seeking alpha article Collectors Universe - A Scandal Waiting To Be Exposed

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

For us non- lawyers.... What's a predominance issue?

Sorry. One of several requirements to maintain a class action is that common issues must "predominate" over individualized ones. Translated, that means roughly that you need to be able to establish liability towards the entire class by common proof and each plaintiff doesn't have to present his or her case. For example, everyone who bought the stock is injured if the company issued false financials and inflated the stock price. Each member of the class was hurt in the same way because the drug was inherently dangerous, or the car had a manufacturing defect.

But if the question is were people hurt because PSA failed to catch altered cards, or stiffed people on the guarantee, or was bad at grading, that feels to me like each and every person would have to show that on a case by case/card by card basis, even if there was an overall pattern. Just showing the pattern doesn't prove YOU were wronged. You would need to show that YOUR card was misgraded or altered or that YOU were stiffed on the guarantee. If that's the case, individualized issues "predominate" over common ones. If the case has to proceed as a boatload of mini-trials, it doesn't warrant class treatment.

Somewhat simplified but that is the idea.

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Sorry. One of several requirements to maintain a class action is that common issues must "predominate" over individualized ones. Translated, that means roughly that you need to be able to establish liability towards the entire class by common proof and each plaintiff doesn't have to present his or her case. For example, everyone who bought the stock is injured if the company issued false financials and inflated the stock price. Each member of the class was hurt in the same way because the drug was inherently dangerous, or the car had a manufacturing defect.

But if the question is were people hurt because PSA failed to catch altered cards, or stiffed people on the guarantee, or was bad at grading, that feels to me like each and every person would have to show that on a case by case/card by card basis, even if there was an overall pattern. Just showing the pattern doesn't prove YOU were wronged. You would need to show that YOUR card was misgraded or altered or that YOU were stiffed on the guarantee. If that's the case, individualized issues "predominate" over common ones. If the case has to proceed as a boatload of mini-trials, it doesn't warrant class treatment.

Somewhat simplified but that is the idea.

From an accounting perspective, there is nothing needed to be disclosed, yet.

Deemed contingent liability, it needs to be recorded and disclosed if the liability meets more than likelihood possibility. Although there there may be an inquiry, if there is not yet direct investigation yet of PSA's subsidiary, it is still in discovery and too early to determine liklihood; allowing the company to take the generic "ordinary course" liability disclosure in its notes. Auditors and SEC would sign off as long as there is not enough information to determine the extent of the liability.

Would like to see the Q&A transcript for the Q if they have earnings calls. Is there any brokers that cover them?

[Peter_Spaeth]

https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/clct/call-transcripts

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/clct/call-transcripts

Thanks, what a joke. They have no sell side brokers covering the stock. No one was on the Q&A. I guess there is no one to hold their feet to the fire.

If anyone knows if there are any brokers covering, please let me know...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

Thanks, what a joke. They have no sell side brokers covering the stock. No one was on the Q&A. I guess there is no one to hold their feet to the fire.

If anyone knows if there are any brokers covering, please let me know...

Up 70 cents today so far. It may crash but it isn't going to be linear absent some much bigger bombshell than a blog post.

[Nunzio11]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

From an accounting perspective, there is nothing needed to be disclosed, yet.

Deemed contingent liability, it needs to be recorded and disclosed if the liability meets more than likelihood possibility. Although there there may be an inquiry, if there is not yet direct investigation yet of PSA's subsidiary, it is still in discovery and too early to determine liklihood; allowing the company to take the generic "ordinary course" liability disclosure in its notes. Auditors and SEC would sign off as long as there is not enough information to determine the extent of the liability.

Would like to see the Q&A transcript for the Q if they have earnings calls. Is there any brokers that cover them?

The company is not covered by any major (or minor) sell side research firms. It’s just too small, illiquid and tightly held for an investment bank to research. The only company that covers it research wise is a general IR firm. Seeking Alpha will help get the word out but larger Wall Street firms typically take their view with a grain of salt.

[Dpeck100]

It wouldn't surprise me if the guy who wrote the article has already closed out his put position. The open interest has dropped significantly on the January 2020 puts. Obviously the article was an attempt to get a run on the stock and for a trading opportunity for him. The high of the day was $19.72 the day of the article so it will be interesting to see if CLCT can get through there. If it does they are going run this right back up as the shorts cover.

For those that don't know options essentially it is a zero sum game. Somebody wins and somebody loses. When the open interest drops that means someone has cleared out their trade. Judging by the action in the puts the buyers are doomed. The bid ask spread on the January 2020 $15's is $0.60 by $1.25 and you would have to be a total moron to buy an option with such a low open interest and a spread that puts you down over 50% the second you buy. Many options you can get executed in the spread but on options like this there is no incentive with such low liquidity.

CLCT is going to need some really bad news to break below $17.55. There was huge volume that came into the stock on May 2nd and it bounced right off that level on this bear raid.

[Peter_Spaeth]

As I just posted elsewhere CLCT is back around 19.50. It's the Wild West out there and nothing stops people from posting short attacks.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As I just posted elsewhere CLCT is back around 19.50. It's the Wild West out there and nothing stops people from posting short attacks.

just trying to derail

look at poor ole TEUM! I believe trading was halted the other day after a 30% drop.

Listed on Russell 2k THE VERY NEXT DAY

Short attack, gave me a shart attack

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

just trying to derail

look at poor ole TEUM! I believe trading was halted the other day after a 30% drop.

Listed on Russell 2k THE VERY NEXT DAY

Short attack, gave me a shart attack

Not familiar with this stock but just looked it up and there is huge short interest and it increased by over 20% the last update. My system is showing just under 25% of the float short and nearly 25 million shares.

This is a dangerous stock that is for sure looking at the longer term chart. Good luck with your trade.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As I just posted elsewhere CLCT is back around 19.50. It's the Wild West out there and nothing stops people from posting short attacks.

You would never know anything was going on looking at this chart. This could get back to $21 in a blink of an eye and $17.65 is a long ways from there and if it does the puts will be toast.

[Dpeck100]

It will be very interesting to see what happens to CLCT in the next few days. It just traded at a recent high from this sell off and I see the fresh short data out today has increased significantly.

There was a block of 22k shares that crossed today above the bid that got it moving mid day.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Sorry. One of several requirements to maintain a class action is that common issues must "predominate" over individualized ones. Translated, that means roughly that you need to be able to establish liability towards the entire class by common proof and each plaintiff doesn't have to present his or her case. For example, everyone who bought the stock is injured if the company issued false financials and inflated the stock price. Each member of the class was hurt in the same way because the drug was inherently dangerous, or the car had a manufacturing defect.

But if the question is were people hurt because PSA failed to catch altered cards, or stiffed people on the guarantee, or was bad at grading, that feels to me like each and every person would have to show that on a case by case/card by card basis, even if there was an overall pattern. Just showing the pattern doesn't prove YOU were wronged. You would need to show that YOUR card was misgraded or altered or that YOU were stiffed on the guarantee. If that's the case, individualized issues "predominate" over common ones. If the case has to proceed as a boatload of mini-trials, it doesn't warrant class treatment.

Somewhat simplified but that is the idea.

Thanks!

Simplified is probably best for us non- lawyers...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

Thanks!

Simplified is probably best for us non- lawyers...

Any time. People who don't know the law love to throw around the prospect of class actions but sometimes it isn't that simple.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Any time. People who don't know the law love to throw around the prospect of class actions but sometimes it isn't that simple.

Keep trying, counselor.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Keep trying, counselor.

LOL I get it.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Any time. People who don't know the law love to throw around the prospect of class actions but sometimes it isn't that simple.

It's always good to know real experts, especially people who can simplify complex things in specialized areas.

I have a friend/acquaintance who ended up becoming an "expert" in private radio/tv antennas. When she was a new lawyer she got handed a case where a good client of the firm had put up a 40ft ham radio tower in his backyard and the HOA wasn't happy. She checked a few things, told him she might be able to save the tower, but it could be very expensive, so how far was he willing to go. He gave her a pretty shocking number as a probable limit to the cost. (I think it was something like 5 million!)
Using that she approached the HOA and said they would probably win, but he was willing to go as far as $X to fight it and the choice was theirs.

Tower approved!

Then they started getting requests from his also rich radio friends... So she became the go-to person for radio antennas in backyards.

[kateighty]

All very well said Peter!