SINCLAIR TANKING!

[BUSHOUT]

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SBGI&d=b

[Roland99]

1. Latest numbers...

Last Trade: 6.56
Trade Time: 2:34PM ET
Change: 0.48 (6.82%)

[Bozita]

7. The cliff grows steeper (down 7.67% at 2:40pm EDT)

[dicknbush]

25. Three months ago they were at....

$10 per share nor they are at $6.44....( A loss of 8% just today) I love this. The phone calls are really hitting the republican scum wherer it hurts ...Their pocketbooks. YEEEE HAAAA!

[fertilizeonarbusto]

2. *doing a little dance*

Maybe Shrubby can lend them some moolah.

[movonne]

5. Oh, I'm sure they will...didn't I read they got some kind of contract

from the government through a wholly owned subsidiary????

[Crankie Avalon]

3. HAH!!!

These right wingers can't run anything except into the ground, can they?

[rkc3]

4. Unfortunately, they do run campaigns pretty well.

They took a jackass and turned him into a race horse.

[radfringe]

16. slight correction

they took a jackass, slapped on some lipstick and then turn him into a race horse

[blondeatlast]

39. The Supreme Court turned him into a racehorse, remember? nt

[Media_Lies_Daily]

45. The jackass is still a jackass, and he didn't win in 2000.

[ClintonTyree]

6. Their politics...............

sure aren't enhancing share holder value. It's plain to see that many others are thinking the same way. I wrote to them and told them this would happen. The only way they'll re-think their partisan bullshit is if it hits them right square in the wallet.

[lil-petunia]

10. Their loss in stack value is 3x their reported earnings last year.

[Kolesar]

8. what does "underweight" mean? JPM "initiated" SBGI to "underweight"

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ud?s=SBGI

Equities terminology is so vague to me.

[Redbear]

19. Underweight is a polite way of saying

SELL!!!!!!!

Seriously.

It means relative to other stocks in its class, it should be rated lower. In other words, we don't recommen you buy this.

[Kolesar]

33. thanks...that's what I thought...eom

[Momof1]

9. Down to 6.46 at 2:42 pm

:)

[AndyTiedye]

13. Bring on the Bears

[On the Road]

11. Wow -- Almost 9% Down

That is NOT normal fluctuation. The investor community is going to start putting serious pressure on them to change their ways.

[Bozita]

going down faster than the gas gauge on a Hummer

[troubleinwinter]

12. They figure...

...that they will make it all back and MORE, with gov't contracts if Chimp wins.

But this does look nice!

[yardwork]

34. They can't recover from this even if chimp wins

Plus they've made it virtually impossible for the industry to sneak more deregulation through Congress. We're all watching like hawks now. Which means that the rest of the industry is pissed as hell at SBG right now.

Heh heh. I love it when they turn on one another. I love it when their beloved market eats them alive!

[blondeatlast]

40. Yeegads, that ain't pretty. But then, beauty is in the eye of the

beholder.

On second thought, looks real good!

[IdaBriggs]

14. Oooh! $6.40 @ 2:51 --> DOWN $0.64 (9.09%) nt

[Shopaholic]

15. I'm loving it!

:evilgrin:

[Zorra]

17. Bankrupt the traitors.

:toast:

[DinahMoeHum]

18. Here's a ten-year price chart on the stock (SBGI: NASDAQ-NM)

Link:
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/quickchart.asp?symb=sbgi&sid=0&o_symb=sbgi&freq=2&time=13

As you'll see, the lowest price on this chart reads at $5.00, and this stock has been trending downward all of 2004.


:smoke:

[npincus]

20. hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

and a tee hee, to boot!

[MazeRat7]

21. How can we see detail of large volume trades...

Like when execs exercise large chunks of their options.

MZr7

[Stephanie]

22. Translation please

Why is the stock going down, who is losing money, and how much are they losing? Thanks!

[MazeRat7]

24. If you had $100 invested this morning.. its now worth about $91.50

The investors have lost about 8.5% of their investment.

MZr7

[Stephanie]

26. Thank you

Is that due to loss of ad revenue? Why is it tanking?

