Seeking Alpha

Scott Ryan

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Scott Ryan's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Zuck: Facebook unbundling apps, wants "a pipeline of experiences" [View news story]
    Google is stalking Facebook, trying to emulate FACEBOOK now (as seen on Titan acquisition). Behavior is what they call in poker a "TELL".

    GOOG is continuing to see their ad revenue shrink and FACEBOOK'S growing in comensurate fashion. FB is what GOOG was in the first decade of the new millinium and AAPL for that matter without Jobs.
    Apr 16, 2014. 07:34 PM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook slips; ITG data points to subdued Q1 numbers [View news story]
    That Facebook has had some unsustainable run is a fallacy. Facebook is barely up from the IPO price. They had the IPO priced correctly but the sell off to the low $17.58 makes shorts contend that the all-time low should be the measurement in how much growth FB has exhibited.

    The $17.58 all-time low was the - wrong price- in need of a correction. The rise from there back to the IPO price of $38 represents a correction to fair value. Let's not forget the IPO came out --May 2012! So FB, from its IPO price has risen a modest 55% from the IPO price over the course of TWO YEARS.
    Wall Street had priced it right in 2012. The ridiculous low FB temporarily reached amidst popular public enmity has absolutely NOTHING to do with what FB is worth. Facebook WILL be at $300billion in market cap in the not too distant future as investors wake up to the unprecedented and unparalleled nature of what they are. Facebook is not just a company. Facebook is an entire SECTOR unto itself. GOOG is now EMULATING FB (latest evidence the TITAN move) because they know they are threatened.

    I believe Mark Zuckerberg in regard to what he asserted about GOOGLE going after WhatsApp - and I believe GOOGLE TOTALLY lied in their denial to save face.
    Apr 16, 2014. 02:40 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook slips; ITG data points to subdued Q1 numbers [View news story]
    FB may get the Apple treatment but not until they have the Apple market cap. And they will, at least in regard to the latter.
    Apr 16, 2014. 02:37 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook Likely To Surf Past Estimates [View article]
    A kindred spirit it seems.
    Apr 11, 2014. 10:09 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook Is Being Frivolous With Its Money [View article]
    I like your points combatcorpsmanVN and thank you for your service. Mark Zuckerberg is the man they love to hate and so much so that it clouds their judgement. Intense enmity for a CEO is not a sound basis to engage in a short position.
    Apr 11, 2014. 10:05 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • For Facebook, Liquidity Matters Most [View article]
    Yes to misconstruing but I probably should have elaborated more on that. I'm basically saying that the rapid & temporary -decrease- in FB's share price is the actual bubble.

    Looking at the situation philosophically, I am applying the word "bubble" to the downward move because bubbles are made by euphoria that is not based in reality. The fundamentals favor Facebook with its current growth, future growth potential to approach upwards of $300 billion and perhaps well beyond in market cap (as they dominate in unprecedented ways). The substance absolutely justifies -higher- valuation for FB.

    The bear case is the bubble if we look at what temporarily drove down FB shares last quarter with ABSURD analogies like that of the Princeton rocket scientists. Silly stories like that are what you normally see proliferate in favor of a company that is overvalued. In this case, the ludicrous justifications are being proliferated by the SHORTS. THAT is the --best-- they have to offer. I can't tell you how many desperate shorts tweeted that asinine thesis last quarter. The media pundits and shorts flooded the market with a torrent of baseless contentions having no common ground with reality. Let's not forget the "teen crisis" either. They were and still are passionate in their desire to be right but that doesn't change the facts. Many are also blinded by their irrational enmity for Mark Zuckerberg. He's the guy they love to hate.

    The purveyors of financial casuistry have created their own euphoria all based upon their greed as they succeed in the short run with their self fulfilling prophecies. However, they will die by their own sword when reality plays out and FB continues to dominate.

    As I expatiated in my prior post, I was short most of the 1999 bubble stocks before most and made the best returns of my investing career then. I can assure you that the word bubble was then NOT being propounded by the majority of the media and shorts did not abound as they do here. These are amateurs who are in for a rude awakening. They think they understand but they do not. As I wrote in my article The 'Facebook Bubble' Bubble
    http://bit.ly/1cL6mJG
    Apr 10, 2014. 11:06 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook Likely To Surf Past Estimates [View article]
    The REAL joke is the credulous notion of Fed "tightening". Fool us once, shame on them, fool perpetually, shame on every sucker who believes they have a choice.

