|
TranceAddict Investors Club @ Marketocracy (pg. 34)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
I wouldn't be surprised. But hey--you can buy FMD even cheaper today! My short will be covered before the end of the year (maybe covered and re-shorted multiple times if I can get the borrow!). Good luck! |
Yea, down 5%, it's damn hard calling bottoms...:o
I might buy half a quarter position at a time...
| quote: |
Capitalizt wrote on Today 03:43:
Yo man, what do you think of BAC and AXP? I think all the bad news is built into these stocks and they have nowhere to go but up. I'm thinking of buying a few shares..
|
I personally don't like either one, but here's the fundamental facts...
BAC is the more undervalued stock. BAC's FS is 66; average. The gamma is 1.89, indicating the stock price is undervalued substantially. The yield ratio is 2.07, indicating the earnings and dividends are very cheap, a further indication of stock price undervaluation. The PEG is 1.94, indicating the price paid appears to be much too high relative to the estimated future growth in earnings. So while BAC's price is undervalued now; when current price and earnings are compared to expected earnings growth, BAC is overvalued. So you must decide whether you want to buy current undervaluation, or future overvaluation. Then again, the PEG uses estimated future earnings growth, which can be wrong...The intrinsic strength (the ultimate measure of a company :D), is 2.82, AVERAGE. BAC's fundamentals are average, but their price is cheap. Personally, I wouldn't buy it because I only buy cheap companies with EXCELLENT fundamentals, not just average.
AXP's FS is 59; just below average. The gamma is 1.21, indicating a moderate undervaluation. The yield ratio is .94, indicating the dividends and earnings are pretty cheap. The PEG is 1.22, indicating the price and earnings relative to expected earning growth is a little high, but not that bad. A PEG of more than 1.5 is one that gets into more expensive territory. The intrinsic strength is 2.97; AVERAGE, but better than BAC's because AXP expected earnings growth is higher than BAC, thus the PEG is lower. That is why AXP's IS is slightly higher than BAC's despite BAC's better fundamentals.
If I was to give BAC and AXP a grade, BAC would be a C and AXP would be a D+. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Yea, down 5%, it's damn hard calling bottoms...:o
I might buy half a quarter position at a time...
|
Officially closed out my FMD position today. Down another 7%. I think it could get back to $11 or so but I've been in this thing since the mid $30s so I'm taking some risk off the table. I noticed this morning that they're hawking yet another in-house brand. They now have their Aspire private loans and Monticello.
Krypton, I officially don't care whether the stock goes up or down now, but if it runs back up around $20, I may have to jump back in.;) |
|
|
| Krypton |
Guys, look at the plowback ratio of ESV...
Plowback = Earnings per share / dividends per share
Plowback indicates how much of earnings is being devoted to paying dividends. Usually, the plowback ratio is 0-10, but ESV's plowback ratio is 66.46.
What does this mean? It means ESV has a lot of earnings to devote to dividends! Much above average. Am I right in assuming, based on the plowback ratio, that ESV will be increasing dividends in the future?? |
|
|
| venomX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Guys, look at the plowback ratio of ESV...
Plowback = Earnings per share / dividends per share
Plowback indicates how much of earnings is being devoted to paying dividends. Usually, the plowback ratio is 0-10, but ESV's plowback ratio is 66.46.
What does this mean? It means ESV has a lot of earnings to devote to dividends! Much above average. Am I right in assuming, based on the plowback ratio, that ESV will be increasing dividends in the future?? |
I wouldn't think it is that straight forward. The amount of dividends being payed out should not be just a function of how much cash you have lying around. The strategy of the business will be crucial in determining what is done with those earnings. If the company has decided to grow their business they might increase the dividends only moderately or even not increase them at all. I would suggest you look at their strategic outlook coupled with the info you have on their earnings. A good company doesn't only look to appease their shareholder in the short term, but looks to grow the shareholder value in the long term. So I wouldn't assume anything, I would go check what they say their strategy is going to be and then have a better idea of what they might do. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by venomX
I wouldn't think it is that straight forward. The amount of dividends being payed out should not be just a function of how much cash you have lying around. The strategy of the business will be crucial in determining what is done with those earnings. If the company has decided to grow their business they might increase the dividends only moderately or even not increase them at all. I would suggest you look at their strategic outlook coupled with the info you have on their earnings. A good company doesn't only look to appease their shareholder in the short term, but looks to grow the shareholder value in the long term. So I wouldn't assume anything, I would go check what they say their strategy is going to be and then have a better idea of what they might do. |
Do you think the high plowback ratio suggests that the company has a higher PROBABILITY of having the incentive of -high earnings/low dividend- to where they would more likely increase their dividend in the future; as compared to a company with a lower plowback ratio. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
IS ratio is still being improved upon and will change...
