Google Groups Home
Help | Sign in
AERN
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  4 messages - Collapse all
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
Edward Hilquist  
View profile
 More options May 7 1996, 3:00 am
Newsgroups: misc.invest.stocks
From: Edward Hilquist <eahil...@uiuc.edu>
Date: 1996/05/07
Subject: AERN

Why has AERN dropped to as low as 5 3/8?  It's OEM announcement
is on Thursday, and should skyrocket with the release of their new
battery that lasts a full day on full load with only one charge.

I think people would be trying to buy it up like crazy?  Anyone know
why?


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Martin Weiss  
View profile
 More options May 8 1996, 3:00 am
Newsgroups: misc.invest.stocks
From: m...@nyquist.lis.pitt.edu (Martin Weiss)
Date: 1996/05/08
Subject: Re: AERN

In article <318F8A02.2...@uiuc.edu>, Edward Hilquist <eahil...@uiuc.edu> writes:

|> Why has AERN dropped to as low as 5 3/8?  It's OEM announcement
|> is on Thursday, and should skyrocket with the release of their new
|> battery that lasts a full day on full load with only one charge.
|>
|> I think people would be trying to buy it up like crazy?  Anyone know
|> why?

1) The first quarter results that were released recently weren't impressive (at
   least to me)

2) The overall equities market has been in a funk since Friday.  That will affect
   most stocks in some way.

--
Martin Weiss
Telecommunications Program
University of Pittsburgh


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Michael J. Chudobiak  
View profile
 More options May 8 1996, 3:00 am
Newsgroups: misc.invest.stocks
From: m...@avtechpulse.com (Michael J. Chudobiak)
Date: 1996/05/08
Subject: Re: AERN

m...@nyquist.lis.pitt.edu (Martin Weiss) wrote:
>In article <318F8A02.2...@uiuc.edu>, Edward Hilquist <eahil...@uiuc.edu> writes:
>|> Why has AERN dropped to as low as 5 3/8?  It's OEM announcement
>|> is on Thursday, and should skyrocket with the release of their new
>|> battery that lasts a full day on full load with only one charge.
>|>
>|> I think people would be trying to buy it up like crazy?  Anyone know
>|> why?
>1) The first quarter results that were released recently weren't impressive (at
>   least to me)

They were an improvement, though. This is more of a "potential" stock
anyways.

>2) The overall equities market has been in a funk since Friday.  That will affect
>   most stocks in some way.

Happily, AERN rose 22% today, to close at 6 11/16, up 1 3/16.

Regards,
Michael J. Chudobiak


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Martin Weiss  
View profile
 More options May 9 1996, 3:00 am
Newsgroups: misc.invest.stocks
From: m...@nyquist.lis.pitt.edu (Martin Weiss)
Date: 1996/05/09
Subject: Re: AERN

In article <4mr2jf$...@nic.ott.hookup.net>, m...@avtechpulse.com (Michael J. Chudobiak) writes:

|> >1) The first quarter results that were released recently weren't impressive (at
|> >   least to me)
|>
|> They were an improvement, though. This is more of a "potential" stock
|> anyways.
|>

It is a potential stock, and that's why Ihave held my long position for many
months.  What concerned me in the numbers was a drop in revenue as well as lower
R&D and marketing expenses.  It was the lower expenses that made the loss per
share look good, not the increases in revenue.  It really surprises me that this
company would be reducing expenditures in these areas.

--Martin


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2008 Google