Investing Thread

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Sultan, Inc.

Short it.

[rocket surgeon]

definitely will invest in draftkings. Any other stocks in other sectors of the economy are helpful

  in at $45-nice ride

check out sorrento(srne) in at $7 also gonna ride this cowboy.  today it's $14  analysts estimates avg target $28.  price targets in the $30's
       i think it's better than that as they are far from a one trick pony.  give this one some patience beyond a year.  they've already been into cancer tx's, antibodies, immunological approaches which made covid a natural progression, but don't let that fool ya.  their progress with the covid is great PR too

[Not A Serious Person]

Look at their 52 week hi/low

A lot of money was made when people bought at under 4

That would be Dave "Davey Day Trader" Portnoy.

* January 2020, he got $50 million of PENN stock for a stake in Barstool (PENN was ~$25)

* March 2020, that stake was worth $10 to $12 million. (PENN ~$4)

* April 2020, back to $20 million, he starts day trading (PENN ~ $10)

* This past week - the stock was up 25% ($103 to $128).  Portnoy's stake increased by $60 million just this past week to a total of $250 million. (no typo!)

Some Wall Street analysts think it can double again in the next year. 

Could Portnoy become a billionaire in the next few years?  Maybe he will then buy an NFL team!

[MU82]

Not the greatest Super Bowl for gambling stocks, apparently.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3659518-super-bowl-letdown-for-penn-and-draftkings-after-torrid-rallies?mail_subject=dkng-super-bowl-letdown-for-penn-and-draftkings-after-torrid-rallies&utm_campaign=rta-stock-news&utm_content=link-1&utm_medium=email&utm_source=seeking_alpha

Penn National Gaming (PENN) and DraftKings (DKNG) fall back after a blistering pace for both stocks ahead of the Super Bowl.

Penn is still 88% higher over the last 90 days and DraftKings is up 48% for the same time period.

Things did not go exceptionally well for sports betting apps with the huge Super Bowl test as DraftKings, FanDuel (PDYPY) and BetMGM (MGM) all had some tech issues reported right before the kickoff of Super Bowl LV in certain regions with high traffic. Meanwhile, the Barstool betting app appears to have passed the traffic test with flying colors.

The American Gaming Association forecast a record 7.6M bettors would place bets at online sportsbooks this year.

[Not A Serious Person]

Tesla announced a $1 billion purchase of bitcoin today.  Now trading >$44,000.

Rumors abound they will announce a $5 billion purchase
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/08/apple-may-be-the-next-notable-company-to-buy-bitcoin-rbc-says.html

[buckchuckler]

Tesla announced a $1 billion purchase of bitcoin today.  Now trading >$44,000.

Rumors abound they will announce a $5 billion purchase
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/08/apple-may-be-the-next-notable-company-to-buy-bitcoin-rbc-says.html

What was the price when Tesla bought it?  30 something?  They should sell it now and make a nice couple hundred million profit in a day.

[Hards Alumni]

What was the price when Tesla bought it?  30 something?  They should sell it now and make a nice couple hundred million profit in a day.

Who honestly knows.  When he announced it was already 40k trending upwards for two weeks.

[MU82]

Colin Kaepernick jumps aboard the SPAC train

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3660371-colin-kaepernick-jumps-aboard-the-spac-train

Colin Kaepernick is taking his activism to the wide world of SPACs, or blank check companies which raise money through an IPO so that they can buy or merge with another firm. He'll serve as co-chair of Mission Advancement Corp., which will focus on racial justice and diversity issues and seek to raise up to $287.5M. The SPAC is specifically targeting consumer businesses with an enterprise value of more than $1B that "delivers a significant impact financially, culturally and socially."

[JWags85]

Welp, that’s as good of a sign of a top as I’ve ever seen

[MU82]

Welp, that’s as good of a sign of a top as I’ve ever seen

Made me laugh.

[JoeSmith1721]

How do people feel about vegan/plant based OTC stocks? Was looking at VRYYF, BABYF, and BUROF. I've never invested in OTCs before and am curious as to how much of a gamble it is.

