You're right. They care about their fiduciary duty to shareholders to earn a profit, and of course they are primarily concerned with earning money form themselves (like everyone). Mitt's proposals will provide them with incentives to hire, bring back jobs, and invest in the United States. Blaming them for doing their jobs (maximizing shareholder value), or for being self interested (as everyone is) is not the way to make things better. Giving them the policies needed for investing in America to make sense for them and their shareholders is the only way to spur investment and spark growth.
2 Sectors To Consider If Romney Wins [View article]
I agree that Republicans don't want big government, however my general feeling is that the American public is generally quite hawkish about China. Its hard not to look at China's economy, demographics and government system and feel at least a little threaten, and in the past those sorts of threats have often turned into arms races... you may be right, but I think that Mitt Romney's policy of building a 15 ship navy is a direct response to China, and that the public would likely support that move purely because of China's status as a rising power.
You are right, to a point. Obama isn't to blame for the current economic malaise. The question is, has he improved the situation relative to what it would have been or not? No one really knows the answer to this question. The stimulus package likely helped some, but it was incredibly inefficient. The uncertainty caused by the healthcare debate likely had a negative impact, even if the legislation is positive for the economy in the long run. Obama's perceived attitude toward business certainly hasn't helped spur investment, etc. Blaming the meltdown on Obama is silly, but that doesn't give his economic policies a free pass. Theoretically I would say he has probably not helped the situation, but putting empirical evidence behind that claim is a very, very difficult task.
If he would say anything to get elected, he probably wouldn't be speaking in favor of business so much... not a populist position by any stretch of the imagination. What many do like about him (including me) is that he favors solutions that work over principles. Pragmatism in Washingtion should be a good thing for markets.
I measure execution in results, not a temporary hardware issue that can occur at most product role-outs with beta software which MS had no control over. In terms of successfully introducing the Surface to the public, the role-out was perfect, and the freeze up was a side-story quickly buried by positive press about the keyboard. No one is talking about that now. Surface is now the most anticipated and talked about tablet since the iPad, bar none, and that is largely because of the perfectly executed release. Who knows why the tablet froze, but if MS hadn't done a stellar job on everything else that day it might have been the dominant story. It wasn't, and that tells you all you need to know.
Care to be specific? Only a very small part of the article even resembles a supply-side argument (the discussion of the income effect of Mitt's proposed capital gains tax cut). What I don't understand about much of the criticism is that I never say that Mitt is a better choice. I am only saying that his policies favor business, and thus stocks. I don't see how this is controversial: I expect progressives to say that a president should be people-focused and that corporations are instruments of greed that should not be encouraged, and conservatives to say that Mitt has it right and favoring companies will help workers and the economy overall. To be clear once more: I am not saying one side is right or wrong politically or for the broader economy, only that a Mitt Romney administration would likely be beneficial for stock prices.
I'm not convinced you understand the point of this article. I am not saying that I think abandoning the mercury regulations is the right thing to do. Read it all again, I never said that. All I said is that if the regulations are repealed, it is positive for stocks and negative for public health. This isn't a political philosophy article, its an economics article... saying that repealing a regulation will help stock does not equate to endorsing the repeal of such regulation... its just a necessary result of a nonpartisan analysis.
Well, pretty much, but there are some differences. Newt's tax plan is more aggressive (and thus much less feasible) than Mitt's. Ron Paul too has a very different plan. The bottom line is that while the plans are overall quite similar, Mitt is the most likely to win and his plan is also the most likely to be put into law because it is reasonable, well thought out and not entirely unpalatable for Democrats.
U.S. Manufacturing Set To Outperform: How To Profit [View article]
My point isn't so much that Ford is a buy per se, only that it stands, as a prominent American manufacturer, to benefit from the factors I describe in the article. The debt is almost certainly already factored into the share price, whereas I believe a resurgence of American manufacturing is not.
Odyssey Marine Exploration: The Perfect Stock For A Choppy Market [View article]
I'm sorry, but I happen to think that the chances of a "reasonable settlement" of the Black Swan case are zero. Odyssey has already lost on appeal, with its only remaining hope being the US Supreme Court. The odds of the court taking the case are very, very low, as it hinges mostly on a factual dispute (was the Mercedes a warship or not?) as opposed to the court's purpose of determining constitutional issues. Regardless, why would Spain settle if they are going to win? There are court costs involved they may prefer to avoid, sure, but they have made it very obvious that this is an issue of cultural patrimony and that they believe Odyssey pillaged a war grave. I think they would find it unconscionable that Odyssey profits from what they view as a disingenuous (at best) operation, regardless of Odyssey's good faith, which I believe is very real. Spain's stated positions leave no room for such an agreement, no matter how rational it may be (and I agree that it would be a rational thing to do). Perhaps the new government will have a different idea, but I doubt it and I surely wouldn't factor it into my valuation of the stock. I won't complain if it happens, though. =)
I don't agree... the recession that has already started in the Eurozone will only amplify the problems, and fiscal austerity ensured by the recent agreement will make it a deep one that may even spread across the pond. Regardless of how the debt situation works out, Europe is in for another year of negative growth... hard to see their market undervalued here with that fact in mind.
