Seeking Alpha


View as an RSS Feed
View Amvona's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Lost Money on Cisco: Why We're Not Worried [View article]
    Not worried. The article references a multi-year time horizon, not multi-day. It is hard to imagine an investment, with a time horizon of less than a year.

    Investment is seperate from speculation, which is most often associated with high activity. Neither “speculation” nor this type of “trading” is suggested in the article.

    here are further thoughts on the topic:

    It might be worth considering that the company:

    a) Is a clear market leader
    b) Has averaged a healthy 23.3% Operating Margin over the last five years
    c) Has grown gross revenue 41% during the same period, including years of deep recession.

    Have yet to lose a night of sleep over the stock price, which at any moment is what someone else thinks it’s worth – only matters if you’re interested in selling at that time - would not be interested in selling a company with CSCO’s characteristics.

    If the company does “print in the 16s” today or tomorrow…, does it diminish the characteristics that are described in this response, or in the article above? Because “the market” says it is worth $16 on March 17th, 2011 or March 18th, 2011, does that make the stock worth that number?

    Or is that price merely what someone is willing to buy or sell it for on a day when the world’s third largest economy is literally in 'meltdown' - that is to say at a time we appear to be witnessing one of the worst natural and nuclear disasters of all time and the related market gyrations? In such a case, reference to a benchmark, such as the S & P 500 is also useful.

    Does a sound analysis of its qualitative and quantitative factors not determine the value? (Which can vary widely and is somewhat subjective). Can the investor not determine in his or her own mind what price is “fair” for the value – if the investor is comfortable with that number, why would they care what others think?
    Mar 17, 2011. 06:56 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Lost Money on Cisco: Why We're Not Worried [View article]
    Thank you for taking the time to both read the article, but also to comment, and for your particularly kind words… sincerely appreciate it.

    21k readers in just over 30 hrs, almost every commenter angry...

    Next time, instead of publishing an article for shareholders (who have lost money for ten years straight on a stock) that suggests that the stock is finally a good buy, might just do a paper cut in the eye and pour lemon juice on it instead… it will be more fun... ;o)
    Feb 14, 2011. 05:53 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Lost Money on Cisco: Why We're Not Worried [View article]
    ....the best returns are to be had by choosing well to begin with...

    Fortunes are rarely made by "...regularly taking some profits...", and its related tax penalties.

    Holding on to the right companies means regularly taking (as an owner) ongoing profits, vs. just "some" – the profit is in the company owned, not the stock sold.

    Stocks should be sold when a) their long term prospects no longer look favorable b) they are radically overpriced, or c) the capital can be better used somewhere else.

    …not convinced “taking profits” as a reason in itself, constitutes a sound justification upon which to sell - if the company is good, there is a significant margin of safety, it was purchased on a value basis, and the objective is to compound returns over the long run.

    … there are different investment philosophies (not all equal), not all investors would be a good match for the particular philosophy put forward.
    Feb 13, 2011. 09:08 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Lost Money on Cisco: Why We're Not Worried [View article]
    don't understand comment regarding May 2010?

    do not have "clients" as such... do not receive any pay.

    the only advice given was precisely what is stated in the second sentence of the article.

    ...have not lost one penny yet for investors, rather the annual returns are greater than 75%...

    Since much of the advice and related rational are published online (with a date), it is easy to research the track record.

    dollar cost averaging is appropriate for passive investors... hope article didn't come off as "passive" approach to investing.

    is citing only recent price declines a sound basis upon which to make a "do not buy" conclusion?
    Feb 13, 2011. 08:46 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Skechers and the Market's Strange Reaction to Sterne Agee [View article]
    I really appreciate your feedback.

    Don't worry too much about the lose, all investors have loses.

    Historically analysts, pundits and short sellers worked in conjunction to try to find and trigger "stop loss" orders - of course that is illegal now a days. Nonetheless, it warrants further consideration on the value of automated orders, and why we need them at all? Illegal is not the same as "impossible to carry out".
    The key is to know a stock well enough, that it doesn't matter what the market thinks it's worth - but rather, it should only matter what you think it's worth - based on a rational framework.

    You might want to check out the original post on the blog at:

    Some important elements were edited out by SA for some odd reason?
    Dec 22, 2010. 10:12 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple's Crime And Punishment [View article]
    Dear Minutemen,

    Thank you for taking the time to read the article and to comment.
    Mar 13, 2013. 06:06 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Silver Platters, Annie Oakley And 'The Sidelines' [View article]
    Dear Reader,

    Thank you for taking the time to read the article.

    Can you please explain your comment regarding “Is this politician speak…”, or perhaps how the actual position of the author can be made any more transparent?