[Hards Alumni]

How do people feel about vegan/plant based OTC stocks? Was looking at VRYYF, BABYF, and BUROF. I've never invested in OTCs before and am curious as to how much of a gamble it is.

Penny stocks are not a good plan.

[21Jumpstreet]

How do people feel about vegan/plant based OTC stocks? Was looking at VRYYF, BABYF, and BUROF. I've never invested in OTCs before and am curious as to how much of a gamble it is.

I like the vegan/plant based sector, but I wouldn’t pay the prices for those three OTCs.

I currently own two cannabis OTCs but paid literal pennies per share. I only did it because I took some nice profits from ACB and TLRY. It’s basically a night at the craps table, not an “investment” strategy. If I make a buck, cool, if I don’t, I didn’t lose much.

*I am not someone to take investing advice from.

[MU82]

Thinking it's time to invest in guns again. RGR, anybody?

[buckchuckler]

Thinking it's time to invest in guns again. RGR, anybody?

Seems like a lot of people have been investing guns over the last year or so...

[StillAWarrior]

Question for those here much more knowledgeable than me:  A couple years ago I invested a small amount of money in Glu Mobile (GLUU).  Earlier this week it was announced that Electronic Arts (EA) had acquired Glu for $2.1 billion. They apparently are paying GLUU shareholders $12.50/share at some unspecified time in the future (but supposedly in Q2 2021). Here's some information on the deal.

Since the deal was announced, GLUU has been trading between $12.50 and $12.60 or so (jumping as high as $12.72 very briefly). It seems to me that there is no real reason to expect that it will ever move significantly because the final price has already been pretty much set.* Is there any real reason to sit on this, or should I try to dump in on one of the higher (although small) blips? It seems that if I wait, I'm just going to get the $12.50.  Again, this is very small amount of money at issue. This is part of my RH account that I've been using to play and also to learn a little bit -- like what happens in this type of situation.


*I'm aware that the deal has to be approved and that there are some out there who are already trying to stir up questions about fiduciary duties, etc. I'm assuming the deal will close.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

StillAWarrior,

I see the stock was up a bit more yesterday to close at 12.80, indicating the market thinks there is a smallish possibility that someone comes in with a higher bid than EA's 12.50. If this was completely a done deal, you'd likely see the stock trading a hare under 12.50, basically the time value of money until the expected close date.

So, as you said, you have a few options:
1) Still on the stock in anticipation that another buyer comes calling at something higher than $12.80
2) Sell now and grab the extra $0.30/share over the buyout price
3) If no other buyer comes forth, the stock will likely drop to ~$12.47; you could sell then rather than wait around for that extra $0.03/share
4) Wait it out until close and take $12.50

The biggest factor is how likely you think it is that another buyer jumps in at something more than $12.50/share.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Colin Kaepernick jumps aboard the SPAC train

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3660371-colin-kaepernick-jumps-aboard-the-spac-train

Colin Kaepernick is taking his activism to the wide world of SPACs, or blank check companies which raise money through an IPO so that they can buy or merge with another firm. He'll serve as co-chair of Mission Advancement Corp., which will focus on racial justice and diversity issues and seek to raise up to $287.5M. The SPAC is specifically targeting consumer businesses with an enterprise value of more than $1B that "delivers a significant impact financially, culturally and socially."

Some SPAC thought from Yahoo Finance (the only worthwhile part of Yahoo). Sorry, no link, morning newsletter, selected paragraphs below:

"The growth has been wack. In 2019, according to SPACInsider, 59 SPACs worth $13 billion were created. Last year there were 248 worth $83 billion. And already, just six weeks into this year, there are 135 SPACs which have raised $40 billion. Many more are on tap.

