Seeking Alpha

Scott Ryan

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Scott Ryan's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Facebook's WhatsApp Acquisition Exposes Grave Risks To The Business Model [View article]
    Off the mark. I see the brilliance in Zuck's move and it will also lead to a new channel of monetization. History (and Zuck) will demonstrate that he stole WhatsApp at $12 billion. It is a unique opportunity where the average investor gets financially to participate early on in an exciting new company via FB.

    WhatsApp was destined to grow and is doing so rapidly. Facebook will further expedite that growth and have the technology. I love the naysayers! The only desperation is on the part of those who grasp at straws because they were wrong in the beginning and obstinately cling to their askew theses. We actually need these people.

    They kept propounding their doom and gloom predictions all last quarter. Facebook produced results that exposed them. Looking at the previously unfathomable results that FB just produced, it is utterly preposterous to contend this was some type of desperate move.

    These FB contrarian folks live in a fantasy land.
    Feb 20, 2014. 11:22 AM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook's $19 Billion Buy As Seen By Media Vs. Market-Makers [View article]
    The bottom line is that "value" is subjective. They received something for their currency that I believe will prove to be what Youtube was to Google or what PayPal to ebay or.... the naysayers who troll online message or discussion boards are usually cynical or angry about the success realized by those investors who are visionary and business savvy. That's because THAT is what it takes to be a GREAT investor. Numbers are important but not exclusively. They don't tell the future. That takes vision, anticipation and imagination.

    The shorts & constant critics are for the most part bean counters who do not have vision. They cannot imagine how the peices could come together, possible synergies, possible monetization opportunities aside from ads... All they understand is raw numbers and the past. There's a reason why you don't see too many CPAs on the Forbes 400. These people are better suited to researching investment grade bonds. It's not like it's a character flaw. They're just in the wrong place.
    Feb 21, 2014. 01:55 PM | 12 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Going Big With Facebook Makes A Lot Of Sense [View article]
    Nice article. I would say the probability of FB doubling again from here is high given what we know and what FB has demonstrated in its actual performance.
    Trite analysis abounds now just as it did last quarter with the all-time classic Princeton rocket-scientist thesis equating FB users to bacteria...

    The latest FB short seller talking point (or "tweeting point") is to circulate the question "who really clicks on digital ads? So over-rated..." Well, I for one do if I'm at a site I trust and the ad is relevant to me. I have found myself watching video ads recently for movie trailers that caught my interest (instead of immediately clicking the "x" at the top right corner). But more than that anecdotal evidence, one could also ask the question "who has really been clicking -TV- ads for the past century?" Advertisers cannot directly track sales to them - yet they continue to exist for some reason and companies have spent trillions on them for the past century.

    The shorts are very good and apparently organized at circulating misinformation ad nauseam and un-substantive scare headlines all over social media. They will make their cheap returns if they close them out soon enough. Shorts have their role in free-markets so I don't begrudge them. Those of us who study market history remember stories such as how most of the investors who invested in the great Fidelity Magellan during the legendary Peter Lynch's tenure didn't make much money if at all - despite the amazing performance of the investment. You can take great individual companies with extraordinary returns from MSFT, GOOG & AAPL and discover the same. SOME of the investors in those vehicles made phenomenal returns but most didn't -because- they fell for the casuistry employed by the underhanded short-sellers and inept financial media.

    Many people will be able to say they made 100% in FB but many of those will be kicking themselves because they cashed out early as they fell for the flawed generalizations that erroneously tied this specific company with ---unprecedented--- performance to a basket of so-called "mo-mo stocks" like NFLX, TSLA, Z, TWTR... I'm not knocking those companies but it is foolish and grossly betrays the amateur to lump them all together as one company as though they have the same fundamentals and same valuations.

    Last quarter they circulated the word "bubble" in copious quantities but it's only a bubble if the company doesn't have the performance numbers to boot. Facebook is the diamond out of all the aforementioned "high flyers" & will be what AAPL & GOOG were last decade.

