Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed


View KCInvestor's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • InBev / BUD: The Brazilians Are Coming [View article]
    only think I can think is that once the official offer is out, or once the stock has severely reacted to the offer, they will be locked out from selling or may have to jump through hoops to make sure they are not breaking any insider trading laws...perhaps they wanted out without any strings attached...i'm sure they have already been in closed door talks before the leak was reflected in the stock price...i heard of this rumor about a year and a half ago and nothing ever came of it
    May 27, 2008. 05:49 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • First Solar: Large Intangible Assets and High PEs Go Together [View article]
    I'm not sure I get the intangible asset comparison. You really think First Solar is in the process of building a brand image the likes of Coca Cola or Ford as opposed to a product that will inevitably become a commodity (if it isn't already?). They have some competitive advantages, but the move in market valuation can hardly be justified by intangible asset appreciation. You know what happens to goodwill and other intangibles...they get amortized and vanish in a blink of an eye. Focus on long-term earnings quality for a company like FSLR....not the brand they may or may not be building.

    Disclosure: Waiting for the market to break and will be shorting FSLR near-term. Long term, sure we probably haven't seen a high in FSLR as prices can stay irrational for years.
    May 8, 2008. 09:19 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ITT Educational Services Offers an Investment for the Future [View article]
    Not sure if they could fill the gap if FFEL loans are cut off. That would be bad. I still have to think the majority of students will be able to find financing...I don't expect the flow to cutoff entirely, but to tighten a bit and hurt enrollment rates...probably. Still think the shares are discounted too much, but if FFEL loans are cutoff it could get much worse. I only have a smallish position and am going to try to ride it out. If FFEL issues one is safe.
    Apr 1, 2008. 01:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tracking Jim Cramer's Performance: January 2007 Stock Picks [View article]
    what you haven't taken into account is the "Cramer effect" where a stock trades higher on the day or two after his recommendation, primarily due to his recommendation, and then settles back down to prior levels within a week or so. This happens much more dramatically the smaller the company is.

    Could you please re-run your analysis using one week after his call for the entry position? it would be interesting to see how results compare. Thanks
    Mar 14, 2008. 10:15 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Jim Cramer's Mad Money Lightning Round, 3/3/08: Google-licious No More [View article]
    Cramer, what happened to Google $850, or the Google $1000 that you actually valued it at but were being conservative with $850? Internet advertising has slowed a touch, so google is now valued nearly 50% less than your price target only 4 months ago? Wow

    disclosure: no position.
    Mar 4, 2008. 09:06 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Mastercard's Risks [View article]
    good writeup, nice to see someone addressing downside concerns, not just a go buy this stock article. I agree...avoid until valuation looks better. Along with the analysts, CNBC's Fast Money (Guy Adami) has been rooting for this one often the last few months (stating lack of consumer exposure) as well.
    Jan 25, 2008. 12:34 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple and Intel Fail to Impress: Waiting for the Fed's Next Move [View article]
    Oops, you pissed off the AAPL lovers. Commenters: Give me a break --- why are you wasting your time defending the stock --- just shut up and go buy more of it. Everyone can have their opinion, and if the writer was disappointed with Macworld, so be it --- that doesn't make them ignorant or an idiot. In fact, AAPL needs more coverage by people who address its downside risks, because sorry folks, they do exist. Long-term, sure it will likely go higher, but that doesn't mean it can't get crushed come Tuesday (my money is to the long side before you bash me).

    It's also interesting how so many commenters can be so critical of one's grammar, yet they themselves have so many typos in the same sentence..."LEARN OUT TO WRITE". Seriously?

    Just because you've looked up how much their sales have grown year over year, or notice that a product "seems" to be a success doesn't make you an analyst or a stock guru. This company could have negative returns in 2008 --- does anyone realize this? I wouldn't bet on that myself, but the complete lack of acknowledgement that this is a possibility is both mind-boggling and dangerous.

