuum left by this physician has not yet been visibly replaced.  As a result the physician remains a perception issue for the company as he’s really an industry renegade; the sort of personality that brashly pioneers new things while breaking some of the known conventions. Said another way, not a physician who’s strong on following protocols, adherence to data collection guidelines and postop care, etc. It is in these areas where he is  facing challenges and those perceptions seem to have cast a cloud on BSTG’s technology and future, despite all the other corroborating evidence of efficacy, credibility and potential.

2) Also, founding CEO David Green “resigned” a few months back but what seems clear is he wasn’t getting the job done with the company and so it would appear that corporate governance has responded appropriately.  Making the departure more impactful is that Mr. Green left his post as CEO of the parent company to lead BSTG following its spinoff.  A big selling point of the spinoff was that the CEO and CFO of HBIO were moving to lead BSTG and now the CEO is gone – and the CFO remains now with the added title of acting CEO as well.  Tom McNaughton seems very bright and capable from our conversation with him.

3) Absence of major news flow + overhang from offering done in February at $1.75

Yet we like the story because:

1) The technology is real, has worked on several patients, is moving into regulatory approval processes next year and provides a solution where there really is none. [Since this post, the new Cellframe Platform has been launched and achieved ground breaking results in large animals, focused on the esophagus. The prior trachea work is no longer commercially relevant given the new Cellframe approach [different material, different stem cells and far stronger response.]

2) The approach is supported by institutions such as the Mayo Clinic and others that should come to light later this year.

3) The BSTG team seems strong:  The medical director is very impressive – comes from the DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center in Houston; the CFO & acting CEO seems very solid and the VP R&D comes from Organogenesis where he developed tissue engineered products.  Added great CEO from Genzyme in Jim McGorry.

4) The valuation seems cheap given $12M in cash at 3/31/15 and a market cap of $17M based on yesterday’s close of $1.67.  The Q1 cash burn was $1.7M.  Not sure where the stock goes near term – but it does seem an enterprise value of $5M is probably not appropriate for a company of this genesis and market potential.  This is where Mr. Buffets “voting machine” aspect of the market can make you a lot of money… when the “weighing” aspect of valuation catches up with a business of such potential opportunity.

Like all situations, we are of course interested in the IR opportunity should one present itself, but in the interim we thought we should profile another idea on CG Focus List as we’ve been very remiss in posting our ideas on this forum.  [We have since been hired as IR counsel – our firm Catalyst Global – and are working through October 2016 when the biotech-focused IR firm Jenene Thomas Communications takes over.

Please let us know what you think about BSTG.

CG Focus List
info@cgfocuslist.com

 

EBIX – Analyst at $11B Fund Counters Gotham Smear

I had submitted the following article to Seeking Alpha but it was rejected so rather than play the game, I decided to publish it here.  Hope you find it helpful.  The analyst I site is at a highly credible growth fund manager known for long term ownership of stocks. He of course is not in a position to comment on behalf of his firm so he asked that I withhold his name.  SA should understand that.

Screen Shot 2013-02-22 at 10.20.23 AM

A Screen Capture of my “Declined” advisory from SA.

Interesting that SA refuses to publish my post when they freely published an anonymous report from a newly created firm…  I’m not comfortable with their editorial censorship – particularly given all the things I have read on the site.  It does seem they are not being impartial?  Let the readers decide.

Wanted to pass on the following unsolicited comments from an analyst at a well respected, $11B growth manager regarding EBIX and the Gotham City “Report.” He has particular expertise in accounting in Singapore and accounting in general – clearly something the Gotham writers are assuming most people don’t have. His fund does not have a position in EBIX at this time.

I called the analyst who sent this to me to thank him and get his permission to redistribute it. Among the things he said was the accounting was perfectly normal in his view and even noted that Google has 8 Singapore registered sub’s but mentions none of them in their 10-K (I take him at his word). He said it made sense to him but he could see how they (Gotham) were presenting this as irregular.