Essentially SPACs allow sponsors to make big money—for a nominal investment they get a 20% cut of the deal—and for companies to go public. DraftKings (DKNG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE) and Nikola (NKLA) all went public through a SPAC last year. The success of DraftKings in particular served as a clarion call. In fact the volume of new SPACs is now outpacing traditional IPOs, according to this excellent graphic made by The Wall Street Journal.
Politics aside, will Kaepernick’s SPAC make any sense? Will it make any money? Kaepernick does have business experience working with Nike, Medium, Apple and others, and he’s not the CEO anyway. But the truth is, and by definition, we have no idea, because as a new SPAC, Mission hasn’t invested in anything yet. So who knows.

‌

That’s the thing about SPACs. The more you dig into them, the more you realize they’re opaque and complicated. They’re also red hot. And that’s not necessarily a great combination.

‌

The growth has been wack. In 2019, according to SPACInsider, 59 SPACs worth $13 billion were created. Last year there were 248 worth $83 billion. And already, just six weeks into this year, there are 135 SPACs which have raised $40 billion. Many more are on tap.

‌

We’ll get back to what that means in the big picture, but first let’s journey deeper into the nitty-gritty of SPACs.

‌

Here’s some more basic concepts:

‌

-A SPAC is a shell company formed to go public for the purpose of acquiring an existing company typically within two years. It’s really a way for a company to go public without doing an IPO, (more on that later.)

‌

-Sometimes SPAC sponsors have a target in mind, sometimes they don’t.

‌

-Typically hedge funds and traders bought SPACs to arbitrage prices of SPAC securities (common stock, warrants and loans—trust me it’s complicated.) But now plain-vanilla investors, both professional and retail, are snapping up SPAC shares.

‌

-SPAC shares are usually issued at $10 and used to trade around that price until a deal is announced, but during this frenzy they have been spiking on rumors. (More on that later too.)

‌

Essentially SPACs allow sponsors to make big money—for a nominal investment they get a 20% cut of the deal—and for companies to go public. DraftKings (DKNG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE) and Nikola (NKLA) all went public through a SPAC last year. The success of DraftKings in particular served as a clarion call. In fact the volume of new SPACs is now outpacing traditional IPOs, according to this excellent graphic made by The Wall Street Journal.

‌

As for you, Mr. and Ms. Investor, you are just along for the ride.

‌

SPACs have been around since at least 1993, according to this great Bloomberg explainer in the Seattle Times, so why are they hot again now?

‌

Much of it has to do with the one-off year that was 2020. “There were lots of high growth companies needing capital and the traditional IPO process, which takes twice as long anyway, is far riskier in a pandemic and an election year,” says Kristi Marvin of SPACInisder. She also notes that with a SPAC a company can shill itself by predicting forward earnings, which it couldn’t do in an IPO. “Plus, as a huge bonus,” she says, “you get to go public with a high profile, seasoned executive, like David Cote, who immediately brings a ton of value to your company.”

‌

Ah Dave Cote. Remember him? Former CEO of Honeywell (HON), who had a great run there. As it turns out, Cote may be partly responsible for the SPAC surge. Here’s that story: Cote stepped down as CEO of HON in March 2017 and began to poke around. “Yes, I wrote a book, but I didn’t want to do what other ex-CEOs did, I wanted to do something different,” Cote tells me.

‌

“A friend of mine who I respect suggested doing a SPAC, so I took a long hard look. Over the course of a year, I would say 80% to 90% of the people I spoke with told me not to do one. That it would hurt my reputation. And so I was careful. I didn’t want an asterisk next to my name: ‘Was CEO of Honeywell and also had this lame-ass SPAC.’ But finally I decided there was something there.”

‌

And so Cote teamed up with John Waldron at Goldman Sachs, who was also exploring the idea of getting into SPACs. They took the plunge in September 2018, forming GS Acquisition Holdings Corp., with Cote as executive chairman. A little over a year later, their SPAC bought control of Vertiv, a Columbus Ohio-based provider of equipment and services for data centers, from Platinum Equity, a private equity firm run by the billionaire owner of the Detroit Pistons, Tom Gores. The stock [VRT] which dipped down to $5 in the darkness of last March, is now trading at $21.

‌With money flooding into SPACs looking for companies to buy and ordinary investors driving up stock prices, risks are rising.

