Seeking Alpha

Timothy Phillips

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Timothy Phillips' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Amazon: Bigger, But Certainly Not Better [View article]
    Bill - you spent most of the article articulating Amazon's terrible numbers and ratios, and then you ignored all of them in your valuation and priced based on P/S. If profits, cash flow and balance sheet don't matter in the valuation, why discuss them?

    There is a reason why those number matter - and your debt ratio chart shows it - AMZN has to finance itself through liabilities because it burns cash selling products (if you remove delta working capital from FCF over the last 12 months, AMZN has burned $572M selling products). They will need to go back to markets soon for additional cash due to this.
    Oct 28 07:58 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon And The 'Profitless Business Model' Fallacy [View article]
    Nickbritt - the evidence of your theory is right in the balance sheet. Amazon Inventory days has had a steady climb from 33 days (11.1 turns) in 2010 to 46 days (7.9 turns) currently. The spreading out of warehouses and ever increasing amount of items they carry is making them very inefficient vs. when they had a decent profit last (2010).

    Much has changed since 2010 to not allow AMZN to return to 4% operating margin - fulfillment/warehouse costs, gas has doubled (shipping cost per unit is way up), massive Tech & Content expense, etc...

    If you track Amazon costs, they all grow faster than revenue - there is very, very little fixed. If they haven't hit scale by now ($74B in revs) they won't. Hard to imagine there is some magical revenue number out there that makes costs begin to scale slower than revenue.
    Oct 27 10:00 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Accounting Change Stands To Inflate Amazon's Reported Revenues [View article]
    Harry - when a stock has no earnings there is no upper or lower bound to the price. A stock with no earnings is like leaf falling from a tree - the breeze controls its path, and you have no idea where it will end up, but you can be assured there will violent changes in its path along the way.
    Oct 25 07:43 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple Does Something Amazing [View article]
    Great article Ashraf - a better to look at power in a digital system is:

    P = (Cg * n) * F * V^2

    where:
    - Cg = total gate capacitance (output C of previous gate + input C of current gate)
    - n = total number of gates in architecture
    - F = clock Frequency
    - V = Bias Voltage

    So, the number of gates in the architecture and the gate capacitance of the core technology have as large of an impact at the Freq.
    Oct 22 12:57 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The New Kindle Fire Is Not Selling Well [View article]
    Michael - I am at 16.36M with my model (assuming no e-book change in accounting).

    Because of e-book maybe we should quote GM$ forecast. I am at $4.6B GM$, and $0.19B FCF.
    Oct 19 03:49 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 2 Reasons Why Amazon.com Will Again Miss Revenue Estimates [View article]
    I actually have something positive to update on AMZM ... gas prices have really dropped off the last 2 weeks of the quarter, and I just updated my model with the data. Gas ended up down 3.1% Y/Y (and down 0.5% Q/Q), which lowers AMZN ground shipping cost, and thus increases margins from my expectations. Net result:

    EPS increases by 2c from my alters my prediction above to ($0.11) vs. consensus of ($0.09) .. still a miss by 2c.
    Oct 1 06:56 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon: When The Music Stops [View article]
    Bill - here is a great example. AMZN is currently moving business from 3P to 1P due to e-book AAPL case. This will increase revenue by a factor of 8 on those e-book sales - could be billions of $ impact on sales, but GM% will drop conversely such that GM$ are the same. Yet - you would value them much higher post this accounting change based on P/S. You are incentivizing them to ignore the bottom line to go after revenue - this doesn't make any sense, and it is exactly what they have done.
    Sep 30 04:21 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon: When The Music Stops [View article]
    PSalerno - I agree that AMZN is valued on P/S, but my point is that it won;t much longer as the investments have proven a loser (analysts move to P/S when earnings are sacrificed for growth over the short haul, not long haul - because in the long haul someone will start to grow faster and grab those investors away)

    AMZN ROIC on all of the "investments" have moved from 21% 6Q's ago to 1.5% now. They have been investing for more than 3 years, and the ROI keeps shrinking. It should have had a positive impact by now ... but yet, they can;t make any cash flow on what they spent (and this return includes cash from pushing out payables - return on actual invested capital would be negative w/o it).
    Sep 30 12:47 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon: When The Music Stops [View article]
    Bill - why does AMZN deserve a different P/S valuation than WMT(4x) or BBY (5x)? You didn't do a good job convincing of P/S being the correct metric: "This metric just seems better" ?.. P/S is fine if you believe a company earnings/CF are temporary being held down due to expansion, acquisition, etc.. but there is no proof (in fact you point to the opposite - penny pinching) that earnings will ever be there.