Subject: EBIX

Date: February 21, 2013 3:03:13 PM EST

I saw the move in EBIX shares today, and read the “research” by Gotham City Research on Seeking Alpha. Neither I nor my firm have a position in EBIX, but I have been following them since meeting with the company last summer. I saw your comment on the article and thought you may handle IR for the company. If that is the case, I would like to pass along a few observations that may be of use to you. For background, I have an undergraduate degree in accounting and finance, am a CFA charter holder, and at one time negotiated a pioneer tax status extension with the Singapore Economic Development Board (EBD) for a company that had made a number of acquisitions.

1. The credibility questions in regards to the 990 filings do seem spurious, as the author fails to point out that Robin Raina has contributed “about” $2MM a year to his foundation for the past few years, which is perhaps what he was referring to in the interview.

2. The inter company (aka “related party”) loan that seems to be the primary concern of the author would not be disclosed on a consolidated balance sheet, unless the obligation was subject to exchange rate fluctuations, which is almost never the case. If inter company transactions were reflected on consolidated balance sheets, or in footnotes, companies like Google or GE would require hundreds of pages for footnotes alone in their 10-K.

3. To me, knowing accounting, the transactions seem to be fairly obvious, though confusing to those that have never seen cross border IP transactions at the granular level. It appears that US Parent loaned money to Singapore sub, which purchased the intellectual property in the Australia transaction, with the tangible assets staying with the Australian sub. On a consolidated basis, this all rolls up to one clean balance sheet. Why? The company is taking advantage of Singapore’s favorable tax climate by having that subsidiary purchase the intellectual property in the foreign transaction, and then using “transfer pricing” to determine the portion of the revenue for each contract that is “earned” with the IP in Singapore, with the remainder of the revenue “earned” in Australia, thus lowering the effective tax rate. See comment 5 below.

4. The Australia cash flow statement does appear to be somewhat incorrect, in excluding the two offsetting items, but this does not impact the actual cash flow calculation, nor does it impact the consolidated financials since these were all inter company transactions.

5. The difference in the revenues and income for Australia per SEC and ASIC filings seem to be explained in that on a books basis it reflects the tax treatment where a portion of the revenue from a customer is attributed to the intellectual property held by the Singapore sub, while the revenue is actually generated by customers in Australia. For comparison, look at how Google runs revenue through its low tax subsidiaries (i.e. Ireland) on a tax basis, while reporting those revenues as being from the United States in its SEC filings.

6. On the unbilled receivables question, it seems that the company is properly accounting for these. As a refresher, Unearned Revenue is a Balance Sheet account, appearing on the liability side. Unearned revenue can be created if a payment is received for work yet to be completed, or for billings on long term contracts. For a nice summary, see: http://ndhcpa.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/THE-NDH-GROUP-LTD-TIA-ACCOUNTING-FOR-COMPUTER-SOFTWARE-REVENUES-10-08-04.pdf.

7. Why has the company not responded? I imagine it is because they are in a quiet period pre-earnings release, though I have not confirmed this. Impeccable timing on the part of the author.

8. Final note, take a look at the open interest in the Mar 15, 16 and 17 strike puts last week. Unusual? Looks like someone is having a good day.

As for the open interest in options he mentions, he said that on Bloomberg he could see the open interest in March 2013 Puts was limited but ramped substantially a week ago. He said economic studies confirm over and over that options that are 25% or more out of the money, with one month to expiration, are generally like a lottery ticket – they rarely pay off; and that institutional investors would not purchase them. So the aggressive purchase activity is an aberration. From my notes, this is what he saw on Bloomberg – it may be off slightly but the gist is correct and you can look for yourself.

March 2013 EBIX $17 Puts – the open interest went from 700 to 1,900 contracts from 2/13 to 2/14, all trading at the ask price.

March 2013 EBIX $16 Puts – the open interest went from 1,100 to 1800 contracts from 2/13 to 2/14

March 2013 EBIX $15 Puts – the open interest went from 680 to 1,200 contracts from 2/13 to 2/14 – someone paid $0.40 for what is now priced at $2.50

So with the same authority that Gotham questions EBIX, I can state that Gotham – or someone knowledgeable about their plans clearly placed their bets on these options (and perhaps the stock as well) prior to a premeditated plan to attack the stock. They made that investment even before they bought the Gotham website.