    I would not be surprised to see them surpass AAPL & GOOG in the half-trillion market cap club and could perhaps be the first trillion dollar market cap for all we know. That is because everyone is --assuming-- that FB's only monetization prospects are in advertising. FB is unique from Google in that it is a destination, not just a spring board to outside content. There are many other possibilities for monetization besides ads (although they could reach the GOOG levels on ads alone). One example http://bit.ly/1lKHs0x
    Mar 24, 2014. 03:03 PM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook Mobile Sharing Going Down [View article]
    That's what they do cashawash. Perhaps this narrative is the new "teen crisis" for the amateur Put buyers to circulate incessantly. Whatever. Sorry but you should buy some Puts on Tesla instead Valuewalk. FB is going beyond $300 billion and will commensurably augment revenues and earnings to justify every penny of new market cap.

    Good luck disseminating unfounded fear. Maybe you can fool enough sheep in the short run to eke out a profit before your Puts expire.
    Sep 11, 2014. 01:41 PM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 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 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
  • Facebook: Diversifying Revenues [View article]
    That newly popular tactic of trying to elicit amazement by comparing FB's market cap with companies in totally unrelated sectors is useless. It may achieve the desired perception among the ignorant, non-thinking faction of investors.

    Let's compare FB to companies with enormous over-head, have substantial revenues but barely squeak out a profit like restaurants, manufacturers of automobiles, jumbo jets, space ships... because long-term valuations have nothing to due with profit margins or anything like that.

    Shorts are running out of tricks.
    Feb 13, 2014. 12:25 PM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Does Not Have $137 Billion In Cash [View article]
    It would be pretty irresponsible for Apple to keep $93 billion laying around in literal dollars. Banks employ departments known as "Cash Management" whose responsibility is to deploy their "cash" in such a way.
    Mar 4, 2013. 10:26 PM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook's Recent Flop, And Why Mobile Remains In Its Crosshairs [View article]
    Flop is a complete misnomer to describe anything Facebook did. The price decline is only a function of foolish opportunists who are going to get squeezed because they live by the sword. They intentionally disseminate misinformation with bravado though they are at best unqualified critics of little experience and unquantifiable ignorance. They played the same games all last quarter as well with their noise making and grossly insipid "analysis" ( a euphemism for what those bottom feeders circulate to instill fear).

    I put in my limits for SOME of my FB at $100 & will avoid looking at the price until I get a trade confirmation. Stupidity, ignorance & misinformation spreads like a pandemic in this market and there are plenty of willing hosts.
    Mar 27, 2014. 01:46 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook's $19 Billion Buy As Seen By Media Vs. Market-Makers [View article]
    I agree with Peter. As I wrote yesterday, The only actual "desperation" is on the part of those who routinely grasp at straws because they were dead wrong about FB from the beginning and obstinately cling to their skewed theses.

    I love the naysayers. Efficient markets actually need these people. They continually propounded their doom and gloom predictions all last quarter. At the end of the quarter, Facebook laid their cards on the table and produced results that exposed them. They get more angry and determined instead of moving on to a JC Penny as they should.

    I'm not sure how many billions these pundits have amassed by founding and running their own multi-billion dollar, highly successful companies but I think I will opt to trust the judgement of Zuck and Google (who was also prepared to buy WhatsApp in that same ballpark).

    Last quarter it was the Princeton rocket scientists supplanting bacteria or viruses to predict the future of human social propensities. Now and for the next 3 months we will have to read the "DESPERATE MOVE column, the latest version of which was published by some guy at FoxBusiness. Brace for it - "DESPERATE MOVE..." ad nauseam - because it is the next short seller talking point, the best they can come up with. I'm not kidding, the same column literally was already written by several other publications yesterday).