‌

“In some cases there’s 100% speculation,” says Kristi Marvin. “The one that worries me the most right now is Churchill Capital [founded and run by veteran banker Michael Klein] About a month ago, it came out as a rumor that Churchill was in negotiations with Lucid Motors, an EV company, which retail investors love. And so they got all excited and pushed the stock into the $30s. Now, it's a month later, still no deal. That's crazy. It's a big question mark to me if this deal even happens. If there's no deal or Lucid is going to go public via direct listing or traditional IPO, or even with another SPAC, investors are all gonna be running through the door.”

The Wall Street Journal did a piece in November calling into question the performance of SPACs: “SPACs have a poor record of delivering returns. Of 107 that have gone public since 2015 and executed deals, the average return on their common stock has been a loss of 1.4%, according to Renaissance Capital, a research and investment-management firm. During the same period, the average return of companies that went public via IPOs was 49%, the firm says.”

To Atwater’s mind, the collapse of SPAC mania is a “when” not “if” proposition. “The data would suggest it’s very much a very late-cycle phenomenon. I joke that the bar charts of it run the risk of looking like a middle finger by the time they’re done: Nothing, nothing, a little bit of build up, and an enormous spike. Those historically get followed by collapse. Insatiable demand is always inevitably followed by absolutely nonexistent demand. The crowd goes from wanting too much to never having it again.”

[MU82]

Some SPAC thought from Yahoo Finance (the only worthwhile part of Yahoo). Sorry, no link, morning newsletter, selected paragraphs below:

"The growth has been wack. In 2019, according to SPACInsider, 59 SPACs worth $13 billion were created. Last year there were 248 worth $83 billion. And already, just six weeks into this year, there are 135 SPACs which have raised $40 billion. Many more are on tap.

Essentially SPACs allow sponsors to make big money—for a nominal investment they get a 20% cut of the deal—and for companies to go public. DraftKings (DKNG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE) and Nikola (NKLA) all went public through a SPAC last year. The success of DraftKings in particular served as a clarion call. In fact the volume of new SPACs is now outpacing traditional IPOs, according to this excellent graphic made by The Wall Street Journal.
Politics aside, will Kaepernick’s SPAC make any sense? Will it make any money? Kaepernick does have business experience working with Nike, Medium, Apple and others, and he’s not the CEO anyway. But the truth is, and by definition, we have no idea, because as a new SPAC, Mission hasn’t invested in anything yet. So who knows.

‌

That’s the thing about SPACs. The more you dig into them, the more you realize they’re opaque and complicated. They’re also red hot. And that’s not necessarily a great combination.

‌

The growth has been wack. In 2019, according to SPACInsider, 59 SPACs worth $13 billion were created. Last year there were 248 worth $83 billion. And already, just six weeks into this year, there are 135 SPACs which have raised $40 billion. Many more are on tap.

‌

We’ll get back to what that means in the big picture, but first let’s journey deeper into the nitty-gritty of SPACs.

‌

Here’s some more basic concepts:

‌

-A SPAC is a shell company formed to go public for the purpose of acquiring an existing company typically within two years. It’s really a way for a company to go public without doing an IPO, (more on that later.)

‌

-Sometimes SPAC sponsors have a target in mind, sometimes they don’t.

‌

-Typically hedge funds and traders bought SPACs to arbitrage prices of SPAC securities (common stock, warrants and loans—trust me it’s complicated.) But now plain-vanilla investors, both professional and retail, are snapping up SPAC shares.

‌

-SPAC shares are usually issued at $10 and used to trade around that price until a deal is announced, but during this frenzy they have been spiking on rumors. (More on that later too.)

‌

Essentially SPACs allow sponsors to make big money—for a nominal investment they get a 20% cut of the deal—and for companies to go public. DraftKings (DKNG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE) and Nikola (NKLA) all went public through a SPAC last year. The success of DraftKings in particular served as a clarion call. In fact the volume of new SPACs is now outpacing traditional IPOs, according to this excellent graphic made by The Wall Street Journal.

