Long/short equity, special situations, newsletter provider, options
Long/short equity, special situations, newsletter provider, options
Contributor since: 2012
Company: StockSaints
Wow, six years to the day and I still read about HAR, crazy. It was the worst trade of my life ( I shorted into the close on the Friday before the Monday pre-market spike higher, only to close near the very top of the move), or maybe it wasn't. The SEC froze funds, maybe will release soon and that could reduce the loss significantly. I wouldn't wish the experience on anyone, or maybe I would, ask me in three months and I will have the answer.
I have to agree. Usually drops like this take at least two or three days before the dust settles
Hi Carter,
Thanks for reading.
I think you're confusing revenue and market cap. Market cap is what a company is worth and Kroger is worth $24 billion. Revenue is $98 billion
I responded to many of the comments in a follow-up piece
I agree that you should not let an article ruin your investment.
What you should do is weigh it objectively as you can (hard to do when you have a dog in the fight) to see if it offers insight that you may not have given thought to before.
Never invest in a stock without a game plan on what you're going to do if the market doesn't agree with your thesis.
Hey Ryan,
Thanks for reading and being a good sport about my use of your comment.
You're correct up to a point (about value). You can't assume you're right and the market is wrong. You should assume the opposite unless you have unique insight that the market is failing to understand.
The market is (mostly) efficient. There's a valid reason why stocks are making new 52 week lows. The term "dividend trap" wasn't coined by accident.
That said, I do wish you the very best with your investments and I don't have a "death wish" for these names.
Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts.
You write that as if he "allowed" $49 to happen. Icahn is sharp, but doesn't have Jedi mind control over the market. I hope there is more to your bull thesis.
Regardless, best of luck with your investment
It certainly is a good trading vehicle. I wouldn't short it, but short-term long trading, especially around a position is a viable strategy for experienced traders.
Thanks Rich, I appreciate that you took the time to say so.
Thanks. If the company can gain a footing with pricing, it could squeeze.
With a backlog of orders, if they can't do it now, I'm not sure when.
Hi Barry,
Thanks for reading and commenting.
I understand why you may scratch your head. Capstone is such a unique company it's hard to compare to anyone. That said, having something to compare to is a valuable exercise and these companies are "as good as it gets".
Duke -
"why did the seller sell the business?"
It's often for the same reason that most home-owners sale their homes - to cash out and move on to the next great idea. Or management might have realized that they have maximized what they can effectively get out of that business. Or as you are implying, in reference to Apple, it could be that they don't wish to fight.
In either case, it's left up to Sirius to harvest what value it can get out of the acquisition. I have no idea what their plans are. But Agero doesn't hurt Sirius chances of fighting Apple. The real question is, how does it help?
"Cisco announced favorable earnings for the 2012 fiscal fourth quarter. "
Is this a typo?
Way to cover it CN. Well done, as always!
Well, what do you know.... they listened.
CN -
I think you have finally outdone yourself. This is your best work yet. I appreciate the time that you have put into this. After this article I don't think anyone can argue that you are indeed the authority on Sirius - although I don't believe it was ever a debate. You've been criticized as a "bear" for stating facts. Well, sometimes facts are hard to swallow. But they are good for us.
All, I appreciate those that have pointed out my reference to 68% of buybacks that are left. We've recently discussed the possibility of Sirius increasing the buyback program as soon as this one is completed. The correct outstanding number is 36% when factoring that $1.3 billion have already been taken off the market.
However, we believe that the company will buy an additional 30% (or so) - my guess is 32%. Sirius' earnings growth and free cash-flow growth supports this. Company's are know to look for ways to increase their EPS metrics. I don't believe that Sirius will be the exception, especially in the heels of improving churn and ARPU.
In my opinion, the additional re-purchase of 32% will help steer the focus away from revenue, (which may begin to slow) and places more emphasis on subscriber and FCF growth.
Sorry for the confusion.
Sirius Fun -
You are mentioning the headline, not what the article actually said. If you read it again, you will see that we were right on target and never wavered from the $4 projection.
Regarding Cameron, if you are referring to Richard Saintvilus, he's made no gripes about it. Writing under a pseudonym is what many writers here on Seeking Alpha do. But I don't think it take away from their content.
Good luck!
dwdallam -
"Buy and hold" isn't the only way to make money."
Excellent call! This is exactly what we remind our readers on who have never traded before. Once we teach them how to do it by giving them our trading alerts, they are hooked.
That said, we also believe in buy-and-hold. We have several large positions that we never touch. But there are plenty of money-makers out there and Sirius is definitely one of them.