    SA should refuse articles on AAPL altogether if this BS is going to continue.
    Jan 21, 2008. 03:16 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Morgan Stanley's Top Long Ideas For 2008 [View article]
    Nothing in the MS report or in my article stated any idea was necessarily "new". Just highlighting a few stocks in their report where I like their rationale and agree will likely outperform in 2008.
    Dec 18, 2007. 10:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Genentech Will Recover from FDA's Rejection of Avastin [View article]
    I agree with your analysis -- nice write-up


    Dec 7, 2007. 11:41 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Tellurium Supernova [View article]
    I am a chemical engineer and am happy to admit I know absolutely nothing about Te. However - either way you look at this trade, going long or short here, is very speculative. All I can say is that if you think there demise will be in a few years, why not wait to short it until there is some sign of this. They won't collapse overnight, and you would likely still have time to build a large short position. For the time, being the trend might be your friend, although I happen to think all solar stocks are long over-due for a correction, hence why I sold my FSLR position after a big run up back at 165. Don't you think a company of this size would have researched the availablility of their supply chain before investing hundreds of millions of dollars in a business on which it completely relies? While I unequivocably can not dispute the facts/opinions of either argument, I just find it all very hard to believe. But, I suppose Wall Street doesn't have a whole lot of physicists on the payroll either. Again, too speculative either way...
    Dec 5, 2007. 06:04 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Rentech May Get a Bid - But Don't Count On It [View article]
    I guess I have to disagree with you. I've reviewed their 10-K, financial statements, and their corporate governance and don't see anything too alarming. The weighted average price of vested options & warrants is $2.07, and the unvested options is more like $2.70. Stock based compensation expense has been rather low. Their have been no major exercises or insider sales lately. Seems like pretty standard stuff...though you are right, eventually those things will be exercised --- just like all other insiders do in every other public company when they make it big. If you see something that I don't that proves otherwise, please share. Thanks
    Nov 21, 2007. 06:32 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Jos. A. Bank Clothiers: Dressed for Success [View article]
    what do you think about their inventory management philosophy? i agree cheap for this growth
    Nov 20, 2007. 10:12 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • When Bad Strategies Outperform [View article]
    Momentum trading and investing in high growth stocks, while riskier than Jack's strategy, does not make it a bad strategy. It's just different by nature and not as safe. If all you are looking for is low volatility (and likely low returns), Jack's strategy will do and you can be happy with low risk/low reward. If you have a longer investment horizon and a higher risk tolerance, I'd go with Jill's strategy every time. If Jill can learn to master the art of taking profits, I think Jill will outperform every time, not just in markets like the one we've had in 2007.

    But to say that momentum investors are thoughtless, reckless, and do zero research is just plain false. The value vs. growth debate lives on. Ultimately, what investors are willing to pay is all that matters. The fact that a stock, say Apple, has a higher P/E relative to your safe value stock only means that investors have more confidence in a company like Apple to continue selling Mac's, iPod's, and iPhones at an amazing clip and will continue to rake in profits over the near term, especially when compared to a company like HD. You're right though, I'm sure HD and others like it will one day be back on top as the cycle reverses over the next 5-10 years, but why would you want to suffer the almost guranteed losses over the near-term? You'd be better off in cash. If Jack is as educated as you make him out to be, I'm sure his research takes into account the fact that his value stocks are probably out of favor and cheap on a historical basis for good reason, and that there is likely no near-term event/catalyst that will send them flying higher, at least for the time being. So, Jack - be patient with your strategy, because history has shown that your strategy will work over time as well. In the meantime, why don't you try to adapt to current market conditions instead of wasting your time ridiculing strategies that happen to be outperforming yours in today's market. You won't see me crying when value starts to outperform growth because hopefully I'll be smart enough to adapt to what is working at the time and still make money (or at least lose less). In the end Jack and Jill should both make money as long as they both stay in I'm sure you are aware, asset allocation is really all that matters.
    Nov 14, 2007. 05:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
1 Like