‌

As for you, Mr. and Ms. Investor, you are just along for the ride.

‌

SPACs have been around since at least 1993, according to this great Bloomberg explainer in the Seattle Times, so why are they hot again now?

‌

Much of it has to do with the one-off year that was 2020. “There were lots of high growth companies needing capital and the traditional IPO process, which takes twice as long anyway, is far riskier in a pandemic and an election year,” says Kristi Marvin of SPACInisder. She also notes that with a SPAC a company can shill itself by predicting forward earnings, which it couldn’t do in an IPO. “Plus, as a huge bonus,” she says, “you get to go public with a high profile, seasoned executive, like David Cote, who immediately brings a ton of value to your company.”

‌

Ah Dave Cote. Remember him? Former CEO of Honeywell (HON), who had a great run there. As it turns out, Cote may be partly responsible for the SPAC surge. Here’s that story: Cote stepped down as CEO of HON in March 2017 and began to poke around. “Yes, I wrote a book, but I didn’t want to do what other ex-CEOs did, I wanted to do something different,” Cote tells me.

‌

“A friend of mine who I respect suggested doing a SPAC, so I took a long hard look. Over the course of a year, I would say 80% to 90% of the people I spoke with told me not to do one. That it would hurt my reputation. And so I was careful. I didn’t want an asterisk next to my name: ‘Was CEO of Honeywell and also had this lame-ass SPAC.’ But finally I decided there was something there.”

‌

And so Cote teamed up with John Waldron at Goldman Sachs, who was also exploring the idea of getting into SPACs. They took the plunge in September 2018, forming GS Acquisition Holdings Corp., with Cote as executive chairman. A little over a year later, their SPAC bought control of Vertiv, a Columbus Ohio-based provider of equipment and services for data centers, from Platinum Equity, a private equity firm run by the billionaire owner of the Detroit Pistons, Tom Gores. The stock [VRT] which dipped down to $5 in the darkness of last March, is now trading at $21.

‌With money flooding into SPACs looking for companies to buy and ordinary investors driving up stock prices, risks are rising.

‌

“In some cases there’s 100% speculation,” says Kristi Marvin. “The one that worries me the most right now is Churchill Capital [founded and run by veteran banker Michael Klein] About a month ago, it came out as a rumor that Churchill was in negotiations with Lucid Motors, an EV company, which retail investors love. And so they got all excited and pushed the stock into the $30s. Now, it's a month later, still no deal. That's crazy. It's a big question mark to me if this deal even happens. If there's no deal or Lucid is going to go public via direct listing or traditional IPO, or even with another SPAC, investors are all gonna be running through the door.”

The Wall Street Journal did a piece in November calling into question the performance of SPACs: “SPACs have a poor record of delivering returns. Of 107 that have gone public since 2015 and executed deals, the average return on their common stock has been a loss of 1.4%, according to Renaissance Capital, a research and investment-management firm. During the same period, the average return of companies that went public via IPOs was 49%, the firm says.”

To Atwater’s mind, the collapse of SPAC mania is a “when” not “if” proposition. “The data would suggest it’s very much a very late-cycle phenomenon. I joke that the bar charts of it run the risk of looking like a middle finger by the time they’re done: Nothing, nothing, a little bit of build up, and an enormous spike. Those historically get followed by collapse. Insatiable demand is always inevitably followed by absolutely nonexistent demand. The crowd goes from wanting too much to never having it again.”

I had just finished reading that from Yahoo Finance, as I get an email blast from them every morning. It was very interesting, with a lot of background on the SPAC-a-thon going on now.

I've done a teeny bit of SPAC-related buying, most notably DKNG, which has done very well for me so far. But this isn't my kind of investing really, so I won't do much. I'm not a trader but a boring, long-term, buy-and-holdish guy. Yawn!

[forgetful]

Serious question. What would be the benefit of someone like Lucid Motors merging with a SPAC.