Register an account here: and we'll prove it to you!
thenoffya -
"So when somebody with an MBA that has been studying a company says that the company will earn x dollars in the future, that's not predicting the future?"
No, it's not. In the the financial world, the terms to use are "projections" based on "outlook" and "guidance" that the company has provided. You make it sound as if they are telling us who will win the super bowl in 2018.
"Sure, they have more information than I do, or you do, or most anyone else waking up out of bed, but that doesn't imply any more correctness on their ability to predict what's going to happen."
What else does it imply? If someone has more information and is therefore more knowledgeable, I think it implies more inherent accuracy than those without the information. Are they right 100% of the time, no. But that's not enough to undermine their profession otherwise every weatherman in America should be fired.
"You stated yourself that MSFT didn't correctly predict what they would earn this quarter. How can you expect anyone else to be right?"
First, I expect MSFT to know their business better than anyone - thus the premise of this article. Second, it's not about being "right" - it's about demonstrating an ability to execute. And MSFT (Ballmer) has not shown this ability for more than a decade.
Jacob -
I didn't say you were contradicting yourself. I was pointing out the irony that I was now coming to Nokia's defense from a long time supporter. And I was suggesting that the company deserved credit for numbers that (in my opinion) were better than "blah."
doggie -
"I'm right and you're wrong... AGAIN."
[Announcer voice] Now, Tell him what he's won Johnny!
thenoffya -
"It's about predicting the future."
Here again, you make it sound as if they are gypsies with a crystal ball. They are not attempting to "predict" the future. They are often MBA's who cover the companies they report on based on conversations they've had with management of these companies and market trends.
They are the ones asking the questions on the conference calls and at press conferences. They are not like you or anyone else who might make up out of bed and "throw a dart" at a number - thinking you might be right.
To suggest that they are attempting to "predict the future" is disrespectful to their profession. And the idea that each time a company falls short of expectations is the fault of the analysts is tiring.
You can make all of the excuses for Microsoft that you want, that is your right. But after you take a financial analysis or statistics course, you will learn to separate Wall Street analysts and the job they perform from crystal ball-toting gypsies. I assure you.
doggie -
You're entitled to your opinion.
"PERIOD. End of story"
Do people still say that about things of which they have no clue?
thenoffya -
It's not average people that are just trying to predict the future. These are educated groups, typically with an MBA. And these are not extreme projections from one end to the other, but a consensus of many who in the past, have gotten Microsoft projections right.
So it seems as sour grapes to suddenly criticize their credentials. Let's not forget, many of these targets were based on Microsoft's own guidance, which the company also missed. And I don't buy into the notion that "analysts are wrong more than they are right." Besides, what does that have to do with Microsoft's brutal performance?
doggie -
"One could almost argue the growth of the Lumia isn't taking sales from anyone, they are simply growing into the smartphone markets overall growth."
That's nonsense. The market is a pie. If one grows, another's portion shrinks. It's simple economics. BlackBerry lost share in the recent quarter, while Apple, Google etc. gained share - as did Nokia. So I stand by my "inference" that Nokia stole share from BlackBerry.
CN -
From one writer to another, you've nailed that response. Well done sir :-)
E.T. -
"it will go back down to probably 2.97 or so"
On what basis?
Stephen -
"Stick with the plan. Long holders with a longer term viewpoint should seek to add to position on sharp dips. If you missed the last one then pick up some shares on the next. Most importantly, remain disciplined and hold strong to your strategy."
I couldn't have said it better. This is one of the most underrated yet basic concepts of investing that is applicable to virtually any stock. Fundamentals don't change that drastically from one quarter to the next. And if investors insist that they are in for the long-term, then near-term headwinds caused by macro-related policy shouldn't matter.
Stephen, you've been spelling it out all along, Sirius is in the process of buying back tons of stock. Essentially, they WILL support the share price from any drop as (in my opinion) they have demonstrated this week.
With that, it's not hard to be bullish here - regardless of any competitor entry into the radio streaming market. In twelve months or if/when the new entrants are showing to have caused a drop in subscriptions or any other cash-flow related metric, than there is a basis for discussion. But until then, the best play is to buy because, ... well, Sirius is buying also. Plain and simple.
Jack10000 -
I see your point. So basically you're saying that the stock's recent climb have not been organic or real, therefore the valuation is inflated through the buyback. Is that what you're saying?
Jack10000 -
"I still believe Sirius is holding the stock up"
What exactly are you implying?
CN -
Touché :-)