[MazeRat7]

28. If I knew what made the market move.. I would be a very rich man..

No idea. Bad press, investor jitters, the color of the sky... who the hell knows...
That is a question best left to the analyst. I am an amateur where those kinds of questions are concerned.

MZr7

[factcheck]

46. This is why

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=printer_friendly&forum=132&topic_id=1103190&mesg_id=1107433

[JusticeForAll]

23. This is VOTING EARLY!!

Our ban on their advertisers' products should last until this horrible scourge is BOUGHT out.

THIS IS VOTING EARLY!

[high density]

27. JP Morgan

Today they rated the stock as an Underweight:

"A recommendation for investors to decrease their investment position in a particular security, sector, asset class, or market. Brokerage firms such as Morgan Stanley and JP Morgan use 'Underweight' when downgrading a stock. Antithesis of Overweight."

Sell sell sell!

[Ksec]

29. Fk with us , will ya?

hehe Life is good.

[JUS]

30. the CEO is going to have to cut back on his hookers

[Kber]

31. buy out

I wonder if anyone could interest George Soros in a media company in critical need of new management - going cheap!

[Eric J in MN]

37. Or Ted Turner (nt)

nt

[Carolab]

51. Or President Gore

he needs a station or two

[sontec]

32. SO BEAUTIFUL

was watching real-time buy/sell...
saw some huge blocks.
NOT aunt-sally selling in her 401k.

[yardwork]

35. But the Aunt Sallys are selling SBG too - and it's all good!

Sell sell sell.

[Pithy Cherub]

36. throw 'em a ten ton anvil!

n/t

[BUSHOUT]

38. 6.49 Down 0.55 (7.81%) at 4pm. Can't find the after hours movement..nt

[factcheck]

41. Unfortunately...

it appears there are a great many people here who do not understand the stock market.

Two things happened over the last week: 1) SBG released a revised (MUCH lower) estimate of Q3 earnings, and 2) many analysts downgraded their stock from BUY to HOLD, not to SELL. The two reasons for the downgrade were: 1) the earnings estimate, and 2) that many analysts felt that the stock (that was up well over $10) was overvalued. Looking at it, I tend to agree.

Interesting that NONE of the analysts that I heard or read said anything about political motivations or boycotts.

Sorry. From a purely objective point of view: If I were considering this stock (which I am not), I would have to say this stock is definitely a solid HOLD right now because it is going to hover around $6-7 for about a week and then start heading upward. I would expect that within 10 days, the stock will be trading at $9-10; right about where it should be purely based on financial data. And, anyone who picked it up at $7 is going to make some pretty easy money over a pretty short time.

[BUSHOUT]

43. Are you on F#$kin' glue? Read the latest news on Yahoo financial....

You're living under a stone. LOTS of analysts are pissing on this stock because of the partisan move.

This is bigger than any of your typical rightwing boycott that they're oh so good at.

This is into the mainsteam.....an electioneering attack on Americas democracy will do that.

[factcheck]

53. Ummmm..

Well, I did look. Generally, of course, I would not get my information from Yahoo! but I took a look anyway.

Am I missing something? Maybe you could point me to what you cite "LOTS of analysts are pissing on this stock". Because all I could find was an outside link to CBS and a vague article that speculated that the sell off was due to the political activity, they even quoted unnamed analysts. CBS is not exactly on my list of reputable news sources - well none really are, but CBS is near the top of my not so reputable news source list. :)

Oh, wait... Maybe I should have read more of the message boards! Right, those people know what they are talking about! PUHLEEEEZE!! The people posting on those boards, if they even hold any stock, couldn't amass combined holdings that I couldn't honestly completely offset if I just felt like messing with people.

So, you just go ahead and believe that this is some HUGE movement by millions of people to put Sinclair out of business. I guess that IF Kerry loses this election, I CAN blame people like you who pulled images of victory over their eyes and tried to make everyone else see what they saw.

I am sorry, but I have been involved in too many situations, business, personal, whatever, that have been derailed because people thought we had succeeded before the end of the 'race'. I am a firm believer in working like you are losing until you have actually won.

I am not trying to be terribly negative here. Actually I am just trying to be a realist. You COULD be encouraging to people without giving them what amount to false hopes. Because if those hopes do turn out to be false, you are going to be left sitting on your ass wondering where everyone is who were just carrying you a moment earlier.

