MagicDiligence's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/user/149011/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/1326201/comments?source=feed#comment-17390701 17390701
However, my concern is management's strategy here. One commenter is right when he/she points out that the company is moving towards vocational programs. It's easy enough to understand why - less federal spend exposure - but do these offerings have enough appeal to potential students? It's a big risk.

Finally, I get a little agitated when "investors" talk about for-profit education like it's the only schools where students don't pay back loans. Go look at the cohort rates on the MAAC schools, or even Harvard Medical! It's a lot harder to pay off loans when you don't have parents to do it for you.
]]> Tue, 09 Apr 2013 07:08:14 -0400
However, my concern is management's strategy here. One commenter is right when he/she points out that the company is moving towards vocational programs. It's easy enough to understand why - less federal spend exposure - but do these offerings have enough appeal to potential students? It's a big risk.

Finally, I get a little agitated when "investors" talk about for-profit education like it's the only schools where students don't pay back loans. Go look at the cohort rates on the MAAC schools, or even Harvard Medical! It's a lot harder to pay off loans when you don't have parents to do it for you.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1303511/comments?source=feed#comment-17009161 17009161 Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:02:42 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1210281/comments?source=feed#comment-16715011 16715011 Sat, 23 Mar 2013 22:16:47 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1106501/comments?source=feed#comment-13569381 13569381 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 21:49:48 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1080361/comments?source=feed#comment-12958081 12958081 Mon, 24 Dec 2012 20:02:02 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1065221/comments?source=feed#comment-12720861 12720861 Tue, 18 Dec 2012 07:40:22 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/992891/comments?source=feed#comment-11414871 11414871
That said, they did declare the November payout at the same rate. And they do have $21 million in cash in the bank with no debt. So I think they can probably sustain it for another year at least while they try to get Asia growing.

Even if they did cut it a bit, investors could still be looking at a 6-7% yield with adequate coverage.

Thanks for commenting!]]> Fri, 09 Nov 2012 09:46:04 -0500
That said, they did declare the November payout at the same rate. And they do have $21 million in cash in the bank with no debt. So I think they can probably sustain it for another year at least while they try to get Asia growing.

Even if they did cut it a bit, investors could still be looking at a 6-7% yield with adequate coverage.

Thanks for commenting!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/971541/comments?source=feed#comment-11229051 11229051 https://www.volly.com]]> Sun, 04 Nov 2012 21:29:18 -0500 https://www.volly.com]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/913151/comments?source=feed#comment-10431941 10431941 Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:55:49 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/913151/comments?source=feed#comment-10369251 10369251 >Excess Cash = Cash - Current Liabilities + (Current Assets - Cash)
>
>can be simplified to
>Excess Cash = Current Assets - Current Liabilities
>
>as the 2 cash terms cancel out.

The use of the MAX part is important. Take for example the following situation, stock KLIC (Kulicke & Soffa), where current assets far exceed current liabilities.

Cash = $381
C.Assets = $648
C.Liabs = $135

By the "Excess Cash = Cash - Current Liabilities + (Current Assets - Cash)", you get $513, but this is more than cash! So it doesn't make sense.

Likewise, "Excess Cash = Cash - (Current Liabilities - Current Assets + Cash)" is also $513 - just a different way to express it.

As you mentioned, $513 is also the result of (Current Assets - Current Liabilities).

It is when you add the MAX part in where you guard against getting a figure greater than cash in the first place.

MAX(0; (Current Liabilities - Current Assets + Cash))

Here, the result of the max compare is -$132. This is the amount that current assets exceed cash. So you discount it to zero and substract from total cash getting... total cash. All of it is excess!

Hope this helps. I realize now the article is probably not totally clear on the importance of the MAX part.]]> Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:50:49 -0400 >Excess Cash = Cash - Current Liabilities + (Current Assets - Cash)
>
>can be simplified to
>Excess Cash = Current Assets - Current Liabilities
>
>as the 2 cash terms cancel out.

The use of the MAX part is important. Take for example the following situation, stock KLIC (Kulicke & Soffa), where current assets far exceed current liabilities.

Cash = $381
C.Assets = $648
C.Liabs = $135

By the "Excess Cash = Cash - Current Liabilities + (Current Assets - Cash)", you get $513, but this is more than cash! So it doesn't make sense.

Likewise, "Excess Cash = Cash - (Current Liabilities - Current Assets + Cash)" is also $513 - just a different way to express it.

As you mentioned, $513 is also the result of (Current Assets - Current Liabilities).

It is when you add the MAX part in where you guard against getting a figure greater than cash in the first place.

MAX(0; (Current Liabilities - Current Assets + Cash))

Here, the result of the max compare is -$132. This is the amount that current assets exceed cash. So you discount it to zero and substract from total cash getting... total cash. All of it is excess!

Hope this helps. I realize now the article is probably not totally clear on the importance of the MAX part.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/868491/comments?source=feed#comment-9491211 9491211
Didn't think so.]]> Sat, 15 Sep 2012 11:43:22 -0400
Didn't think so.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/818161/comments?source=feed#comment-8614531 8614531 Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:26:44 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/783501/comments?source=feed#comment-8498871 8498871 Fri, 17 Aug 2012 09:52:36 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/807431/comments?source=feed#comment-8419591 8419591 Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:41:08 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/783501/comments?source=feed#comment-8326271 8326271 Sat, 11 Aug 2012 22:51:13 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/800631/comments?source=feed#comment-8320461 8320461 Sat, 11 Aug 2012 16:06:58 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/604611/comments?source=feed#comment-5643241 5643241 Mon, 21 May 2012 07:34:49 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/587921/comments?source=feed#comment-5490961 5490961
Not sure why one would complain about spending free cash flow on acquisitions. Isn't one of the legitimate uses to grow earnings? They've also allocated a pretty nice dividend and executed share repurchases at troughs in the stock price. Don't think you can knock on capital allocation very effectively.

On churn, I have doubts that a whole lot of customers enter and exit before 4 months. These are primarily (almost completely) business customers, not consumers. But it is difficult to say for sure.

ARPU did disappear. But they do disclose DIDs so it is easy enough to estimate. Obviously they took it out because it has been on a 5+ year decline. A legitimate point against the stock, absolutely.

On the amortization points... well these are non-cash accounting gymnastics. If you focus on cash flow, the valuation is still very attractive, almost a 15% yield on free cash flow.

JCOM has warts, but the valuation, dividend, and fairly consistent performance make it look like a good buy to me. The bear case sounds good on paper, but the fact is that the degradation in fax service customers has been much slower than bears would have anticipated, while the growth in voice services in particular has offset much of it.]]> Wed, 16 May 2012 10:14:26 -0400
Not sure why one would complain about spending free cash flow on acquisitions. Isn't one of the legitimate uses to grow earnings? They've also allocated a pretty nice dividend and executed share repurchases at troughs in the stock price. Don't think you can knock on capital allocation very effectively.

On churn, I have doubts that a whole lot of customers enter and exit before 4 months. These are primarily (almost completely) business customers, not consumers. But it is difficult to say for sure.

ARPU did disappear. But they do disclose DIDs so it is easy enough to estimate. Obviously they took it out because it has been on a 5+ year decline. A legitimate point against the stock, absolutely.

On the amortization points... well these are non-cash accounting gymnastics. If you focus on cash flow, the valuation is still very attractive, almost a 15% yield on free cash flow.

JCOM has warts, but the valuation, dividend, and fairly consistent performance make it look like a good buy to me. The bear case sounds good on paper, but the fact is that the degradation in fax service customers has been much slower than bears would have anticipated, while the growth in voice services in particular has offset much of it.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/565291/comments?source=feed#comment-5403871 5403871 Sun, 13 May 2012 23:30:19 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/149011-magicdiligence/472721-for-investment-success-chose-crap-stocks?source=feed#comment-4156461 4156461 Wed, 04 Apr 2012 20:34:16 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/422201/comments?source=feed#comment-3332451 3332451 Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:29:47 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/383821/comments?source=feed#comment-3134291 3134291
I don't know where they get the $1.03b in free cash flow, looking at the 10-K, it shows $920m in operating cash and $156m in cap-ex, which amounts to $765m or so of FCF. Dividend payments were $300m as stated. (300 / 765) = 39.2%.

That's a pretty decent ratio for dividend sustainability, at least in the near term.

Longer-term, I'd agree PBI would not make a very good buy-and-hold candidate.
]]> Sat, 03 Mar 2012 11:21:23 -0500
I don't know where they get the $1.03b in free cash flow, looking at the 10-K, it shows $920m in operating cash and $156m in cap-ex, which amounts to $765m or so of FCF. Dividend payments were $300m as stated. (300 / 765) = 39.2%.

That's a pretty decent ratio for dividend sustainability, at least in the near term.

Longer-term, I'd agree PBI would not make a very good buy-and-hold candidate.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/360241/comments?source=feed#comment-2599491 2599491 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:37:31 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/346451/comments?source=feed#comment-2499191 2499191 Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:51:25 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/346451/comments?source=feed#comment-2477631 2477631
Cook is focused on China. Whether it be to sell a cut rate iPhone 4 or even work a price cut, Apple will address the cost issue.]]> Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:55:22 -0500
Cook is focused on China. Whether it be to sell a cut rate iPhone 4 or even work a price cut, Apple will address the cost issue.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/323401/comments?source=feed#comment-2221271 2221271 Sun, 29 Jan 2012 14:29:43 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/320218/comments?source=feed#comment-2195279 2195279
And you are right, EBIT/EV is correct.]]> Mon, 23 Jan 2012 09:22:13 -0500
And you are right, EBIT/EV is correct.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/316514/comments?source=feed#comment-2139177 2139177 Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:43:14 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/309686/comments?source=feed#comment-2056721 2056721 ]]> Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:47:09 -0500 ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/245024/comments?source=feed#comment-1995732 1995732 Wed, 26 Oct 2011 06:44:37 -0400