Clearly there are a lot of people willing to pump money into their company, regardless of going public via SPAC.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Some SPAC thought from Yahoo Finance (the only worthwhile part of Yahoo). Sorry, no link, morning newsletter, selected paragraphs below:

"The growth has been wack. In 2019, according to SPACInsider, 59 SPACs worth $13 billion were created. Last year there were 248 worth $83 billion. And already, just six weeks into this year, there are 135 SPACs which have raised $40 billion. Many more are on tap.

Essentially SPACs allow sponsors to make big money—for a nominal investment they get a 20% cut of the deal—and for companies to go public. DraftKings (DKNG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE) and Nikola (NKLA) all went public through a SPAC last year. The success of DraftKings in particular served as a clarion call. In fact the volume of new SPACs is now outpacing traditional IPOs, according to this excellent graphic made by The Wall Street Journal.
Politics aside, will Kaepernick’s SPAC make any sense? Will it make any money? Kaepernick does have business experience working with Nike, Medium, Apple and others, and he’s not the CEO anyway. But the truth is, and by definition, we have no idea, because as a new SPAC, Mission hasn’t invested in anything yet. So who knows.

‌

That’s the thing about SPACs. The more you dig into them, the more you realize they’re opaque and complicated. They’re also red hot. And that’s not necessarily a great combination.

‌

The growth has been wack. In 2019, according to SPACInsider, 59 SPACs worth $13 billion were created. Last year there were 248 worth $83 billion. And already, just six weeks into this year, there are 135 SPACs which have raised $40 billion. Many more are on tap.

‌

We’ll get back to what that means in the big picture, but first let’s journey deeper into the nitty-gritty of SPACs.

‌

Here’s some more basic concepts:

‌

-A SPAC is a shell company formed to go public for the purpose of acquiring an existing company typically within two years. It’s really a way for a company to go public without doing an IPO, (more on that later.)

‌

-Sometimes SPAC sponsors have a target in mind, sometimes they don’t.

‌

-Typically hedge funds and traders bought SPACs to arbitrage prices of SPAC securities (common stock, warrants and loans—trust me it’s complicated.) But now plain-vanilla investors, both professional and retail, are snapping up SPAC shares.

‌

-SPAC shares are usually issued at $10 and used to trade around that price until a deal is announced, but during this frenzy they have been spiking on rumors. (More on that later too.)

‌

Essentially SPACs allow sponsors to make big money—for a nominal investment they get a 20% cut of the deal—and for companies to go public. DraftKings (DKNG), Virgin Galactic (SPCE) and Nikola (NKLA) all went public through a SPAC last year. The success of DraftKings in particular served as a clarion call. In fact the volume of new SPACs is now outpacing traditional IPOs, according to this excellent graphic made by The Wall Street Journal.

‌

As for you, Mr. and Ms. Investor, you are just along for the ride.

‌

SPACs have been around since at least 1993, according to this great Bloomberg explainer in the Seattle Times, so why are they hot again now?

‌

Much of it has to do with the one-off year that was 2020. “There were lots of high growth companies needing capital and the traditional IPO process, which takes twice as long anyway, is far riskier in a pandemic and an election year,” says Kristi Marvin of SPACInisder. She also notes that with a SPAC a company can shill itself by predicting forward earnings, which it couldn’t do in an IPO. “Plus, as a huge bonus,” she says, “you get to go public with a high profile, seasoned executive, like David Cote, who immediately brings a ton of value to your company.”

‌

Ah Dave Cote. Remember him? Former CEO of Honeywell (HON), who had a great run there. As it turns out, Cote may be partly responsible for the SPAC surge. Here’s that story: Cote stepped down as CEO of HON in March 2017 and began to poke around. “Yes, I wrote a book, but I didn’t want to do what other ex-CEOs did, I wanted to do something different,” Cote tells me.

‌

“A friend of mine who I respect suggested doing a SPAC, so I took a long hard look. Over the course of a year, I would say 80% to 90% of the people I spoke with told me not to do one. That it would hurt my reputation. And so I was careful. I didn’t want an asterisk next to my name: ‘Was CEO of Honeywell and also had this lame-ass SPAC.’ But finally I decided there was something there.”