    The so-called tapering was so inconsequential it is laughable. They only claimed they are "tightening" to make the herd believe they actually have a CHOICE. Sure, as I predicted over a year ago, they may temporarily decrease the quantity of gov obligations by a modicum. That is only symbolic, enough to sucker more people into taking their jawboning seriously for as long as they can. Yellen is Obama's yes women. He appointed her for a reason. There can be NO legitimate tapering with the unconscionable spending to come. They wouldn't even be able to pay the INTEREST on the debt if they allowed rates to increase by any meaningful degree.

    I am astounded that so many people can be so naive. Anyone who buys food at grocery stores or restaurants and anyone in the real world who has to budget for energy sees the dollar becoming rapidly worthless.

    On that note, companies like Facebook are right to acquire as many assets as they can right now. $19 billion for Whatsapp will look like a pittance in another couple years when we are dealing with trillion dollar market caps and Facebook will be one of those companies.
    Apr 10, 2014. 10:42 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Buy Recommendations For Facebook And Priceline [View article]
    The "mo-mo" short sellers are not going to like reality very much. Short-sellers are the people who have ACTUALLY created the real "bubble". They THINK they learned something from history but in reality, they are CREATING history because they have drawn deeply erroneous conclusions based on assumptions that were not analogous to 1999 with regard to Facebook.

    I've been hearing reporters on CNBC go on and on, feeding the baseless selling fueled by ignorance. They repeat ad nauseam that "investors are wondering whether a shift or -rotation- in leadership from growth is underway."

    If they are worried about a shift or "rotation" than it is a complete misnomer to refer to these capricious dice rollers as investors.

    What astute "investor" would buy a company let's say in a private market - and then worry about whether they bought a good business and a reasonable price a few weeks later because of what a herd of sheep are buying? It is especially ridiculous when considering that the herd is historically wrong time after time, century after century. A person so destitute of conviction and fortitude is anything but an investor.

    Exactly as they did last quarter, the herd is proliferating insipid baseless rhetoric that has no bearing whatsoever in fact about Facebook. The bubble and so-called mo-mo is on the short side and the followers of such pessimistic clap-trap will be met with agony on 4/23/2014.

    Facebook: The Most Reluctant Growth Stock in Contemporary Market History
    http://bit.ly/1fgbtnL

    Facebook is not Tesla and it is not Netflix yet the mo-mo short-sellers base their theses on such comparisons daily, which is not investment analysis. It may better correlate to astrology or palm-reading.
    Apr 10, 2014. 11:23 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • For Facebook, Liquidity Matters Most [View article]
    I made some of my best returns in the ".com era" with Puts on YHOO, AOL & even INTC.

    YHOO the COMPANY did not have anything resembling the actual performance of Facebook - the company. YHOO had a $200 billion market cap before it had a business plan and revenues. Comparing stocks to stocks misses the fundamentals.

    The "mo-mo" short sellers are not going to like reality very much. Short-sellers are the people who have ACTUALLY created the real "bubble". They THINK they learned something from history but in reality, they are CREATING history because they have drawn deeply erroneous conclusions based on assumptions that were not analogous to 1999 with regard to Facebook.

    I've been hearing reporters on CNBC go on and on, feeding the baseless selling fueled by ignorance. They repeat ad nauseam that "investors are wondering whether a shift or -rotation- in leadership from growth is underway."

    If they are worried about a shift or "rotation" than it is a complete misnomer to refer to these capricious dice rollers as investors.

    What astute "investor" would buy a company let's say in a private market - and then worry about whether they bought a good business and a reasonable price a few weeks later because of what a herd of sheep are buying? It is especially ridiculous when considering that the herd is historically wrong time after time, century after century. A person so destitute of conviction and fortitude is anything but an investor.

    Exactly as they did last quarter, the herd is proliferating insipid baseless rhetoric that has no bearing whatsoever in fact about Facebook. The bubble and so-called mo-mo is on the short side and the followers of such pessimistic clap-trap will be met with agony on 4/23/2014.

