Seeking Alpha

Vince Martin

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Vince Martin's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • ConocoPhillips' Yield Should Surpass 5% - And Soon [View article]
    Theoretically, yes, the market value will be the same. As of yesterday, the future value of the when-issued shares was actually slightly higher than current COP stock. As I replied yesterday to another comment, at the time, the "when issued" shares totaled about $73.69 ($18 for 1/2 PSX, $55.69 for COP-WI), with COP trading at $73.29.

    There may be some movement in one direction or the other, but that's for traders and I think it's impossible to predict. Nor would I think the movements would be material, particularly for long-term and/or income investors.
    Apr 19 02:23 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ConocoPhillips' Yield Should Surpass 5% - And Soon [View article]
    Yes, you will receive 7 shares of PSX and a cash payment; the PSX share will be sold on the open market and you will get half (roughly $16-$17).

    The shares distributed will not be taxed but the cash will be.

    http://bit.ly/IP5RBk
    Apr 18 07:08 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Research In Motion's Options For Survival [View article]
    That's funny. And I've written 4 pieces on RIMM. Made enough to buy a new iPhone.
    Apr 5 12:40 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Thompson Creek Missteps Frustrating; But Value Remains [View article]
    "If TC ever makes it through a quarter without a $100 million dollar capex miss the stock will go up a lot."

    I could have cut this entire article down to that sentence. I think the December move shows what the stock will do if the market gets any confidence in their ability to do so.

    That said, I'm not sure it's fair to entirely blame management. This is truly an industry-wide problem -- particularly in terms of labor scarcity, the demand-supply equilibrium is completely out of whack. Add on the jump in oil, which is a key input cost, and much of what has happened would have happened to anybody.
    Apr 4 12:31 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Myth Of Defensive Stocks [View article]
    "The problem is that individual investors are more risk-seeking than they let on - both to themselves and to others."

    I think it's less that they are risk-seeking than that they are risk-ignorant. I would also argue that those tendencies extend far above the retail level. It's just not an investing trap; people (all of us) generally act as if we have more control over our destinies than we actually do.

    And, agreed, the need for diversification was highlighted in 2008-09. The idea that you can be truly diversified in US equities alone should have gone out the window. Not sure that lesson has been learned, however.
    Oct 17 06:59 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Myth Of Defensive Stocks [View article]
    Morningstar.com has good data on those points -- you can use the "10K" figure and see total returns with dividend reinvesting.

    Over the long haul, dividend stocks have traditionally outperformed. The question is the causuality of this correlation; is it that dividends (and subsequent reinvestment) provide an extra compound boost, or is that dividend stocks are traditionally higher-quality, more mature, better-managed companies?
    Oct 17 06:56 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pres. Obama's jobs bill is in reality another bailout of debt-ridden state and local governments, especially for blue states such as CA, NY and IL where he has greater support, Paul Peterson and Daniel Nadler write. Such states, typically with Democrat legislatures and highly unionized public-sector workforces, often pay interest rates an extra half-point higher than other states.  [View news story]
    The irony of conservatives bemoaning aid going to blue states -- particularly Harvard economists -- is beyond amazing. Blue states have been subsidizing red states -- such as my home state of Oklahoma -- since the federal expansion of the 1960s, if not earlier. OK gets, if I recall, something on the order of $1.30 in federal spending for every $1 it pays in federal taxes, while states like MA, NJ, and CA -- who are supposedly being paid off here by Obama -- receive something in the range of 75 cents to 85 cents on the dollar. It may be the transfer of wealth from Massachusetts to Montana, rather than the transfer of wealth from its citizens to its unions, that are responsible for the higher interest rates.
    Sep 15 07:05 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Advanced Micro Devices and the False Lure of the Covered Straddle [View article]
    In the future, I'd read -- and understand -- the whole piece before making condescending comments that only serve to make you foolish.

    As for your apparent contention that simple buy/sell strategies are morally superior to option strategies, good luck with that. You claim "that was the simple rules of the game", and I couldn't agree more, with emphasis on the "was".
    Jul 25 01:29 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Income Without the Dividend: A Strategy for Generating Income in a Down Market [View article]
    The cash used to secure the put options is not cash that would otherwise be held "in cash" to reduce risk in a traditional portfolio; that cash would in a traditional portfolio be used to purchase the stock outright. So, yes, we are increasing portfolio risk relative to having all our money in T-Bills, but not relative to owning dividend stocks directly.

