valuemanager03

Total Rating:
0 / 0

6 Comments

    • Tue Jun 24th 09:07 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Rating Agencies Target Guarantors to Deflect Subprime Blame
      With all due respect to Tom... but his article is just blame shifting from the insurance companies TO the ratings agencies. The insurers took crazy risks at very low premiums... and thus ruined their reputations themselves (while all the while being rated AAA). Those poor underwriting decisions are NOT the rating agencies faults. Even while being rated AAA early this year, the market (investors and clients) already treated them as insolvent. Look at the yields they had to offer to raise capital. Look at municipalities reinsuring their already wrapped bonds. And Moodys or S&P keeping a AAA now wouldn't change that.
      View article »
    • Thu May 22nd 13:02 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      First Marblehead Should Jump on FBR Reversal
      Well, good for your gut. Glad its so precise. The 'lending platform' is not worth much. It consists of people and relationships with low tier schools, all of which were geared towards volume of low quality loans (whose ultimate pay back will only now come to light since the first few years usually result in very low defaults). Further, the firm has let go about 2/3 of their employees from this time last year. The ones who remain are almost all on the trust servicing side, since there is virtually no volume in the selling 'platform'. So - again - not much value there.
      View article »
    • Sun Mar 30th 19:49 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Deteriorating Market for PCs
      This is interesting market share type data, but I found it disingenious of you to use different time periods for the 4 time series charts - all of which are based on the same underlying survey data and are directly comparable. Why? I'm guessing because you want each chart to best prove your point (linear increases/decreases in market share). Why not put all 4 charts for the same full time period so people can see the ebb and flow of market share?
      View article »
    • Tue Mar 25th 14:34 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Consolidated Mercantile: Cheap in Terms of Cash
      Did you see the notice of delisting.... this was already an illiquid stock, and now it won't be trading on Nasdaq anymore (see delisting notice). Wonder if this company will really even trade anymore? Perhaps it will return to oblivion... back in the $1 range... but no one will care.
      View article »
    • Thu Feb 21st 15:13 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Consolidated Mercantile: Cash Rich Canadian Microcap
      Excellent analysis and post. I have followed this company for a while and felt the *exact* same... but you have done a quite thorough job putting it in print.

      I too thought the company would have had a great deal buying Prides Capital's shares (incredibly book value accretive, including to Litwin's stake). But they didn't. I guess they want to save the cash to maximize value of the next deal? I wonder, too, if age is catching up with the managers (not to say they are diminished by age, but do they still want make 5 to 10 year investments in their 70's???).

      As a shareholder, I'd be happy with a liquidation of that $3 plus cash. More likely, they'll make some deal. Even if they destroy shareholder value in another deal... it would have to be 50% loss to break-even. Anything with a decent ROI would mean shareholders turn out marvelously. It's like a SPAC, but so much better since we are paying 1/2 of the cash value, and there are no warrants to dilute the upside.
      View article »
    • Fri Jan 18th 10:22 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Economics of Second Liens
      OK recounting of the facts... until your last paragraph - which advocates people maxing out their line of credit in hopes of paying 10% back on it. That's not the 'worst-case' scenario. The worst-case is you lose the house (which is the only reason the 2nd lien holder would accept 10% or nothing) - and your credit is wrecked so you go back to renting for 7 years. The other scenario is that they stay in their home, and have to pay off 100% of the loan plus interest over time.

      Losing the home may be the only option for stretched borrowers - but unfathomable to recommend anyone to do that and guarantee that they drown in debt. It's thinking like that which is reducing the countries financial smarts and wrecking families.
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»