7 High Quality Stocks For The Long-Term Investor [View article]
I wouldn't include FCX as a high quality stock for long term investors. Here's why: The company has a long history of diluting shareholders, with share count increasing from 232 million to 945 million in just the past 9 years. That is a horrible track record for long term investors, and not the sort of history I would look for in a stock I want to own for the long term.
Auxilio Inc. Has Multi-Bagger Potential And Downside Protection [View article]
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for the comment, it is spot on. The dry spell was under a different CEO, and Mr. Flynn has done a great job so far... he impresses me quite a bit which is one reason I am so confident in AUXO's potential. I also agree that it has reached a critical mass in terms of recognition and customer count. Regarding the large equipment sellers becoming more aggressive, this is possible but the bottom line is that any large seller managing their own products will tend to inflate their own margins over time given the switching costs involved. All of Auxilio's current contracts have been won via RFPs against those companies, and I expect its success to continue though again, it is possible things become more difficult down the road. On the working capital, I'm curious to see what happens to it going forward, but overall I don't think their is reason for alarm. The company's burn rate is falling, and it is projected to go cash flow positive this, which tells me that there is a good chance that its $1.3 million of cash and $1.4 million LOC will hold them over (that's $2.3 million total since they need to maintain 400k in a bank account per the covenants of the LOC). They burned just over $1 million in the first 9 months of 2012, and that's at a very rapid roll-out rate. I would expect that as the margins for the new accounts improve they stand a better chance at nabbing non-dilutive financing. It would be great to see the LOC increased or another transaction that doesn't dilute shareholders to fuel the growth, but either way they're financing for the right reason. Again, spot on of the warrants/options. I had meant to mention this, and it does impact the long term somewhat though not really material against the potential growth. Completely agreed on the lack of price response to sales growth... weary shareholders, low liquidity, etc. all contribute to the market largely ignoring the massive growth, but that doesn't make it any less real. I'm certainly not in the camp that the company should slow down its growth right now to build up profitability and get more attractive financing. EMR and the current sales momentum give them reason, IMO, to go for every last RFP they can... if that means the company needs additional financing to finance the growth that's okay with me, because they're building up a roster of contracts that will be profitable for a long, long time. Regarding acquisition potential, I agree that that would be a nice exit and have heard others mention that as well.
What Mitt Might Mean For Stocks [View article]
2 Sectors To Consider If Romney Wins [View article]
Thanks for the comment,
Jared
What Mitt Might Mean For Stocks [View article]
What Mitt Might Mean For Stocks [View article]
Does Microsoft Have A Master Plan? [View article]
Does Microsoft Have A Master Plan? [View article]
What Mitt Might Mean For Stocks [View article]
What Mitt Might Mean For Stocks [View article]
What Mitt Might Mean For Stocks [View article]
U.S. Manufacturing Set To Outperform: How To Profit [View article]
Odyssey Marine Exploration: The Perfect Stock For A Choppy Market [View article]
Eurozone - The Buy Of A Decade? [View article]
7 High Quality Stocks For The Long-Term Investor [View article]
'Twas The Weeks Before Christmas [View article]
Auxilio Inc. Has Multi-Bagger Potential And Downside Protection [View article]
Thanks for the comment, it is spot on. The dry spell was under a different CEO, and Mr. Flynn has done a great job so far... he impresses me quite a bit which is one reason I am so confident in AUXO's potential. I also agree that it has reached a critical mass in terms of recognition and customer count.
Regarding the large equipment sellers becoming more aggressive, this is possible but the bottom line is that any large seller managing their own products will tend to inflate their own margins over time given the switching costs involved. All of Auxilio's current contracts have been won via RFPs against those companies, and I expect its success to continue though again, it is possible things become more difficult down the road.
On the working capital, I'm curious to see what happens to it going forward, but overall I don't think their is reason for alarm. The company's burn rate is falling, and it is projected to go cash flow positive this, which tells me that there is a good chance that its $1.3 million of cash and $1.4 million LOC will hold them over (that's $2.3 million total since they need to maintain 400k in a bank account per the covenants of the LOC). They burned just over $1 million in the first 9 months of 2012, and that's at a very rapid roll-out rate. I would expect that as the margins for the new accounts improve they stand a better chance at nabbing non-dilutive financing. It would be great to see the LOC increased or another transaction that doesn't dilute shareholders to fuel the growth, but either way they're financing for the right reason.
Again, spot on of the warrants/options. I had meant to mention this, and it does impact the long term somewhat though not really material against the potential growth.
Completely agreed on the lack of price response to sales growth... weary shareholders, low liquidity, etc. all contribute to the market largely ignoring the massive growth, but that doesn't make it any less real. I'm certainly not in the camp that the company should slow down its growth right now to build up profitability and get more attractive financing. EMR and the current sales momentum give them reason, IMO, to go for every last RFP they can... if that means the company needs additional financing to finance the growth that's okay with me, because they're building up a roster of contracts that will be profitable for a long, long time.
Regarding acquisition potential, I agree that that would be a nice exit and have heard others mention that as well.