Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co. (RS)

All Comments on RS

  • commenter
    thomas728
    Sep 10 07:06 AM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    Hey guy........where is WaMu ? Every portfolio needs a solid
    financial.

    Mr. Nygren     Reply
  • commenter
    Daniel
    Jacome
    Sep 04 04:36 PM
    My Website
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    can we dump this into a spreadsheet next time and rank them a bit. this is just another snow job: ) Reply
  • commenter
    pockyclips
    2020
    Aug 12 02:07 PM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    This looks like a dartboard. Pick 3 sector ETFs, 3 little followed stocks
    and sleep better at night.     Reply
  • commenter
    User 81960
    Jul 30 04:41 PM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    YOU HAVE TO MANY STOCKS TO FOLLOW.
    ALL YOU NEED IS SOMETHING LIKE THESE.
    CHK / CSCO / EMC / FCX / GE / HAL / IPI / MON / MRVL / MSFT / RIMM / T / TEVA / V / WB / YUM.
    JUST 16 STOCKS TO FOLLOW.
    THEN YOU CAN DO YOUR HOMEWORK ON EACH .     Reply
  • commenter
    Rocknrollleg
    end193
    Jul 24 01:54 PM
    Commercial Metals Earnings and the Domestic Steel Market [view article]
    Excellent article. By the way, won't increased oil demand actually increase steel demand for drilling purposes? Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    Jul 18 06:20 AM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    4-5 index etfs probably would do it as well. don't tell me you can keep track and properly analyze and follow all of your holdings. way too many.
    zero value added.     Reply
  • commenter
    Graham
    Jul 10 10:47 PM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    Hi David,

    i have no idea how you pick stocks, what is your method? However, i see you have 3 companies in your list that i am long on, FTEK, FSR and FAST. I would like for you to check out ISLN, EXBD and MKL     Reply
  • commenter
    andrewh10
    Jul 10 05:24 AM
    My Website
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    If that is your replacement list can we see the rest of what you currently own. At first glance it seems like you may toss the majority of your energy, financials, and tech holdings. Can we get a sector percentage to give some clarification? Here I will make your task much easier, stocks on your list I would hang on to would include: AA, AYR, BDK, BKS, CBI, CMI, COMS, CPB, CSCO, DD, DRYS, DUK, FCX, FTO, HELE, HNZ, HOC, HON, IPSU, IR, JCI, KCI, KMX, NVS, OSK, PAYX, PPC, PPG, PRU, RTN, SNY, TSO, TTC, TXT, VE, VZ, WAG, WY. Reply
  • commenter
    NEH
    Jul 07 10:57 PM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    David, it's nice to hear you are in agreement. Actually, I have been in dry-bulk for a while, and bought NM because they bought a port terminal with grain silos in Uruguay. Its heavily asset-based, even if heavily leveraged, but I favor asset based equities. The Uruguay purchase, and they are keeping the previous owners on-board, is another key factor that really sets NM apart from the other dry-bulk shippers. BTW - I invest only in dry-bulk. Less risk of environmental disasters than tankers.


    On Jul 07 10:04 AM David White wrote:

    > NM is a good bet. It has excellent value. It has an extremely low
    > PE and FPE. It also has an excellent Price to Book value ratio. Further
    > it has both a new fleet in South America (for the river traffic mostly)
    > which is supposed to begin adding 35% to EBITDA beginning in the
    > 4th quarter of this year. It got pushed further downward in the recent
    > market move in that direction, so it is an excellent buy now.     Reply
  • commenter
    sanserve
    Jul 07 02:53 PM
    My Website
    What's Wrong with Today's Value Investing? [view article]
    When All Stocks Are Value Stocks - Think QDI

    Value stocks are those that tend to trade at lower prices relative to their fundamental characteristics than their more speculative cousins, the growth stocks; they have higher than usual dividend yields and lower P/E and P/B ratios. So when all stock prices are down significantly, have they all become value stocks? Or, based on the panicky fear that tends to overwhelm media and financial experts alike, haven't they all taken on the speculative characteristics of growth stocks?

    Well, to a certain extent they have, because the lower value stock prices go, the more likely it is that they will eventually experience the 15% ROE that typifies the classic growth stock. Interestingly, by definition, growth stocks are expected to be associated with profitable companies, a fact that speculators often lose site of. There are three features that separate value stocks from growth stocks and two that separate Investment Grade Value (IGV) stocks from the average, run-of-the-mill, variety.

    Value stocks pay dividends, and have lower ratios than growth stocks. IGV stock companies also have long-term histories of profitability and an S & P rating of B+ or higher. Would you be surprised to learn that neither the DJIA nor the S & P 500 contains particularly high numbers of IGV stocks? Still, since 1982, value stocks have outperformed growth stocks 62% of the time. So when an ugly correction has a makeover, it's likely that all value stocks transform themselves into growth stocks, at least temporarily.

    Will Rogers summed up the stock selection quandary nicely with: "Only buy stocks that go up. If they aren't going to go up, don't buy them." Many have misunderstood this tongue-in-cheek observation and joined the buy-anything-high investment club. You need dig no further than the current lists (June '08) of "most advancing issues" to see how investors are buying commodity companies and financial futures at the highest prices in the history of mankind.

