Message ID: 164540
Posted By: mersenne137
Posted On: 2004-08-07 20:40:00
Subject: Royce answers and more questions
I called Royce Funds seeking answers
to the 6/30/04 Institutional holding list. I spoke with a Ms D. Ing in the legal
department, and a Mr. Robinson (?) from the investment desk. They were evasive,
but gave me some information.
Royce has actually **NOT** sold many shares
of SCOX. Sometime in May, it changed its arrangement with Jonathan Cohen's managing
Investment Advisor business (JHC Investment) so the stocks owned by the Royce Technology
Value Fund (RYTVX) are not reported on the Royce SEC 13F statement.
For
this reason, all holdings in RYTVX are shown as "sold" by Royce. This includes 450K
shares of SCOX, 1,300k shares of CYBS, and numerous other issues. I can't imagine
CYBS and others were happy with a reported huge institutional dump, despite the
fact most shares were not actually sold.
So the story remains the same: Royce
is inexplicably holding on to SCOX, despite accumulating losses. It is actively
trying to obscure the holdings of its RYTVX affiliate.
Since the June 30
filing, Cohen's RYTVX has definitely sold a large stake in CYBS, and figures indicate
that some SCOX may have sold as well. The CYBS sales came on July 16, the hypothetical
SCOX sales are about 40K as of July 31.
RYTVX closed Friday at $5.69. It
is under heavy redemption pressure, and has stopped reporting montly total assets
in it monthly online accounting.
JHC Investment filed a SEC registration
statement on March 22, 2004. It apparently considers itself exempt from public reporting
requirements at that time, the new arrangement may require it to submit the quarterly
holding list by the Aug 15 deadline. The SEC regs on who is required to submit the
13F statement are opaque to me.
The JHC Investment Management has only one
partner: Jonathan Harris Cohen. It manages 2 funds, including a private hedge fund.
In March, it had 118 MM in total assests under management, RYTVX was at about 85
MM at that time so the hedge was about 40MM in assets.
The JHC registration
statement also includes asset reporting for the affiliated investment partnerships
run by Cohen
JHC indicated in the SEC registration that it buys and sells
securities privately that it also manages. This may be the reason Royce has divorced
itself of the RYTVX assets: Cohen is privately hedging stocks he manages Long for
RYTVX,and this is likely to violate Royce governance principles
RYTVX sold
300K shares in the Descartes System Group (DSGX) in Q2. DSGX suffered a meltdown
when its CEO was caught cooking the books and abruptly resigned. DSGX is a Canadian
RFID tag/wholesale logistic firm.
The DSGX experience indicates Cohen and
Royce will bail when the legal problems or losses at SCOX become insupportable.
Investment Advisor search for JHC information:
http://www.adviserinfo.sec.gov/IAPD/Content/Search/iapd_OrgSearch.asp
Message ID: 164544
Posted By: rgriffith64
Posted On: 2004-08-07 21:40:00
Subject: Re: Royce answers and more questions
Yahoo seems to have a good
handle on RYTV
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hl?s=RYTVX
Over 7% of its
assets in a stock with a YTD return of -65%
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pm?s=RYTVX
Wow a 90% return in 2003. I guess if you ride the pump up that is what you get.
Time for the bubble to burst.
Message ID: 164622
Posted By: freecode_99
Posted On: 2004-08-08 15:20:00
Subject: No message boards for Royce either
They don't want a lot of people
knowing the shady side of their dealings IMHO.
TICC, Royce & Associates,
RYTVX, Micro-cap funds, others. No way to discuss those in a message board.
Maybe we need to start a magazine to uncover shady deals like these. Would be
nice to have some real independent news coverage that acted like media is supposed
to act : as watchdogs for our liberties instead of fearmongers and shills.
freecode
Message ID: 164629
Posted By: karl_w_lewis
Posted On: 2004-08-08 15:49:00
Subject: Re: No message boards for Royce either
>> Maybe we need to start
a magazine to uncover shady deals like these. Would be nice to have some real independent
news coverage that acted like media is supposed to act : as watchdogs for our liberties
instead of fearmongers and shills. <<
Well, yes, that'd be really, realy
cool. But...
I think, (and I would love to be wrong), that the marketplace
has spoken already. Fearmongering sells. Shilling sells ad space. Fearmongering
and shilling together gets readers and advertisers. (Thus the preponderance of that
in the market place, today.)
If you have in mind a printed publication there
are real costs that have to be offset, and short of winning a lottery, (or perhaps
you are already independently wealthy, (in which case can I borrow ten bucks?)),
it may be very, very hard to make that go.
Of course, the internet changes,
(by virtually eliminating), all the costs. So an on-line magazine might could work
realy well, and not break the bank.
Sites like Groklaw demonstrate that
there is a deep hunger in at least a small group of people, to get undiluted news.
But, (call me cynical), I think many. (most?), people would rather avoid stories
that make them really uncomfortable. The fearmongering that goes on in the press,
is, I would argue, rather like a roller-coaster ride, it *seems* a little scary,
but the reader/rider knows they're safe. News as entertainment sells; news that
is news is avoided.
KWL
Grokbuck? Grokthieves? Grokwhores? (No, that
just sounds very wrong.)
The texts of these Yahoo Message Board posts have been licensed for copying
and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board users "mersenne137", "rgriffith64",
"freecode_99", "karl_w_lewis" under the following license: License: CCL
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.
Copyright 2004 Yahoo! SCOX. Messages are owned by the individual posters.