Seeking Alpha

Sava

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Sava's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Wait, Facebook Is Worth How Much? [View article]
    If you have liked a brand, company, or something else, their posts will show up in your newsfeed even if they aren't paying for it. A lot of critics of Facebook will point to screenshots of "ads" that aren't ads at all.

    That 5% is for total newsfeed ads of all types across all of Facebook's billion+ MAUs. It is possible and even likely you have more than 5%, as that is only the average.
    Sep 4 08:51 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Nasdaq: Sell-Off After eSpeed Deal Offers An Entry Opportunity [View article]
    John, you might want to go share your insight with NDAQ and NYSE executives because they think it has only to do with HFT.
    Aug 26 08:42 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Examining Facebook's Potential Reveals Tremendous Opportunities [View article]
    Have you heard of Farmville or Candy Crush Saga? They have been a game platform for some of the most popular online games in the world.
    Aug 15 08:35 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What Lies In Store For Facebook? [View article]
    First, what I said in my first comment isn't true: there was 76% revenue growth in mobile ads on a sequential quarter basis but that was a $282.09 sequential difference. The total revenue from mobile ads was $655.59 million - which is all revenue that didn't exist a year ago.

    The opportunity in buying this is as follows: Martin Sorrell - CEO of WPP the largest advertising company in the world before the merger of Omnicon and Publicis points out that print has 25 percent of advertising spend but only accounts for seven percent of consumers’ media time. Conversely, mobile devices account of 10 percent of media time but get just one percent of ad spend. Over time ad spend should adjust to better align with time spent. It is natural there is a discrepancy because mobile is such a new platform, and print is such an entrenched (but struggling) piece of the advertising pie.

    There is no alternative to Facebook for mobile ad spend. It is estimated that 20% of people's time on mobile devices is on Facebook. There isn't a close second.
    Aug 14 05:07 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What Lies In Store For Facebook? [View article]
    If you are in the stock for what it did yesterday you invest differently than I do. I don't like Sheryl Sandberg selling all of those shares, but I can still use my head and realize that over the next 2-3 years this company has huge opportunity and the share price does too.
    Aug 14 10:09 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Nasdaq: Sell-Off After eSpeed Deal Offers An Entry Opportunity [View article]
    Retail Investors have nothing to do with trading volume. It is all HFT - NDAQ wants as much HFT as possible to go on, that is the only thing that really moves the needle on trading volume.
    Aug 13 10:51 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • StealthGas: Hungry For A Buyback [View article]
    By loading up on ships "before the rest of the LPG sector creates a glut of shipping just like the greedy shippers in the other sectors" GASS is contributing to a coming glut that will be painful for them too.
    Mar 14 06:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Does Not Have $137 Billion In Cash [View article]
    You know issuing 1 preferred for every outstanding share of common with a par value of $50 and a annual yield of 4% would not require Apple to use any cash that is currently on the balance sheet right? It would just take a small fraction of their future cash-flow. This is David Einhorn's idea and your article has absolutely to relevance to it.
    Mar 5 12:52 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Apple Is A Short-Term Sell Based On David Einhorn's Plan [View article]
    Thank you Illuminati Investments but in Apple's case this is entirely irrelevant. The cash is just sitting there. Do you have a plan for how they will reinvest $137 billion? Apple does not seem to. They could continue to grow as much as they might desire simply from future cash flow. More importantly to Daugherty's point, I originally said, "all things else being equal" which would include growth rates.
    Feb 28 04:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Apple Is A Short-Term Sell Based On David Einhorn's Plan [View article]
    Daugherty,

    Thanks for the correction on #1.

    You are wrong on #2. Consider an abstract example: You have two inital investments of 1000 shares in identical companies valued at 20x earnings which are $10 per share. Each investment at the beginning of the decade is woth $200,000. Both companies grow at a 10% annual rate of the decade. If the only difference between the companies was that one paid a consistent annual 5% dividend and you reinvested that dividend at the price it was issued at, then your investment in the company with the 5% dividend would be worth more than $260,000 more than the investment without a dividend. Apple could return wealth to investors it currently isn't using and will not use in the foreseeable future by issuing preferreds.

    With regards to your third point, it is much easier to crash on secure income and buy more stock with said income than to just sit on a stock price that is detached from the economic reality of the underlying stock because the company will not reward its owners.
    Feb 27 09:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Apple Is A Short-Term Sell Based On David Einhorn's Plan [View article]
    If the dividend or buyback required bringing cash back from over seas, he is right. The preferred he was talking about did not have a required dividend that would accrue if missed. Further, you are concerned about the ability of Apple to pay a dividend.....

    That is funny to me. It is actually laughable. Do you know how many years of 4% dividends on 1 preferred for every share outstanding Apple's current cash-pile would cover? About 73 years worth. And the preferred's would not even touch that. Apple can make any move it wants, while continuing to actually put more cash on the balance sheet. If they issued the preferreds they would still be putting billions in cash on the balance sheet every year.

    Here's the math: $137 billion divided by (.04*50*939060516) (annual return on preferred times shares outstanding) = 72.9
    Feb 27 01:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Apple Is A Short-Term Sell Based On David Einhorn's Plan [View article]
    Almost none of what you say is incriminating. Yes dividends make EPS lower than they would be without them (on common stock or iprefs). If you are long term investor who reinvests dividends on common or preferred your investment will grow much larger over time than sans dividend all things else being equal. Do you have information on the duration of Einhorn's calls? For all you know they are two years in length. He has owned shares for over 3 years.

    The phrase "raiding the coffers" seems to refer to the cash-hoard, which would be left alone under the iPrefs scheme. It wouldn't under massive share-buybacks or a special dividend.

    Just because a stock pays out a dividend does not mean it is crippled. Right now, Apple seems like a crippled stock. iPrefs would put the pep back in Apple's step.
    Feb 27 01:18 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Apple Is A Short-Term Sell Based On David Einhorn's Plan [View article]
    If "he is simply using the preferred idea as a decoy to flush out more dividend or buybacks" he would be trying to flush out things he has stated he doesn't think are effective. http://bit.ly/YyIXRd
    Feb 26 11:07 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Apple Is A Short-Term Sell Based On David Einhorn's Plan [View article]
    He has owned Apple for over 3 years. He is looking out for Greenlight's interest, but based off his own presentation it is difficult to say what he is proposing would be bad for Apple. He thinks, rightly I believe, that Apple is perceived as a company that does not really care about it's shareholders. He thinks iPrefs would change that in a big way because it would be such a great reward to current shareholders. It also would not affect their current cash-hoard at all and should they want to stop paying the dividends there wouldn't be an issue.
    Feb 26 09:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Apple Is A Short-Term Sell Based On David Einhorn's Plan [View article]
    Einhorn has publicly come out against raising the dividend or increasing share buybacks. In fact he has come out against every method of returning the cash hoard to shareholders. His preferred plan would only require a small portion of future cash flow to enact. He doesn't want Apple to have to pay large taxes to bring cash back to the US. Go read Einhorn's actual presentation before you bash the guy without even understanding him: http://bit.ly/YyIXRd

    As Albert B. said in a comment above, Apple has a shareholder perception problem. If Apple treated its shareholders like Texas Instruments or IBM have it would trade at a higher premium.
    Feb 26 08:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
97 Comments
87 Likes