Wednesday, March 23, 2011

The Street Sweeper on Northern and Voyager: Part 2

The Street Sweeper has published Part II on Northern Oil and Voyager Oil.

Linked without comment.

4 comments:

  1. I'm curious as to why streetsweeper would cover a third of their position with such a small gain?


    * Important Disclosure: Prior to the publication of this article, TheStreetSweeper (through its members) has effected a “short sale” of 53,000 shares of the stock of NOG beginning on March, 17, 2011, at an average price of $28.7889 a share, with the intent of profiting from decreases in the price of the stock.

    TheStreetSweeper covered 20,000 shares of its short position at $28.64 on March 22. It continues to hold a short position of 33,000 shares, however.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am not privy to the Street Sweeper thinking on that. But my guess is that 53000 shares was a too big a position for them and that they could not keep carrying it...

    Our position is smaller and we have covered none. (We also had the position on for a longer time... we put it on above 30.)

    This is not a Rino International (cover at 2c story). Its an inflated business with real oil and real wells. We will phase our covering in - covering as it goes down.

    I (honestly) do not have an end-value in mind. I think I know what is worth plus or minus about 100 percent! But how you trade one of these is - well - a trick of the traders...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well now Street Sweeper has closed out the rest of its position entirely @ $26.435. Seems pretty odd for them to cover so quickly. I mean they made in the range of 8% in a week - not much you can say to that - but if they truly believed their thesis you would have thought they would have held onto a winning position for longer than that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. imo, thestreetsweeper is committing immoral & unethical deeds by conspiring with a short seller trader to load up just prior to releasing a hit piece. Firstly, their short seller knows the news and its precise release timing beforehand and secondly, they are a dot.org and are supposed to be preventing, not committing fraud.

    I think they should be called out and prosecuted. Very hypocritical, imo.

    ReplyDelete