Just trying to provide some balance to the story.

Disclosure: I am long EBIX. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Additional disclosure: Have been a shareholder for nearly 10 years and am disgusted by how the media covers this hatchet job as if it were credible – when the author is anonymous and the website was launched last week.

This article is tagged with: Long Ideas

HERE’s The response to my submission.  I can publish it here now because it’s not on SA.

 

 

Declined

Dear David Collins,

Thank you for the submission, and we do welcome counterpoints, but in order to publish we’d need several revisions. First, we’d ask you to identify the fund the analyst is with, or explain why you can’t. Second, the information on the options is interesting, but the allegations of impropriety are not sufficiently supported. Lastly, if the analyst could provide sources supporting their statements, that would add to the credibility.

Sincerely Yours,

SA Editors

The “New” Klondex Mines – Nevada Gold Moving to Initial Production

Feb. 19, 2013     Klondex Mines Ltd.  TSX: KDX or OTCQX: KLNDF    $1.25

High-Grade Nevada Gold Mine Transformed the Past 8 Months
by New CEO, Team, Plan & Funding; Now Targeting Initial Gold
Production by Year-End with a Team That Has Done it Before

Site View Photo

Why Klondex? – Why Now? KDX has been transformed over 8 months by a new Board & management. Key issues have been addressed, a realistic plan and budget confirmed, $30M in funding raised, impressive exploration results continue, & management is executing on its goals to reach initial bulk sampling. The “New Klondex” story is not yet well known, but the company is working to change that.

KDX Table 1

Klondex Strengths:

  • CEO led Midas mine (Newmont) & Hollister mine from start-up to production of
    over 80k gold oz/year
  • Clear plan for continued development & initial production at Fire Creek by end of 2013
  • Capital in place to fund 2013 program
  • Clear goals: new resource, drilling, vent raise, water management, milling agreement, board additions, bulk sampling
  • Recent exploration has shown high grades, Main Zone continuity and discovered new West Zone
  • Under-explored: meaningful exploration potential
  • In heart of Nevada gold country; good geologic, regulatory & infrastructure environment
  • Low-Cap-Ex path to initial production
  • Significant valuation discount on EV/Resource basis
  • “New Klondex” story not well known

KDX Table 2

About: Klondex Mines is a gold exploration & development company focused on its Fire Creek gold property in Nevada with a gold resource of 1.6M oz. indicated and 0.5M oz. inferred.
Klondex has developed an underground decline and workings to access mineralization for in-fill and exploration drilling as well as bulk sampling. Fire Creek is permitted for small scale, bulk sample gold production anticipated to commence by year-end 2013.

Recent Visible Gold Discovery at Fire Creek

Visible Gold

KDX Intercepts

www.cgfocuslist.com   ✪  212.924.9800   ✪   info@cgfocuslist.com

Disclosure: The parent of CG Focus List, Catalyst Global LLC, is currently providing and has provided investor relations services to Klondex Mines Ltd. since 2007. Coverage of Klondex Mines by CG Focus List is completely independent of Catalyst Global’s IR activities and reflects the belief of several major investors that Klondex shares represent significant value at this time. Neither CG Focus List nor Catalyst Global have received compensation of any kind for the preparation and distribution of this Alert.

CG Focus List and/or its affiliates do have long positions in Klondex shares but per our trading policy we have not bought or sold shares in the last five trading days following today’s article and will not effect any transactions in Klondex stock for five days following the distribution of today’s article.

EBIX, Inc. Nasdaq: EBIX – Our Valentine?

Insurance Services/Software Provider EBIX, Inc. (EBIX) – Our Valentine? 2/13/13
(Alert issued intraday, stock closed at $18.42, up $1.24 (7%) on 1.3M shares)

EBIX Chart

13M shares short out of 37M… we hope the shorts are saying… “What me worry?”