    In fact, the risk with this strategy is lower even than a tactic of owning these dividend stocks outright with OTM covered calls, as the margin of safety is a) greater and b) easier to match to our risk tolerance through our choice of strike price. You couldn't get 12% margin of safety with an OTM covered call strategy, though of course your yield would be higher should the stock break even or rise.
    Jun 16 08:47 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • BlackBerry Bulls, Just Stop [View article]
    There are lots of comments to that effect; for some reason $12 and $15 seem to be the most popular prices. $14 remains unpopular :)
    Sep 25 02:30 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • BlackBerry Bulls, Just Stop [View article]
    I didn't stamp a $500MM loss going forward. But this company is going to burn cash for a while. Any acquirer is going to account for that in his/her bid.

    I easily dismiss the conspiracy theory because it's ridiculous. Watsa's bid is at $9 because the stock was at $8.xx and the company has no leverage.Again, nothing about the timeline changes the present value of the stock! It would have changed the timing but the valuation of the stock is based on the prelim Q2 figures and they were TERRIBLE, accounting changes or no. (WS knew the accounting had changed, and BB still missed by 47% or something like that on the TOP line.)

    The stock was at $8.xx and the company has no leverage because it has run itself into the ground. For two-plus years, it's been "this is manipulated, look at the P/E," then earnings disappeared. Then "this is manipulated, look at book value," then book value disappeared. Now it's "this is manipulated, look at the cash." It's not a worthy case, and it hasn't been the whole way down.
    Sep 25 02:27 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • BlackBerry Bulls, Just Stop [View article]
    What spin said it was fake? Shares rose, CNN.com had "BlackBerry going private" on its front page, so did this site. You're grasping.

    Those who complain about media bashing need to tell me one thing: what else were they supposed to write about?
    Sep 25 02:22 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Perfect Trifecta For Thompson Creek [View article]
    There are a number of mistakes here. To begin with, your EV/sales calculation is flawed. 2.75x FY15 revenue of nearly $900 million is not "in the $3 billion range." It's less than $2.5 billion. And there aren't 171 million shares outstanding; there are 227 million, because you didn't account for the substantial dilution from the tMEDs. I'm also curious as to where you're getting $900MM from considering that Milligan (at current prices) is doing $500MM and there's a decent chance one of the moly mines could still be mothballed. Finally, comparing TC in 2008 to TC in 2013 is a bit of a stretch, because they are almost two completely different companies; using EV/sales is a peculiar tool anyhow.

    Secondly, the latest estimate for the cash flow potential from Milligan was not in May, but with the Q2 results, and it was lower than you write. (gross profit was $220 million, not $240 million). Projected GP from Milligan has fallen by nearly 50 percent over the past two years.

    Thirdly, you write, "This is because the marginal cost of production for most molybdenum producers is in the $11 range, so it is unlikely that prices will dip below that for any significant length of time." Not remotely true; moly is often mined as a byproduct by companies targeting other types of ore, so they will sell it for whatever they get.

    Finally, your DCF model uses 171MM shares; as noted above, the correct number is much higher. (226 if I recall off hand). the details on the tMEDs are in the 10-K.
    Aug 12 05:50 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • RadioShack Is Not Worth The Gamble [View article]
    I do think vastly lowering the number of locations is a play here...the question is whether it's too late. But I agree...4300 RadioShacks just seems too many. When you add in the focus on wireless, and how many RadioShacks are next door to or in the same shopping mall as a Verizon or Sprint store...there's just so much redundancy.
    Aug 4 04:34 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Be Wary Of Adams Resources' Big Run [View article]
    Nothing about this article is needless or unwarranted. The point is not that earnings are going to be flat. The point is that there is a very real possibility that when the spread narrows earnings will tumble back toward $2-3 per share. And that results in a valuation of $35-$45 (ballpark), which is why I've recommended it (repeatedly) around $30.

    The Marketing profits are not representative of the company's long-term profit potential. The company itself is saying that. So you can't just value the company at 10x EPS + cash and say it should be worth $77.

    And, btw, the stock didn't "get pounded" today. It's down 7.5% after rising 30% in four sessions. That's par for the course when average daily volume is 11K and the company essentially has four pieces of news a year.
    Mar 21 06:49 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
619 Comments
392 Likes