Value Investor Today

Verifone is Gregory Pepin's Highest Conviction Holding - Here's Why

"Analysis is concerned primarily with values which are supported by the facts and not with those which depend largely upon expectations." - Benjamin Graham

Your analysis, in my opinion, is based more from what you expect to occur rather than what is occurring. The world of technology changes so rapidly that there is no margin of safety in speculating what the future may bring to that industry.

What we do have knowledge of right now is that this company has more debt than the book value of their equity. That equates to risk and lots of it. Can you guarantee what the future will bring or how this business will handle any future challenges? I certainly can't.

There is definitive guidelines that have been passed down to us from Benjamin Graham. If your Margin of Safety is what you speculate will happen at a given period in the future, then you have no Margin of Safety. Any investment without a Margin of Safety is speculation. The whole point to being a value investor is to not speculate. With over 14,000 publicly traded companies, our options are so abundant that if a particular investment doesn't meet those guidelines, move on because eventually you'll find one that does.


On Dec 26 08:38 AM Gregory Pepin wrote:

> everyone can have an opinion on a stock. However what i keep from
> buffett and fischer is the principle to invest in a business model
> you believe over the long run. Neither buffett or fischer would have
> pick Apple or Google but according to me it is a great long term
> value an growth pick.
> But such a stock trade 3-4x their pe. Come on.
> Their balance has been Hurt by inventory issue. But this business
> is a High margin and generate lots of cash. Once again look at Apple
> balance sheet in 2001. Not attractive but if you look at their strategy
> you could love the stock. It all comes down to the value of the business
> plan and i like verifone ones.
>
> Anyway i feel comfortable with my fundamental approach adapted to
> new technology and so far it pays off pretty well and i believe it
> is the same for you.
> We have one thing in Common we are long term investor. We are just
> different in our analysis approach and i agree a q&a isn't enough
> to express your point of view but it is a good way to attract interest
> on a stock.

Mariusz Skonieczny's 'Why Are We So Clueless About the Stock Market?': A Great Primer for New Investors

Ignore Jup, he works for Timothy Sykes who advertises himself to be an investor but in fact the majority of his earnings comes from DVD sales. One of the biggest con artists I've ever ran across.


On Dec 11 05:31 PM Jae Jun wrote:

> oh and seekingalpha scrapes all the content off my site, so my original
> audience are my readers who obviously know.

Verifone is Gregory Pepin's Highest Conviction Holding - Here's Why

Exactly my feelings on this one. This isn't close to a value play.


On Dec 25 10:45 AM Thomas Smicklas wrote:

> Give me a chimp, a dart and a copy of the WSJ stock table.
> Let the chimp take aim and hit a random stock.
> I'll tout it as a long term holding.
>
> Who will remember what I recommended by the year 2015?

Verifone is Gregory Pepin's Highest Conviction Holding - Here's Why

Terrible question and answer session, in my opinion, with no real valuation but rather a sort of stock pumping article. I also find it wrong to mention that Mr. Pepin works for a value firm modeled after Graham, Buffett, and Fisher given the fact that neither of those gentleman would have purchased a technology stock or any stock that had more in Total Liabilities than the Total Equity of the firm.

I'm a value investor and in my strong opinion, this is not a value play. I believe this company is worth roughly $4.50 - $5.00 per share right now and currently it is trading for 3X that amount. It's overvalued.

Delusions of Grandeur in regards to the Covestor Investment Return

Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? LOL. Don't worry Timothy, there is nothing about you that warrants a stalking although I've heard you may wear them once in a while.


On Dec 22 02:17 AM Timothy Sykes wrote:

> LOL its Jim Hodges, the guy who totalllly cyber stalks me, check
> out Jimmy boy's ignorance, some people don't even deserve free speech,
> they ruin it for everyone else!
>
> www.timothysykes.com/2.../

Delusions of Grandeur in regards to the Covestor Investment Return

As always Perry, thanks for you information.


On Dec 22 06:07 AM Perryblacher wrote:

> Hi Jim
>
> We actually show for most members both the return including cash
> and without cash - there should be a tab on your factsheet. The main
> return shown is a time weighted return, exlcuding cash which reports
> as the institutions do. This is as someone following your trade signals
> will want to follow you with a fixed sum and not necessarily add
> or remove cash as you do. I appreciate this shows the return someone
> follwing you fully invested would achieve and not the return you
> yourself may have realized.
>
> Understand the post - well said and hope we can continue to improve
> how we report for you
>
> With best wishes
> Perry Blacher (CEO Covestor)

Delusions of Grandeur in regards to the Covestor Investment Return

I measure my performance, as all intelligent investors do, by way of Aggregate Returns. Measuring them on a daily, weekly, monthly, or annually rate is of very little merit to me or most investors.

On Dec 22 04:50 AM jup wrote:

> what's really funny about your skepticism James is if you would just
> follow his trades or if you had followed them real time on his blog
> since 2007 you would see that he is legit. This is coming from a
> former skeptic/reformed value investor myself who has followed them
> since 2007. Bottom line. Sykes beat your returns in 2008. Actually
> he creamed them and every other bagholder.

Delusions of Grandeur in regards to the Covestor Investment Return

Thanks for your passive/aggressive post Timothy.


On Dec 22 02:10 AM Timothy Sykes wrote:

> zzzz, why don't you link to my profile instead of being a typical
> coward/introverted value investor calling me names behind my back?
> why dont you include covestor's new "cash+equities" chart to see
> EXACTLY how my strategy is up 130%+ in 2009.
>
> PS my account is now over $100,000--for some reason covestor hasnt
> updated the $ sign...why dont you ask them for a comment BEFORe you
> write an inaccurate article...oh wait, this is SA, why should we
> expect any quality whatsoever

Gannett Is Undervalued

Gannett has been around since 1906. Much longer than Mr. Murdoch.


On Nov 01 06:18 PM casey00001 wrote:

> If Gannett was worth anything, Rupert Murdoch would have already
> bought it.

Gannett Is Undervalued

A quick calculation (numbers I'm using in example have nothing to do with GCI's actual financial statement):

If a company who earned $10 Million after COGS took an impairment charge of $5 Million due to short term 'projected' goodwill asset value, and that company operated at the 38% tax bracket, then the following is true:

Operating Income: $5 Million
Taxes: $1.9 Million
Net Income: $3.10 Million

Same situation excluding the impairment charge:

Operating Income: $10 Million
Taxes: $3.8 Million
Net Income: $6.20 Million

The difference between not having an impairment and having an impairment is a difference of $1.9 Million in taxes and $3.10 Million to the bottom line, or 100% in the favor of having an impairment.

Therefore, it is clearly in the best interest of a company to have an impairment charge, especially one in which no actual cash is being exchanged such is the case with GCI; rather, its a complete 'projection'.

And yes, companies do this ALL the time. You may have not have noticed it before because the majority of investors do not read the entire SEC filings. That is a fact.

Gannett Is Undervalued

Mr. Sang. You and I disagree strongly. If I can show a Net Loss on my bottom line, I have a tax advantage in doing so.

You are clearly mistaken to say that a corporation or an individual does not receive a tax benefit by showing a Net Loss. I know this from a first hand business perspective.


On Nov 01 07:32 PM Chimin Sang wrote:

> I don't think you get the accounting right. A company DOES NOT gain
> tax benefit by writing down goodwill.
>
> If there were such a rule, all companies would like to exercise their
> 'right judgement' to write down goodwill to gain tax benefit. This
> would be a wrong incentive IRS send out to the companies. Of course,
> I know the rule by fact. I am giving you a scenario to show the absurdness
> of such a rule.

Gannett Is Undervalued

If you completely take away Goodwill from their balance sheet, the way Warren Buffett has suggested doing, the company operates itself with very little difference than it has in previous years.


On Nov 01 04:16 PM Short Bus wrote:

> delusional with 100% certainty
>
> Based on fact A, I can infer fact B, and then derive from that, fact
> C. Which based on fact C, I can guarantee that fact D is 100% correct.
>
>
> quod erat demonstrandum

Did Value Investor Mark Sellers Over-Value PRXI?

That is correct but the ruling had a condition in which RMST (Premier) may never sell or dispose of the artifacts. So, to value Premier based off of its stated assets is incorrect because those assets have no 'resale' value.

On Oct 28 05:25 PM User 62480 wrote:

> February 28, 2009 10-K of PRXI:
> RMST appealed the July 2, 2004 court order to the U.S. Court of Appeals
> for the Fourth Circuit. On January 31, 2006, the court of appeals
> reversed the lower court’s decision to invalidate the 1993 Proces-Verbal,
> pursuant to which the government of France granted RMST title to
> all artifacts recovered from the wreck site during the 1987 expedition.
> As a result, the appellate court tacitly reconfirmed that RMST owns
> the approximately 2,000 artifacts recovered during the 1987 expedition.

25 Stocks Benjamin Graham Would Like

Ben Graham would have used, what is now called, the Cyclically Adjusted Price Earning Ratio (CAPE) during a recession/depression which would have required a company to have a P/E below 10. Therefore, your screen is dramatically flawed.

Axcelis Technologies Hidden Value Play?

Good summary.