    The problem with a straight P/S on an unprofitable company is that you can have a huge valuation right up until the day the company goes BK. AMZN could drop prices 20% today in order to juice revenue further. In your model, you would raise your price target, while the company would run out of money in less than 2 Q's. If you are going to use P/S you should at least value less than WMT or BBY as they are profitable ...
    Sep 30 08:02 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 2 Reasons Why Amazon.com Will Again Miss Revenue Estimates [View article]
    And let's keep in mind that Apple sells more than 5x more tablets than AMZN in spite of making fat profits on the device vs. no profits for AMZN. Amazon basically gives them away, and barely has market share.

    So, if their plan was to take no profits over the past 2.5 years to be the market leader by now - that strategy / execution is not working well. Most would call that a huge failure.
    Sep 25 09:59 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 2 Reasons Why Amazon.com Will Again Miss Revenue Estimates [View article]
    Hi Paulo - my model is currently pumping out the following based on comscore, channeladvisor, retail sales, gas prices, etc...

    (this does not account for any revenue recognition change from 3P to 1P):
    - Product sales (direct e-commerce): 15.0% Y/Y(lowest ever by 300bps)
    - 3P retail: 27.6% Y/Y
    - AWS/dig: 58.0% Y/Y

    Total = $16.36B (18.5% Y/Y) vs. consensus of 21.4% Y/Y
    EPS = ($0.13) vs. consensus of ($0.09).

    So, my model which is usually pretty accurate has them missing revs by a bunch (290bps or $400M), and missing EPS by 4c.

    Ironically, the big lowering of 1P sales due to comscore US data actually raised EPS as overall margins are higher (they lose money on 1P as I have shown in my articles).

    My fear is they headline well with the revenue recognition change, and beat on revs due to this even margins will get crushed. This could be the fuel to top off the parabolic launch to $350+
    Sep 22 07:42 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon.com: The Mix Matters And Explains Most Of The Profit Implosion [View article]
    Paulo - don;t forget that shipping was at its bottom as a % of revenue in 2009 and 2010 due to gasoline being a cyclical low (it has increased 40% since then). Shipping has grown from 7.1% in 2009 Q3 to 8.7% last Q. That has removed 1.6% of the net as well, in spite of new "close to customer" FC's that should be reducing the shipping expense.
    Aug 23 02:57 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • eBay A Leading Indicator Of Amazon Revenue - Revisited [View article]
    An R2 is 0.71, while interesting as a directional correlative point, is largely worthless as a predictor. You need at least 0.90 or more for the independent variable to act as an accurate predictor (assuming the other technical indicators are significant).

    Broader market indicators provide much higher R2's when combined in a more complex regression (Paulo and I have discussed these points) - Channel advisor, Consumer spending, retail spending, e-com data, etc... all are available prior to AMZN reporting. I have been able to nail AMZN revenue growth pretty closely based on this.

    eBay numbers are better used to compare the accuracy of Channel Advisor numbers, so when you apply them to AMZN you account for error in the eBay estimates back to AMZN in the model.

    Of course, knowing the AMZN revenue number perfectly vs. analyst estimates would not have made you money in the stock anyways, as they have consistently missed on revenue and their stock has increased each time.
    Jul 31 05:16 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Accounting Change Stands To Inflate Amazon's Reported Revenues [View article]
    I'm done with this one .. My logic has never been so far off from reality on anything .... if I can't explain it, I'm not going to discuss it anymore. I was right this week on AAPL, FB, NFLX, and on AMZN numbers - but wrong on AMZN stock movement. I am so disconnected from the analysts logic. Either I am wrong and should up, or I am right and these guys are all colluding in a huge lie, and there is no point in fighting the tape anymore. Either way, I am done commenting. Maybe one less bear will help turn sentiment. Good Luck all.
    Jul 26 01:09 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Accounting Change Stands To Inflate Amazon's Reported Revenues [View article]
    yeah - I didn't inlcuded that becuase it makes no sense at all. What the Hell is he trying to say?
    Jul 26 10:01 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
434 Comments
474 Likes