Our planned approach for CG Focus List was to prepare a more formal and thorough one page Alert on each idea, but for those who know us and EBIX – and given time constraints – we threw this together to re-flag the idea for you on a day when the stock is acting “better.” We were not planning to profile EBIX at this time, but today’s trading was brought to our attention by a chartist we know who had told us the stock was a “Sell” on a technical basis the past two years; he now thinks it looks attractive but not conclusive.  We have been working on what was going to be our first idea for CG Focus List. It is almost ready for the presses so you will see one more idea in the next few days.  Then we’ll get back to asking for your favorite stock ideas!  Please be generous and please spread the word about CG Focus List.

As long term believers (and shareholders) in the EBIX story the past 10 years (though we have seen the stock stagnate the past 2 years under waves of rumor & innuendo while getting progressively cheaper…) today’s trading activity makes us think it’s not hopeless that Wall Street could love again… Thank you St. Valentine!?

The naysayers can sling all the mud they like about the stock & the CEO (a former client for 2 years ~2004-2006), but the growth, cash flow and business premise all seem very real; and the execution over 10 years nothing short of amazing. Further, we are hopeful that organic growth will seep into the numbers more each successive quarter as the sales team and selling/cross-selling initiatives they have put into place the last year or two mature at the same time the Company’s expanded size and scope make it more likely to win new or additional business from larger insurance players.

As a major holder of the stock said to us the other day, and we’ve not checked his math yet but he knows the story well (we paraphrase): “if EBIX delivers on the CEO’s goal of growing to $500M in sales with comparable operating margins (~39%) within 3 years, the share price should rise 2-fold while maintaining the same single digit multiple and paying us a 1 1/2 % yield along the way…” (We note that the prior goals of $100M & $200M in sales seemed a stretch but have both been achieved as promised).

Someone’s going to be right on the stock, but we believe that 10 years of precedent with a CEO who’s executed well and delivered as promised on the business while increasing his exposure to the stock is a data set that is more reliable than the scurrilous rumors adeptly floated into the market to scare away week hands. Of course we could be wrong so we keep asking the tough questions as well…

The shorts have certainly succeeded in creating fear around the name, but perhaps the tide has turned and they are experiencing some fear as the stock comes to life on no news as Q4 reporting approaches.

Either way, we do expect the shorts to return with their proven methods, particularly if the shares continue their rally in the coming days and months.  They’ve been masterful and far too successful in scaring 25% and more out of the stock each time they make a run for the Company.

Suffice it to say, we think the story is worth a very close look and a fair review of the pros and cons.

EBIX is covered by Craig-Hallum and Singular Research and perhaps Northland – not sure?

Steve Barlow is the IR guy and very good at it.

Steve Barlow
678.281.2043
steve.barlow@ebix.com
www.ebix.com

Call him not us!  He’s paid to know the answers. We’re just trying to add value by exchanging ideas worthy of consideration.

Disclosure: CG Focus List and/or its affiliates have had a long position in EBIX shares for years but per our policy we have not bought or sold shares related to this position in the last five trading days following today’s article. Feeling the stock was depressed and a potential rebound candidate on Q4 results, we had put in place a modest LONG trading position more than five days prior to this article. We may reduce this position as a result of the execution of out of the money limit orders, depending on EBIX market activity.

 

Welcome to CG Focus List

Thank you for visiting CG Focus List, a free service dedicated to introducing investors and media to compelling small and micro-cap investment ideas.  The ideas are sourced from a network of investment community contacts we have gotten to know, respect and trust over the past 25 years.  These are not trading calls but fundamental investment ideas that we hope to efficiently outline in just one page.  From there you should do your own due diligence and consult with your investment advisor prior to any investment.

CG Focus List ideas are distributed via email as it remains the most effective way to notify subscribers simultaneously.  We would appreciate any feedback you have on the service, the format and its delivery as we want to make it as user friendly and valuable as possible.

To subscribe to the CG Focus List, please send an email to “subscribe@cgfocuslist.com” with the following required information.  To unsubscribe, please send an email to  unsubscribe@cgfocuslist.com; please make sure to indicate the email you wish to have removed if you send it from a different account.

  • Name
  • Firm Name
  • Preferred Email
  • Phone Number (in case of email bounce-back)
  • City/State
  • Investment interests / parameters

Thank you!