Does a rescheduled conference call generally mean “something's wrong” with a company?
Does the market automatically assume a rescheduled call means something major, like the auditors aren't signing the financials, is going on? Yes. (If so, why?) People - including investors - are emotional. And suspicious. And paranoid. Financial discussions tend to make everything sound like a cold, clinical science, and to some degree that is true. But you should never look past something much more simple - people are people. And of course, once all is said and done, acts like a reschedule often do mean something is up. So you've now got a nice mix of fact and emotion.   Does it mean that 95% of the shares' holders are insiders who all decided to sell when they learned about whatever is causing the delay in the con call? No. See Littleadv's answer. Insiders (those who are aware of non-public material information, not necessarily employees) are the ones who actually cannot sell once they learned about whatever, by law. Martha Stewart went to jail for that. Any such deviation from the norm triggers abnormal response and avalanche of rumors, so by default investors assume something bad and try to minimize the loss. When dealing with a tiny company (market cap of less than 15M) with a tiny market volume (6.2M), the swings can be very significant. For such a small company, it is safe to assume that something happened that lead them to delay the conference call, and since they didn't tell what happen, investors assume the worst. It might end up as the CEO and CFO having bad stomach after celebrating 100% growth in revenue they were going to announce, but you'll have to wait and see....
It is because 17th was Friday, 18th-19th were weekends and 20th was a holiday on the Toronto Stock Exchange (Family Day). Just to confirm you could have picked up another stock trading on TMX and observed the price movements. sorry, things got busy.   active calendar management. Are you talking about having a dedicated receptionist manage say an exchange calendar? taking calls, making an appointment on your calendar and then saving the event and setting reminders? that kind of thing?  outgoing calls to confirm appointments sounds interesting, but currently we only want to deal with inbound, process then transfer. It's a drive by swipe at technicals, which is fine and all, but I always thought technicals effectively provide odds of an event happening. For example, $XYZ price is a support level, therefore there are increased odds it will bounce higher from these levels, rather than an implied *guarantee* the support will hold. "Been a long while since I've read it but if I remember correctly with quotational loss Graham refers to an unjustified decline in stock price because of Mr. Market's fear and loathing where the business prospects of the company are actually still sound.  This is opposed to ""actual"" loss of capital which he would consider to be a company going bankrupt or just more generally turning out to have way worse business prospects than expected with the justified decline in stock price that entails." There's no point in making a scene.  I would just left.  Either this was a fluke and that a bad employee or something common.  The fact they are still in business says it was fluke and/or they got rid of the bad employee. IANAL; perhaps some form of fraud.  They are making appointments under false pretense costing Lyft time and money.  However, I believe you are limited to recouping the lost value.  So how much does a false appointment cost, probably not enough to justify pursuing. Behind the scenes of banking are a lot of very manual processes especially when something goes wrong. These take extra time not only because it involves people reviewing what went wrong but also because the bank will take extra steps to reduce human error (e.g. technical jargon about maker/checker, dual controls). Something like this can easily get held up for a month and the best way to jump the queue is to start complaining a lot, calling customer service frequently, asking to talk to management and otherwise pestering the bank until someone senior gets your problem fast-tracked so you stop giving them a headache. My guess is they’re hoping to sell that data to multiple sources, to make up for the losses on ticket sales. Obviously no business is a guaranteed success but I’m sure they researched their options and made a decision they think will lead to profitability at some point. Institute of Supply Management, specifically their Report on Business. Good forward looking indicator.   As far as the weekly report, I'd probably read it, maybe even contribute, but I more of a lurker on this sub. I saw your question and have had some similar experiences so I thought I could help you out. I work in finance and this is something we have never seen before. They lost their insider commitments about a day before the deal was supposed to price but CS pushed it through anyways. Definitely going to be some lawsuits on this one. "Most likely scenario (A): You spend tons of time and effort talking to them, with the end result that they take away the extra points.  You feel screwed having to do their job for them - they've given you no benefit for looking out for them, and you're left with the points you've earned but maybe less desire to go back and use them. Most likely scenario (B): You just use the points, they eventually figure out the problem and fix it.  They send you a nasty letter, demanding some sort of compensation that they have no legal obligation to (because points are not money, you will have rendered existing points for service, and they have, per your existing phone call which can be substantiated in existence though not content through phone records, confirmed that they are yours) - they may go so far as to bar you from their premises.  If you don't use enough points to go ""negative"" before they fix it, you may avoid this. If they can deal with this competently from a customer service/PR standpoint, then in scenario (A) they may understand you quickly, and they may leave you with some extra points for your trouble.  In scenario (B), pretty much the same thing - they'll let you have the points you used and even leave you a little extra. I suggest in either case you only engage in written communication with them or, if your jurisdiction allows it, record voice conversations.  You need a record of what you've been told." "I think a mention of the age-old adage ""correlation does not mean causation"" is in order here.   Keep in mind another possible explanation is when the issue is brought to light people are suddenly given a reason to call in, instead of shrugging it off as a temporary issue." That actually sheds some useful light on the whole matter. As long as $client gets the paperwork in order, all will likely be well.   Had a discussion with $client today about their recurring practices, just to establish a baseline for their understanding of the same. Not because I know there is or is not a concern, but because their business is risk management and that is a risk worth managing. Or at least worth understanding the scope of the risk and potential exposure. "Funny thing is I've sat in on conference calls where I've hear managers start the call saying the performance this month/year/week/day has not been as strong because they are ""waiting for the top down approach to pay off"" and then on the same call they praise their own 'bottom up approach that no one else uses'   I think the only thing you forgot to mention so far is 'smart beta'" don't get stalled in the notion that in ONE call, some MAGIC will happen, if you DO IT RIGHT  reality is a cold call is only the first call.  sales usually requires a sequence ...relationship/confidence building route (multiple calls)