    Looking at the previously unfathomable results that FB just produced, it is utterly preposterous to contend this was some type of desperate move. History is littered with such columns. These FB contrarian folks live in a fantasy land. They are gluttons for punishment and by their genetic makeup, partial to tilting at windmills (how many cliches can I stuff into one paragraph!) They are like the conspiracy theorists of Wall Street. Nevertheless, I warned them so I guess I'll take their money if they insist.
    Feb 21, 2014. 10:18 AM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Facebook Is Heading To $80 [View article]
    "Facebook continues to prove that concerns about "disengaged users" and worries over whether the company is as "cool" as Instagram have been overblown..."

    Of course they are overblown. I have never seen such a concerted and underhanded smear campaign of baseless accusations.

    As I wrote about these blowhards on March 28...
    "Facebook: The Most Reluctant Growth Stock in Contemporary Market History"
    http://bit.ly/1fgbtnL
    Apr 22, 2014. 04:09 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Google: Now A Sell As Return On Assets Remains Main Concern [View article]
    This is like most Wall Street analysis. Plenty of jargon, ratios and processing numbers but it takes little account of the majority of the company's products, pipeline and the human nature of their customers. It isolates one single component of Google's impressive cache of products and services, then attempts to valuate the entire company based on the conjecture derived from some quant's computer software program .

    My colleagues and I often used to chuckle about the difference between successful investors and accountants. There's a reason why you do not see too many CPA's on the Forbes 400 list.
    Jun 21, 2013. 01:01 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook: Reiterating Buy And Targeting $92 [View article]
    Facebook may well become the first $1 Trillion market cap. I wouldn't be at all surprised as online and old media meet in a confluence and become one. Facebook with its unprecedented critical mass will not have the type of pressure experienced by APPLE for example. They don't have to reinvent themselves and worry about patents. With that critical mass of a substantial chunk of Earth already subscribing, continued domination is about not alienating current members and continuing to monetize.

    FB will generate cash like oil companies without the overhead and much higher margins. FB should pass Apple, GOOG and XOM in the fast lane once this thing gets cranking.

    I still say Zuckerberg should bring on his fellow Board member Reed Hastings in a great holy union. FB is product neutral, Mac, ipad, Windows, Android,,, That union makes 100% sense for both parties (as opposed to the pipe dream Apple should buy Netflix...", which makes no sense for Netflix. Read "Will You Facebook Take Thee Netflix?" http://bit.ly/1lKHs0x ).

    Either way, this is going to be a media company like the world has ever seen and Zuckerberg will be the REAL Citizen Kane. Copyright 2014
    Jul 25, 2014. 10:34 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Facebook May Be Fairly Valued, But It Is Not A Buy [View article]
    Articles like this illustrate the difference between investors and people who “play the market”.

    The author is making an assertion based upon a template, one size fits all analysis. “Trading at growth rate…” does not take into account the unprecedented accomplishments of FB thus far (for any US company), additional services to roll out and the many plans and opportunities for monetization. We are in uncharted territory with FB.

    Successful investors are looking at FB as people who are buying a –business. If you have business acumen, you have probably been long companies like FB and NFLX early on.

    If you are a speculator, trader or someone who “plays the market” without natural business acumen, you probably plug in numbers to templates and look at companies as “stocks” like they taught you in a college or university. They can teach you how to be a bean counter but they cannot impart business acuity. Template thinking works better on bonds.

    Shorts, people who claim not to be short and naysayers who are kicking themselves because they missed out – have been writing this for the past year.
    As I wrote in my most recent Facebook article (Never 'Fall In Hatred' With A Stock - Especially Facebook http://seekingalpha.co... ), “Mark Zuckerberg spends no time promoting Facebook stock and instead shapes the future of the Internet while the rest watch on.”

    Facebook is indeed unprecedented. The growth will continue. It will join GOOG in the $300+ billion market cap club and possibly surpass it as the online and mobile advertising sector grows and siphons off even more from old/traditional media . The value prop is more compelling.

    Congrats to ---owners---- of this great company. See you all at $300 billion.
    Jul 24, 2014. 05:33 PM | 5 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
COMMENTS STATS
281 Comments
303 Likes