    Facebook: The Most Reluctant Growth Stock in Contemporary Market History
    http://bit.ly/1fgbtnL

    Facebook is not Tesla and it is not Netflix yet the mo-mo short-sellers base their theses on such comparisons daily, which is not investment analysis. It may better correlate to astrology or palm-reading.
    Apr 9, 2014. 11:31 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook jumps on bullish notes; Sandberg refutes political speculation [View news story]
    The "mo-mo" short sellers are not going to like reality very much. Short-sellers are the people who have ACTUALLY created the real "bubble". They THINK they learned something from history but in reality, they are CREATING history because they drew deeply erroneous conclusions based on assumptions that were not analogous to 1999 with regard to Facebook.

    I've been hearing reporters on CNBC go on and on, feeding the baseless selling fueled by ignorance. They repeat ad nauseam that "investors are wondering whether a shift or -rotation- in leadership from growth is underway."

    If they are worried about a shift or "rotation" than it is a complete misnomer to refer to these capricious dice rollers as investors.

    What astute "investor" would buy a company let's say in a private market - and then worry about whether they bought a good business and a reasonable price a few weeks later because of what a herd of sheep are buying? It is especially ridiculous when considering that the herd is historically wrong time after time, century after century. A person so destitute of conviction and fortitude is anything but an investor.

    Exactly as they did last quarter, the herd is proliferating insipid baseless rhetoric that has no bearing whatsoever in fact about Facebook. The bubble and so-called mo-mo is on the short side and the followers of such pessimistic clap-trap will be met with agony on 4/23/2014.

    Facebook: The Most Reluctant Growth Stock in Contemporary Market History
    http://bit.ly/1fgbtnL

    Facebook is not Tesla and it is not Netflix. People who draw conclusions on the valuation of any one of these companies based upon any other of these incredibly different businesses betray complete ignorance on matters of true investment and are disqualify themselves from being taken seriously by any true investor. In matters of astrology or palm reading perhaps their advice may rightfully be sought but not investing on fundamentals.
    Apr 9, 2014. 11:01 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Great Rotation Begins - Carnage In Social Media Space Accelerates [View article]
    The backward momentum in social media is not based upon reality when it comes to Facebook. The climate is very similar to last quarter as the daily short-seller talking points beat on the stock daily. The talking points by people who have no track record worthy of esteem were absurd but the media loves the drama so it worked in concert to foment their theses.

    This will be reversed on the 4/23 Facebook Q1 call. Facebook will likely end this nonsense of lumping them in with Tesla and Zinga as though they have any resemblance as businesses. Jim Cramer was saying this morning that funds were selling. That is a beautiful cleansing if true as the majority of them under-perform and are likely making a mistake once again.

    Facebook will be a $300-$400 billion company and merit every penny.
    Apr 7, 2014. 12:28 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook Is Being Frivolous With Its Money [View article]
    $FB selling based upon tea-leaves & astrology. Many fools will lose their assets shorting. FB the stock is in the short-term controlled by the greed of shorts but Facebook the company is kicking assets. Q1 will astound just as last quarter.
    Apr 3, 2014. 04:02 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook Is Being Frivolous With Its Money [View article]
    Facebook is being "frivolous" in the minds of people who never built a multi-billion dollar tech company (or any company other than maybe newletters wher they sell hem-line and tea leave trading techniques). I'm not speaking of the author personally. I just see the rhetoric and talking points of the herd as pretty bullish, especially when they write articles questioning Zuck's "sanity"...

    I remember back in 2004 advising Google should do the same - and they later did use their stock as a currency to acquire a great deal of companies like Youtube.

    I think I'll just hang in there with Zuck instead of following the talking points of the herd.

    Facebook: The Most Reluctant Growth Stock in Contemporary Market History
    http://bit.ly/1fgbtnL
    Mar 31, 2014. 04:18 PM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is It Time To Sell Facebook And Buy LinkedIn? [View article]
    I have heard that before. The growth in revenues and earnings demonstrate otherwise and I believe that will continue.
    Mar 28, 2014. 06:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is It Time To Sell Facebook And Buy LinkedIn? [View article]
    I seriously doubt it is time to sell FB and buy LinkedIn. I have accounts at both. I am connected to Facebook every day, throughout the day as are hundreds of millions of their billion+ users.

    I rarely go into LinkedIn because the protocol of what is appropriate is so narrow. I like -having- a LNKD account but only go into it maybe once or twice a month. If I was unemployed maybe I would step it up there but that would only be a temporary situation.

    It reminds me of a local Chamber of Commerce meeting where most of the people there are there to do some "card jamming". You will have a bunch of sales people like insurance agents all trying to sell to each other. Nothing wrong with that except it gets boring quickly for the average person not looking to sell something to someone. The CONTENT is what makes FB so superior to others and that isn't going to change anytime soon.

    The FB shorts are going to be in a world of pompous agony just like during last earnings call. You can see them circulating the same tripe filled, wishful thinking talking points as they did then. They have happy ears. They look for some BS to which they can jointly cling and then tweet the living hell out of their insipid fallacies.

    They can fool a few people in the short-term but they will die by the sword because they have little perspicacity when it comes to understanding business or the nature of "bubbles" ( a word they parrot ad nauseam and erroneously equate it to 1999, a time they apparently spent in middle school while YHOO had a $200+ BILLION market cap before they had a business plan). Well they just have not yet reconciled themselves with the fact that Facebook produces more revenue and eps in a single quarter then YHOO achieved in years.

    2 lessons of 1999
    1. When the media pundits are crying bubble in every article every day for a year, rest assured, you are not yet in a bubble.
    2. REAL success stories still arise during and immediately after a bubble. Google steadily executed and justified its market cap by delivering revenue and earnings. Facebook is on the same path as it executes and reveals the ignorant and underhanded in the market. The short sellers circulate rhetoric about "mo mo" like a flock of sheep. They are the "mo mo" traders. They circulate hype in the direction that is expedient for their short positions but the hype they circulate is disingenuous. They talk in terms of "support and resistance" or the number of Puts or Calls purchased as though that were a sound basis for a legitimate investor to engage in ownership of a company at a particular price - or not.

    What they do is not investing. It is not savvy. It makes them sound as though they have investment acumen to those with rudimentary understanding of investing. However, they are no different than those clowns who purport to be sages of sports betting. Statistically, when you have tens of thousands of people in a room selling their magical system, a group will ALWAYS have a run of luck but in reality they are no better at it than anyone else.

    Rest assured there is nobody on that Forbes 400 list that got there by trading momentum long or short or by magical charts. Most of the people there own great companies and are more often insiders because insiders do not make impetuous mistakes by taking profits way too soon because they do not allow the bottom feeders to scare them out with constant underhanded scare tactics and baseless criticism. Most people who have invested early in the MSFTs, AAPLs, GOOGs & FBs usually do not make the fortunes that the less emotional minority make because most of the herd sell too early as they fall for the misconception that a 100% return is an obligatory sell signal.

    The interesting thing about the Facebook rise that is so different from the unjust rise in1999 bubble stocks is that the rise in FB's share price from lows after the IPO has been the most reluctant rise I've ever seen in a company's stock. I was short all of the right tech stocks in 1999 as I can document with time-stamped proof. I remember the climate well as I then described it on my radio show. Virtually NOBODY wanted to talk bubble.

    It was "new paradigm..." and the praise by analysts and constant celebratory press releases from those companies came at a constant daily torrent. FB has not been met with the fanfare. The climate around FB since the week the IPO was launched has been a chorus of negativity ever since. Look at Wall Street Journal columns, the daily barrage of coordinated Tweets and listen to financial broadcasts. Any honest person of discernment will see that with regard to Facebook, negativity and polemical of Mark Zuckerberg overwhelm the total body of work out there. Facebook skepticism is always given deference in the media.

    Facebook is simply the most reticent and reluctant growth company of its caliber. They talk about direction but they do NOT hype. They simply execute. I will take a pass on the "altruistic" inanity of the mo-mo short sellers and stay the course. http://bit.ly/1jguJTo
    Mar 28, 2014. 04:54 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
282 Comments
304 Likes