    This while they are shunning IGVSI (Investment Grade Value Stock Index) companies that have plummeted to their most attractive price levels in three to five years. Many of the very best multinational companies in the world are at historically low prices. Wall Street smiles knowingly (and greedily) as Main Street hucksters tout gold, currencies, and oil futures as retirement plan safety nets. Regulatory agencies look the other way as speculations worm their way into qualified plans of all varieties. Surely those markets will be regulated some day--- after the next Bazooka-pink, gooey mess becomes history.

    How much financial bloodshed is necessary before we realize that there is no safe and easy shortcut to investment success? When do we learn that most of our mistakes involve greed, fear, or unrealistic expectations about what we own? Eventually, successful investors begin to allocate assets in a goal directed manner by adopting a more realistic investment strategy--- one with security selection guidelines and realistic performance definitions and expectations.

    If you are thinking of trying a strategy for a year to see if it works, you're being too short-term sighted--- the investment markets operate in cycles. If you insist on comparing your performance with indices and averages, you'll rarely be satisfied. A viable investment strategy will be a three-dimensional decision model, and all three decisions are equally important. Few strategies include a targeted profit taking discipline--- dimension two. The first dimension involves the selection of securities. The third?

    How should an investor determine what stocks to buy, and when to buy them? We've discussed the features of value and growth stocks and seen how any number of companies can qualify as either dependent upon where we are in terms of the market cycle or where they are in terms of their own industry, sector, or business cycles. Value stocks (and the debt securities of value stock companies) tend to be safer than growth stocks. But IGVSI stocks are super-screened by a unique rating system that is based on company survival statistics--- very important stuff.

    In the late 90's, it was rumored that a well-known value fund manager was asked why he wasn't buying dot-coms, IPOs, etc. When he said that they didn't qualify as value stocks, he was told to change his definition--- or else. IGV stocks include a quality element that minimizes the risk of loss and normally smoothes the angles in the market cycle. The market value highs are typically not as high, but the market value lows are most often not as low as they are with either growth or Wall Street definition value stocks. They work best in conjunction with portfolios that have an income allocation of at least 30%--- you need to know why.

    How do we create a confidence building IGV stock selection universe without getting bogged down in endless research? Here are five filters you can use to come up with a listing of higher quality companies: (1) An S & P rating of B+ or better. Standard & Poor's combines many fundamental and qualitative factors into a letter ranking that speaks only to the financial viability of the companies. Anything rated lower adds more risk to your portfolio.

    (2) A history of profitability. Although it should seem obvious, buying stock in a company that has a history of profitable operations is inherently less risky. Profitable operations adapt more readily to changes in markets, economies, and business growth opportunities. (3) A history of regular, even increasing, dividend payments. Companies will go to great lengths, and endure great hardships, before electing either to cut or to omit a dividend. Dividend changes are important, absolute size is not.

    (4) A Reasonable Price Range. Most Investment Grade stocks are priced above $10 per share and only a few trade at levels above $100. An unusually high price may be caused by higher sector or company-specific speculation while an inordinately low price may be a good warning signal. (5) An NYSE listing--- just because it's easier.

    Your selection universe will become the backbone of your equity asset allocation, so there is no room for creative adjustments to the rules and guidelines you've established--- no matter how strongly you feel about recent news or rumor. There are approximately 450 IGV stocks to choose from--- and you'll find the name recognition comforting. Additionally, as these companies gyrate above and below your purchase price (as they absolutely will), you can be more confident that it is merely the nature of the stock market and not an imminent financial disaster.

    The QDI? Quality, diversification, and income.


    Steve Selengut
    www.sancoservices.com
    www.kiawahgolfinvestme.../
    Author of: "The Brainwashing of the American Investor: The Book that Wall Street Does Not Want YOU to Read", and "A Millionaire's Secret Investment Strategy"
    Reply
  • commenter
    David White
    Jul 07 10:04 AM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    NM is a good bet. It has excellent value. It has an extremely low PE and FPE. It also has an excellent Price to Book value ratio. Further it has both a new fleet in South America (for the river traffic mostly) which is supposed to begin adding 35% to EBITDA beginning in the 4th quarter of this year. It got pushed further downward in the recent market move in that direction, so it is an excellent buy now. Reply
  • commenter
    DonaldRay
    Jul 06 10:35 PM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    Very valuable too me.....it says too replace your loosers with winners and have a selection process....most of these stocks will probablely be winners and he knows it and says you do not have too pick the very best just one that will outperform your loosers...this is very insightfull and goes with the golden rules of trading...increase winnners and decrease loosers.... Reply
  • commenter
    maubeau
    Jul 06 02:40 PM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    No value to me, completely useless in it's present form. Reply
  • commenter
    User 168670
    Jul 05 02:41 PM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    very silly article-no value unless some has a week of time to review. Reply
  • commenter
    mpharbold1
    Jul 05 11:11 AM
    Replacement Candidates for David Merkel's Portfolio: From AA to ZZ [view article]
    David, In late January you liked VSH. Today it is much cheaper, but every quarter they seem to take a new non-recurring charge that turns out to be anything but non-recurring.The stock was moving up from 8.5 to 10.5 and now after a couple of terrible weeks, its back under 9 again. It looks cheap to me, but I don't see any catalyst on the horizon for it to go up. What are your thoughts today on VSH? Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: