Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • New Efficiente PLUS Improving CD Options  [View article]
    For anyone looking for current index pricing as well as charted history (most of which is hypothetical since the index was created 12/31/2014), you can find it on Bloomberg under ticker EFPLUS5D:IND

    Oct 21, 2015. 05:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Monsanto Harvests Jobs To Cut Costs  [View article]
    "it's hard not to like Monsanto on a fundamental basis."
    I will never like Monsanto for the fundamental reason that they have political risk worse than tobacco, marijuana, and correctional facility (prison) companies.
    Oct 19, 2015. 10:42 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 High-Yielding Strong Dividend Growth Stocks For The Long Haul  [View article]
    Good article, but I would retitle it to "5 Low-Yielding Strong Dividend Growth Stocks For The Long Haul".
    Sep 1, 2015. 10:13 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short StoneMor Partners  [View article]
    This DOES sound like a catalyst to cause the eventual fall of these ponzi-esque MLP companies. I haven't read the recent financial statements. Does the money raised now only cover dividends, and no future acquisitions or growth? I find that hard to believe, else I think the stock would be lower.
    Aug 12, 2015. 05:39 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Short StoneMor Partners  [View article]
    Was article written to demonstrate the author's naivete? The funny thing is, I actually agree StoneMor is not sustainable, and I would not hold it in my portfolio. But to advise people to short STON is beyond foolish. If you had advised to sell and stay away, the article would be decent. But advising to short, I must itemize the following flames:

    1. StoneMor is an MLP. MLP's are almost never profitable by GAAP accounting, yet most of them continue to operate year after year.

    2. This argument is sooooo old. There is an article like this every 6-12 months. I could just change the timestamp on your article to 2010, and wouldn't you look the fool in 2015. (There were plenty of identical articles in the last 5 years and the stock has been fine.) You have provided no new evidence except the unproven declining NAV argument.

    3. If STON is a good short candidate, then you must provide a good entry point to get short. You already missed the recent 15% down move.

    "Once the management decides to stop raising dividends, or when dividends are cut, that will serve as the catalyst for share depreciation."

    Uhhhhh, why would the same management that is running this racket ever do that? They would only do that when forced to do that, which only happens when capital markets refuse to buy newly created shares. You haven't proven that will happen anytime soon.

    "This is the inevitable outcome that I believe will come sooner or later."

    We have no idea when this will happen. I would guess within 20 more years.

    4. The time frame of a short trade is critical, as there are HUGE costs to carrying this stock short. The short seller has to pay the 8% dividend AND has to pay borrow interest to short the stock. Do not be surprised to pay over 20% per year while waiting for your thesis to come true.

    Shorting stocks is best left to short-term traders.
    Disclosure: Neither long nor short STON.
    Aug 11, 2015. 02:57 PM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • StoneMor Partners declares $0.65 dividend  [View news story]
    I think the demographic projections are reasonable, StonePoor, but projections are not the same thing as "raw stone cold fact".
    Jul 24, 2015. 11:55 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • American Realty Capital Properties: You See, That's Why The 7% Preferred Stock Is The Way To Go  [View article]
    Thanks everyone, esp for that link to preferred with qualified dividends.
    Jul 14, 2015. 01:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • American Realty Capital Properties: You See, That's Why The 7% Preferred Stock Is The Way To Go  [View article]
    Do ARCPP's dividends qualify for the qualified dividend income tax rate, or are they taxed as ordinary income?
    Jul 13, 2015. 06:26 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shareholder Friendly AT&T Diversifies Revenue Stream  [View article]
    The price projection starts at current price and then converges on a range of fair values. It's not worthless. You just need to read all about the Valuentum process before you can use their charts.
    Jul 9, 2015. 09:35 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oxford Lane Capital Sell-Off Is Irrational  [View article]
    Istahler, I believe if they sell shares above NAV they are technically creating value for shareholders even though they are lowering the market price.
    Yes this will generate more fees for management because their portfolio is larger now. Assuming the raised capital is invested similarly to the existing portfolio, they could raise the distribution a little. Distribution is based on NAV portfolio returns which has nothing to do with trading price of OXLC.

    Simplified example (not OXLC):

    1,000 shares outstanding x $11.20 market price = $11,200 market cap.
    NAV $10/sh x 1,000 shares = $10,000 portfolio value.
    Portfolio yields 10% of NAV = $1000 total company returns.
    Company distributes 100% of income.
    Dividend per share = $1000 / 1000 sh = $1 / sh.

    Block trade to raise capital $11 x 100 shares = $1100 raised.
    Market doesn't like it and price drops to $10.60/sh.
    1,100 shares outstanding x $10.60 market price = $11,660 market cap.
    new NAV = old NAV + $1100 raised = $11,100 portfolio value.
    Portfolio yields 10% of NAV = $1110 total company returns.
    Company distributes 100% of income.
    Dividend per share = $1110 / 1100 sh = $1.009/sh.

    My point here is that the dividend per share can go up because management created value by selling above NAV, assuming they can deploy the new capital at the same (or better) rate of return as the existing portfolio capital. Though I didn't illustrate it, the yield went up too. Any thoughts or corrections are welcome.
    Jun 5, 2015. 11:30 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • New Efficiente PLUS Improving CD Options  [View article]
    Nice article. I hope all the broker/dealers add these offerings to their platform soon.
    May 29, 2015. 08:35 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Exceed Structured Shield Fund Is A Paradigm Changer  [View article]
    It looks like a really interesting fund and much easier way to access a continuous collar with liquidity.

    Wouldn't this collar cost more (be a larger net debit) than 80 bps (0.80% annually) using the public options market? The fact sheet also says the net fees are 1.45%. I am wondering if the outcome set of [-12.5%,+15%] might look more like [-14.5%,+12.5%] in the real world. Would love to learn more.
    May 18, 2015. 07:27 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Evolution Of The JPMorgan Efficiente Series  [View instapost]
    Thanks for writing this very useful and informative article. The current MLCD's seem to be based on the ETF Efficiente 5 DS. Can you provide a link to the price history or performance numbers by year? Searching google yields a bunch of dead bloomberg links.
    May 9, 2015. 02:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Enduro Royalty Trust Should Be In Your Portfolio  [View article]
    Anybody know if NDRO will be able to recover if oil prices come back to 60+ ?
    Jan 29, 2015. 11:01 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • American Realty Capital Properties: What To Do About Cole Capital...  [View article]
    "the only reason Cole was successful with aggregating assets and completing fill liquidity events was because ARCP was always there waiting."

    I'm not sure what you mean by this statement. To my knowledge Cole has never had a liquidity event selling to ARCP.
    Cole Credit Property Trust II -- Spirit Realty (SRC)
    Cole Credit Property Trust III became publicly listed as COLE.
    Cole Corporate Income Trust -- Select Income REIT (SIR)

    The COLE listing was often mistakenly referred to as an IPO, but really it was just a listing. It was later acquired by ARCP, but that was not a liquidity event, as it was already liquid.
    Jan 12, 2015. 10:43 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment