Read the latest interims.......just make sure that you are sitting down.

"Can sola compete on scrap silicon as a raw material, not for much longer I feel. "

And why exactly do you feel that way, tin-digit?

The trouble with Sola (and I am long again for the time being) is that it's risen rapidly and could suffer equally quickly. It has the capability to increase capacity but it's not generating cash but it's the competitors that may have the ability to dent Sola's growth from here.

purely out of curiosity, as i assume you are now running a tidy profit, have you put a trailing stop in place?

cynic. LOLs 'do i really need to explain? ...... if you have big enough balls and can take them being stamped on a bit,' Fraid you do, cinnie. But firstly to yourself, I think. The only balls round here are the ones you're talking.

You're saying (like all wannabe Adlards) it could rise ('challenging the high or 640') or it could go down('having met the 560 resistance').'
________________________________________________________________
I want to be a chartist. Here's My Study At Home textbook.
_________________________________________________________
Lesson 1 :To be a Chartist
Practice saying this "It could go up, and it could go down.'

Lesson 2 :To Be a Chartist - How to NEVER GET IT WRONG
See Lesson 1

Lesson 3 on being a chartist.
'How to draw a straight line.'

Firstly, go to WH Smiths and buy a ruler.
____________________________________________________________________
There we are. I'm an expert chartist. That didn't take long did it. WOW.

LOLs

and it is exactly because the chart gives no clear signal and because there are various issues surrounding SOLA at the moment, that i think the correct move is to stay still and do nothing! ..... now, if you want to take a new position at this juncture, then jolly good luck to you, but you may as well back a horse instead

" but it's not generating cash" Sorry, wrong, see the Q1 accounts and amouints received. Must try harder. 4/10

"The trouble with Sola ..... is that it's risen rapidly and could suffer equally quickly'
(Oh Dear , 3/10.)

Could you explain that one from a logic-based, or reason-based, perspective, gh?

The shorters here are ruddy amateurs.

"now, if you want to take a new position at this juncture, then jolly good luck to you, but you may as well back a horse instead "

cinnie, who exactly do you believe your audience is here? I don't hear anyone clamouring for your two-way-bet advice.

imo, there is no 2-way bet, even if, as i wrote, it is probable that you could make (or lose) money whether you short or go long .... it all depends on how much pain you can withstand.

imo, the only sensible thing to do, unless you already hold, is to DO NOTHING

anyway, if by some chance i am talking bollox (yet again), i shall excuse myself through general senility!

by he way, are the shorters "amateurs" in your eyes because you think they are wrong? .... if so, there is an evens bet that will be made to eat your words within 2 months (say)!

The intellectual bancruptcy among the potential shorters would be exemplified by their take-up of the phrase 'SOLA has risen rapidly and could suffer equally quickly.'

Anyone can see that SOLA has tracked sideways since January. An essentially arid sp duration. In the meanwhile the revenues have been growing by a three digit annual factor, and if anything, the shorters now run a risk of any new attack being launched at exactly the wrong moment.

Even lead-finger says it's rising to 588p. Just when the shorters start getting aroused by the trigger price, what's the betting Mr Bai announces 2008 growth plans.

Do you feel lucky?

' are the shorters "amateurs" in your eyes because you think they are wrong? '

Not entirely. They are amateurs because of the deathly paucity of their argument. Examination of their detail, little as it is, shows that they cannot form a logical argument, and that makes them both wrong and poor-quality shorters.

As a starting point one has to ask oneself (blimey, I sound like Charles here, must stop) why would anyone, ever, in their right mind, consider shorting a company that is increasing revenues and profits by 200-300% annually, with a product whose demand cannot be met by supply? Is that enough ? More?

Let's face it. That's not really a clever-clogs thing to do is it? In fact that really sums up how the shorters are shooting themselves in the foot.

Secondly there is a lot of inaccuracy and also emotive stuff from them.

Goldy rattles on brainlessly about 'not generating cash' (covered that one, $36.6m received in Q1, I wont' go on), and with woosy semantics of 'froth', 'fireworks' and '(problems) with using scrap silicon.'

Not really very high quality stuff is it?

The thing is, he doesn't realise everyone is having a belly-laugh so he keeps on voicing the same flat brainwave. He's a bit like and old '45 rpm' with a scratch which causes the same sound to be repeated.

