What did he mean by this?

>>1298206
When the IPO happened I thought it was an insane valuation for a one product company. If it was a music group they would be considered a one hit wonder. Yet with no products in the pipeline people still bought it.

I can only think that some people wanted to pump and dump and they convinced longs that it was good.

They've got a deal with redbull going, but I'd like to see more "common man" products. I'm holding at 9.60

>>1298261
>I'm holding at 9.60
They have a good balance sheet with limited debt, but they are losing money bad. The low debt also shows they aren't making debt to make money. They have no clue what to do it seems and I would stay away. Assets are worth $5 per share and half of that is cash.

Trains like Samsung are coming down the tunnel, and it doesnt look like gopro is going to make it out in time

>>1298206
He meant the company had no patents for cameras, so after an initial disruption period, they were at the mercy of their competitors.
I shorted them all the way down from the $90's.
Shit was cash.