‌

And so Cote teamed up with John Waldron at Goldman Sachs, who was also exploring the idea of getting into SPACs. They took the plunge in September 2018, forming GS Acquisition Holdings Corp., with Cote as executive chairman. A little over a year later, their SPAC bought control of Vertiv, a Columbus Ohio-based provider of equipment and services for data centers, from Platinum Equity, a private equity firm run by the billionaire owner of the Detroit Pistons, Tom Gores. The stock [VRT] which dipped down to $5 in the darkness of last March, is now trading at $21.

‌With money flooding into SPACs looking for companies to buy and ordinary investors driving up stock prices, risks are rising.

‌

“In some cases there’s 100% speculation,” says Kristi Marvin. “The one that worries me the most right now is Churchill Capital [founded and run by veteran banker Michael Klein] About a month ago, it came out as a rumor that Churchill was in negotiations with Lucid Motors, an EV company, which retail investors love. And so they got all excited and pushed the stock into the $30s. Now, it's a month later, still no deal. That's crazy. It's a big question mark to me if this deal even happens. If there's no deal or Lucid is going to go public via direct listing or traditional IPO, or even with another SPAC, investors are all gonna be running through the door.”

The Wall Street Journal did a piece in November calling into question the performance of SPACs: “SPACs have a poor record of delivering returns. Of 107 that have gone public since 2015 and executed deals, the average return on their common stock has been a loss of 1.4%, according to Renaissance Capital, a research and investment-management firm. During the same period, the average return of companies that went public via IPOs was 49%, the firm says.”

To Atwater’s mind, the collapse of SPAC mania is a “when” not “if” proposition. “The data would suggest it’s very much a very late-cycle phenomenon. I joke that the bar charts of it run the risk of looking like a middle finger by the time they’re done: Nothing, nothing, a little bit of build up, and an enormous spike. Those historically get followed by collapse. Insatiable demand is always inevitably followed by absolutely nonexistent demand. The crowd goes from wanting too much to never having it again.”

Investment advise from an article that starts out "the growth has been wack".  Quality.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Investment advise from an article that starts out "the growth has been wack".  Quality.

Pretty sure there wasn't any advice, or even any advise, offered.

[StillAWarrior]

StillAWarrior,

I see the stock was up a bit more yesterday to close at 12.80, indicating the market thinks there is a smallish possibility that someone comes in with a higher bid than EA's 12.50. If this was completely a done deal, you'd likely see the stock trading a hare under 12.50, basically the time value of money until the expected close date.

So, as you said, you have a few options:
1) Still on the stock in anticipation that another buyer comes calling at something higher than $12.80
2) Sell now and grab the extra $0.30/share over the buyout price
3) If no other buyer comes forth, the stock will likely drop to ~$12.47; you could sell then rather than wait around for that extra $0.03/share
4) Wait it out until close and take $12.50

The biggest factor is how likely you think it is that another buyer jumps in at something more than $12.50/share.

Thank you. I decided No. 2 was the way to go. It's my understanding that both EA and Glu have already agreed to the deal, so I don't know if another buyer even has the opportunity to come in. Ultimately, it was such a small stake that I figured any fluctuations within the range I was seeing was just the equivalent of a cup of coffee, so I don't see a lot of reason to ride it out. I'm in the process of liquidating the stuff in my RH account, so I figured now was as good of a time as any.  Thank you again.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Thank you. I decided No. 2 was the way to go. It's my understanding that both EA and Glu have already agreed to the deal, so I don't know if another buyer even has the opportunity to come in. Ultimately, it was such a small stake that I figured any fluctuations within the range I was seeing was just the equivalent of a cup of coffee, so I don't see a lot of reason to ride it out. I'm in the process of liquidating the stuff in my RH account, so I figured now was as good of a time as any.  Thank you again.

Probably a good move.

[Hards Alumni]

If you had 500 dollars to invest and wanted to be a little bit on the riskier side, what would you invest in?

You'd be up about 50% if you'd have done what I said.