If the shorters want to commit slow-motion suicide here, so be it. I suppose it's worth thanking them for regularly supplying a healthy dollop of liquidity.

Prediction: Soon, a shorter will scrape the barrell floor and use the phrase 'beware' or 'be careful.'

hardly tracked sideways since January old son .... have a look at the chart above - 420 to 640 to 440 to 560 to 480 to 560 ...... plenty of obvious volatility and thus chance to make plenty of money if one is nimble enough

cynnie 'if so, there is an evens bet that will be made to eat your words within 2 months (say)!'

Hey. If anyone's going to eat my words it will be me thank you very much. No flamin 'bet' is going to get it's chops round my verbals.

'plenty of obvious volatility and thus chance to make plenty of money if one is nimble enough'

Nah. It's been in a range. The volatility you refer to has been too quick for the shorters here. They thought they saw the bandwagon, but then it was too late.

The late Feb fall was far to quick for them. The early April fall probably got them all horny but not only did it recover lost ground but it went on another 40p. If I was a shorter I would never short this stock because of the range-bound volatility which sees such dramatic rises and falls over a matter of a few days, not weeks. The range is 460 to 560.

Any shorting profit would result not from nimble feet but from Daley-style sprinting. It might have equalled a lad's paper-round.

Serious shorters would probably have made serious money from say C&W over several years of decline, but I guess the market doesn't give a very good price for a donkey stock like that. There's probably a better offer/bid price here because the risk to shorters is so much higher.

I go back to asking myself: What sort of idiot shorts the stock of a company increasing revenues and profits by triple-digit factors?

Anyway I'm bored with this now.

Go shorters! No. I mean GO!

No I don't.

I like watching tin-digit burbling and scwawking his way in an out of pratfalls.

actually you are wrong and your arrogant assumption misplaced! .... i openly admit that i cannot be arsed to research, not that i even have the ability, and certainly have no pretensions to chart expertise ...... however, though i can't be bothered to look up the exact dates, but it's all posted here somewhere anyway and certainly on my own trading records, i made money going long (can't remember the in/out prices) and then made some more when i subsequently shorted at 544 and ultimately closed that at 493 (from memory)

the moral is, you can only afford to be supercilous when you are proven to be right and perhaps when you learn to spell squawk! .... as for the derogatory comment that CW. is a donkey stock, the record shows that yet again your arrogance ignores the facts ...... there has of late been plenty to be made in CW. too; i know, because i did when it broke through 180, albeit that i arguably sold prematurely and about 195

Hey cynic, do you always sound like a pompous arse or do you have to practice? Lols ! So much huffing and puffing, Where's Thomas The Tank Shorter?

I always know when I've won an argument. My 'opponent' starts getting personnally abusive. 'Supercilious! Arrogant!' Case closed.

Nah ... keep it going guys. Great entertainment.

GF .... you're fired.

cynic, if that question about trailing stop loss was for me, then yes, I've made a lot of cash here - on the rise from 1 and more recently as you know from shorting and turning around again - and it's not as you correctly state a one way bet.

Alleyne - personally I think your tones could well be over optimistic. I've shorted and made money here. If you think there is no possibility that this rapid rise could not be equalled by rapid falls, then you're simply naive. And i'm long by the way!

yes Dogsbody, the Q was for you ..... i assumed you were long, and if i had bought on the most recent bounce from 480, i too would still hold that position, but monitor carefully as i know you do ....... as for Alleyne, shall leave him to crow from his own dunghill where he is clearly king, albeit as probably sole resident

Ouch.!!!

Couldnt be clearer, from the last 1/4trs cash flow statement...

Cash (used in) / generated by (7,924) 3,256 (13,203)
operations

Interest paid (616) (20) (464)

Net cash (used in) / (8,540) 3,236 (13,667)
generated by operating
activities

Once again I reiterate the fact that sola does not genarate cash.

Couldnt be clearer, thats why they need borrowings for day to day operations.

The institutions would be fools not to redeem their bonds at 588p, lets face it they only yield 1% per annum..... taken from the RNS....

The Convertible Bonds may be converted into New Shares at the option of the
holder at any time on and after 10 April 2007 up to the close of business on 11
March 2012. The Convertible Bonds will accrue interest at 1.00 per cent. per
annum.

And lets not forget the bond issue represent 10% of the sola market capitalisation.

Cynic some good points made.