Do you guys see what I am seeing???
I see a triple top, head & shoulders chart pattern. This is a BEARISH indication. I'm going to be looking for shorts!!
Cap, better start that short fund, I need some competition here!!:) |
So far, my prediction is ringing true. I further expect more declines as the recession that I see as already in the early stages runs its course. Look for bargains as Wall Street goes on sale. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
So far, my prediction is ringing true. I further expect more declines as the recession that I see as already in the early stages runs its course. Look for bargains as Wall Street goes on sale. |
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=sds |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
So far, my prediction is ringing true. I further expect more declines as the recession that I see as already in the early stages runs its course. Look for bargains as Wall Street goes on sale. |
Any idea guesses on how long it takes to take full grip of the economy?
I'm going to make a call that it will be volitile trending downward until mid Feb. when things will begin stabalizing. |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
We are going to start feeling these rate cuts 3-4 months from now. If we get a stimulus package from Washington, it may be sooner. I think the market has priced in most of the turmoil we are going to have for the next few months. Long term investors should start looking for value right now.
I predict the dems will sweep every branch of government next year, so it would be wise to stay away from their favorite "lets get em!" stocks like banks, oil companies, drug companies, etc. I'm thinking tech should be relatively safe from their tendencies to increase regulation, etc. so I made my first long term bets today in the IRA.
I bought Intel, IGW (ishares semiconductor index) and IGN (ishares networking index). All of these stocks are sitting at three year lows and I think they are victims of extreme short sightedness on behalf of the market. Numbers for these companies will certainly be weak this year as the world enters a slowdown/recession...but this in no way justifies how badly the stocks have been crushed.
Just ask yourself...What are the long term macro trends of the world?
My answer:
#1 Lots more computers
#2 Lots more internetz
;)
Semiconductor technology is getting so small and so cheap that we will soon see CPU's in in virtually EVERYTHING we use. Demand for chips is going to skyrocket over the next few decades. Computer and internet use is also growing exponentially as the emerging markets become developed countries, and more of the human race gets online. In my opinion these CPU and internet infrastructure companies are a great buy here, and have the potential to triple in the next 5-10 years. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by atbell
Any idea guesses on how long it takes to take full grip of the economy?
I'm going to make a call that it will be volitile trending downward until mid Feb. when things will begin stabalizing. |
It's too early to tell. We don't even know how low the Fed will go with rates, so it's up in the wind.
My sentiment is a bit negative at moment. I'm worried about stagflation. A trend in which inflation is high because the government prints loads of money but asset values stay flat or negative. That is my main concern at the moment.
It's much like predicting the weather. You can have all the algorithms and models you want, there is no 100% certainty. |
|
|
| venomX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
It's too early to tell. We don't even know how low the Fed will go with rates, so it's up in the wind.
My sentiment is a bit negative at moment. I'm worried about stagflation. A trend in which inflation is high because the government prints loads of money but asset values stay flat or negative. That is my main concern at the moment.
It's much like predicting the weather. You can have all the algorithms and models you want, there is no 100% certainty. |
I don't think the US economy will go into stagflation. Stagflation is a pretty extreme condition. Surely the US economy will go into a mild recession, but to say that this mild recession is going to trigger stagflation is being overly pessimistic I would think. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by venomX
I don't think the US economy will go into stagflation. Stagflation is a pretty extreme condition. Surely the US economy will go into a mild recession, but to say that this mild recession is going to trigger stagflation is being overly pessimistic I would think. |
Correction: Stagflation a la 1970's was more extreme. Stagflation is simply a period of inflation during slowing growth. The definition does not measure the degree of stagflation. We've had it for at least a couple of quarters so far with Q4 GDP slowing to just a 0.6% rate while headline inflation has been rising. I'm getting more hopeful that all of this b/s federal bailing out of morons and massive Fed injections of liquidity will help the economy (though I absolutely disagree with the policy decisions). All that said, the stagflation we've seen so far has been relatively mild and only over a short period. We'll see what happens from here. |
|
|
|
|