    Regarding your comments on “…pricing/margin…” – can you also expand? As a point of reference, you will find 7 critical articles published on the topic here:

    (also found on SeekingAlpha)

    Regarding your comments on “…easier stocks…” can you share with more specificity, or perhaps publish the rationale behind those picks that you “think” will do better?

    Regarding your comments “…could be correct…”. In the link above you will find 23 examples of “could be”, or to use your word 23 examples of “luck”.

    However, if that is not sufficient, the shares have already appreciated ~5.5% in less than two business days.

    From a brief review of your profile page, it appears that you only leave negative comments – is that correct?
    May 1, 2012. 12:27 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Corning From Another Perspective [View article]
    Dear Reader,

    It is true that funds report on a quarterly basis to investors, but always track historical “performance” in years.

    The “annualized” figure becomes extremely important if the following apply:

    a) The manager can perform consistently
    b) The capital is compounded

    i.e. 37.6% which returns 37.6% again in about the same amount of time equals a figure far in excess of 37.6% annually.

    The idea that it is “ridiculous” to use your word, assumes point “A” above is not possible.

    Almost all of the Amvona investments made have done far better than the example provided in this article. Feel free to view the complete and publicly verifiable record widely published on the web, on SeekingAlpha or more specifically here:

    Feel free to stay in touch
    Apr 25, 2012. 02:33 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Corning From Another Perspective [View article]
    Dear Reader,

    If a manager realizes a gain for an investor in a period of time which is less than a year, but must measure (for various reasons) the performance of the investors capital in the standard annual form (which is universal), how do you suggest it be done (if not as above)?

    The annualized figure is the calculus used to determine how the capital has performed, and may continue to performance once it is reallocated (since it is available again) by the manager.
    Apr 25, 2012. 02:10 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Did Seagate Just Tip Western Digital's Hand? [View article]
    Dear Reader,

    Thank you for taking the time to read the article and also to comment – appreciate your detailed thoughts as well.

    You may also like:

    Again thanks,
    Apr 20, 2012. 02:01 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • American Greetings: The Triple 'W' Stock [View article]
    Dear Reader,

    Thank you for taking the time to read the article and also to comment, but especially for your kind remarks.

    Your points are excellent. However, believe that there will always be room for physical cards – they have superior value in many respects, including sentimental value.

    If everyone starts sending e-cards (a business AM is also in), won’t physical cards become even more valuable in a way? Having a McDonalds on every corner does not diminish the value of Prime Rib and Lobster, if anything it highlights the value of real food.

    Even if this is not the case, and the paper card dies off, what is to prevent AM from continuing to evolve and change has it already has in it’s 105 year history?

    That having been said the company has not and does not lose money – their financials are still impressive. They have a seasoned management team with vested interested in the outcome of their future. If the firm got to a point where they were losing money on a serial basis, could they not simply close the operation and sell the assets for [far] more than the market cap today and cover the common? After all the stock is selling for only half of tangible book – and if the real estate is understood correctly, probably even less than that. Today’s price assigns no value to the company as a going concern – even though it has generated 90 mln. In FCF in the last 12 months alone – that is a lot of “run way” to get things right.

    Again thanks and feel free to stay in touch!
    Jan 9, 2012. 05:10 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why We're Still Buying Skechers Stock [View article]
    Dear Reader,

    Thank you for taking the time to read the article and to comment.

    The main point on the tax refund is that it is a large amount of cash (13% of enterprise value as of the writing of the article) being returned to the owners (shareholders) – how it is handled on a GAAP basis is ancillary.

    If following “consensus estimates” and analyst was all that was necessary to have gains in the market, everyone would have gains.

    Opinions are not all equal.

    Hope this helps and feel free to stay in touch
    Dec 3, 2011. 07:23 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Greg Lemelson makes the case that a little-noticed Massachusetts Supreme Court decision this week basically made all foreclosure sales in MA over the past 5 years "wholly void." Of particular interest is the remedy to those who find themselves with worthless title - it's not against the foreclosed homeowner, but against the bank/servicer that improperly foreclosed.  [View news story]
    The following two SJC cases are also important:
    Oct 20, 2011. 08:44 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Update: Western Digital vs. Seagate [View article]
    Thank you for taking the time to read the article and also to comment.

    The point on the STX dividend is a good one. However, when dividends are this high, it might be worth considering if the dividend is designed to attract new captial, instead of disbursing earnings to existing owners – and if so, why?

    Again thanks,
    Aug 11, 2011. 09:55 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Update: Western Digital vs. Seagate [View article]
    The original unedited version of the article can be found here:
    Aug 11, 2011. 08:55 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment