I remember during my HF days in NYC 16-20 where I looked at a bunch of micro/small caps in HK / Asia where a ton of them have negative EV (esp. HK) and my old boss wanted to buy them and we decided against. Turns out all these C-suites are ass clowns enriching themselves w/ the cash and the shareholders never saw a dime of it -- and w/ C-suite having control, public shareholders never had a chance ever getting recourse. I think the worse of one is where the mgmt funneled a ton of cash at way below market rate as a loan to a related party which turns out to be the CEO's personal bank. That bro clipped like 10 mm USD / year for himself w/ the spread. I'm not referring to any companies in particular, but the FDV trading under net cash is never a good argument. Ask the former $EOS bagholders for instance. Makes you think.
MapleLeafCap
MapleLeafCap24.7.2025
Think soon the final flush (with more FUD) as ICO participants can no longer take the pain. Then become super interesting w/ the ball in the team's court: - Capital allocation transparency - IR strategy & guidance-setting, codifying value-capture - Shipment of impactful products - Big collab & press At current price w/ 25% buyback & 30x burn it still trades expensive vs. $BONK @ 11x burn tho (and $GP at 7x). If you want to paint the bear case $PUMP could trade down another 60% from here -- but think unlikely given (a) team would almost certainly act and (b) bidders will show up as a blend of Circ cap & FDV trades close to 1.7 Bn cash-pile (would argue it's already there at 0.002-0.0025
17,97K