[nonconformist]

55. CBS near the top of unreputable news sources?

Interesting. And telling.

[ulTRAX]

44. no correlation

factcheck wrote: "Two things happened over the last week: 1) SBG released a revised (MUCH lower) estimate of Q3 earnings, and 2) many analysts downgraded their stock from BUY to HOLD, not to SELL. The two reasons for the downgrade were: 1) the earnings estimate, and 2) that many analysts felt that the stock (that was up well over $10) was overvalued. Looking at it, I tend to agree."

Since the earnings report came out on 10-4... yet the stock price continued upward for 2 days, this theory is not supported by the evidence.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SBGI&t=3m&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

[factcheck]

52. Not true...

The earnings report alone was not enough to kill it (and, though the company released it on 10/4, it was not widely reported until as late as 10/12 - this happens a LOT). It was the second of the 'double whammy' that did it: most analysts downgraded the stock from BUY to HOLD because of the earnings report AND because they decided the stock was overvalued.

You stated that 'this theory is not supported by the evidence', but you only looked at one piece of the evidence.

Sorry, but the evidence certainly supports the theory. The alternative is that a few small money advertisers pulled their ads which dropped their earnings (Q3 earnings at that - Q3 ended 9/30). Or that investors nationwide were spooked by the political agenda and talk of advertiser boycotts and sold like crazy!!! Even though NONE of the analysts talked about anything political being a concern.

Ummmm... I will be nice about this, but, regardless of what some people might believe, DU is not the bastion of freedom in America that ALL eyes and ears turn to for information. Sure this has been in the mainstream press, but talk to MOST people and they have no idea what the whole Sinclair thing is about.

So, I am sorry to disappoint once again, but their stock will go back up as investors return to pick it up at a bargain price. What basically happened is that you got a few fund companies who dropped large blocks of SBGI and smaller investors followed suit because most of them don't know what the hell they are doing anyway.

Tell you what: this stock hits $6, pick up 10,000 shares (pool some friends together if you have to) and you will make a tidy 20 grand minimum within 2 weeks. Then you can sell, make the profit, pay the capital gains, end up with about $14,000 and donate it or whatever!

Say what you want, but I have made a bit of money here and there in the market. I even remember begging friends and family to get out in January, 2001 when I sold everything I had in the market at the time and bought a bunch of 'safe stocks' (no profit until you actually take the cash so no taxes). No one listened. They thought it would all go on forever.

The market is actually quite predictable for the most part. If a person cannot make 10-12% easily in the market, they have no business investing and should be in a nice safe fund. :)

[ulTRAX]

42. Sinclair Stock Has Been Going Down Since January 04

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SBGI&t=1y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

So one has to separate the general decline from the reaction to Sinclair's announcement to announce the airing of their anti-Kerry propaganda film. I don't see much of a correlation. Here's the 3 month chart: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SBGI&t=3m&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=
The stock continued its slide before the 10-9 story was reported.

[factcheck]

47. Right...

The stock was overvalued when it was above $10. Then there was the earnings report and the downgrading from BUY to HOLD.

[Erratic]

48. When did Sinclair originally announce it was airing the ads?

Stock price looks like its been on a downward trend for awhile(Boo hoo). I wanna see the net result of the boycott.

[Robert Oak]

49. how about a class action lawsuit from shareholders?

anybody want to dig into a class action lawsuit against Sinclair
for irresponsible use of the airwaves which caused shareholders to unnecessarily loses and also fraud for Sinclair misrepresented itself
as a news organization and a major network satellite?

[Bozos for Bush]

50. Down baby down, all the way to hell

Woohoo, this is nice to see!

BTW friends, we need some investigative help on this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1108892

Thanks,

John

[Guaranteed]

54. Anyone know what "underweight" means in stockbroker's lingo? nt

[necso]

56. A little more.

Sinclair's financial woes were highlighted Monday in J.P. Morgan's decision to initiate coverage with an "underweight" rating that indicates it is expected to under-perform its peer group.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2004-10-18-sinclair-broadcasting-woes_x.htm